Republicans & Demographics Questions & Observations?

There was no sexual revolution in the 1960's? There weren't giant reductions in state enforced racism around that time. A few decades before that didn't see women earning the same rights as men? A few decades before that didn't see black people actually being recognized as legally equal to whites? A few decades before that homosexuality wasn't in your country a crime worthy of the death penalty?

Why draw the line at the 1980's? If you want to be socially conservative then go all back. You wouldn't want a return to those times? Then you will understand hy people don't want a return to yours.

Because people like to be free. Fuck you.

The illusion of "social conservatism" is just that. Back in the good ol' days you're pining away for, people fucked outside of marriage, but were more subtle about it--if they did conceive, the couple would get married and have their nine-pound "preemie" baby seven months later. Abortion has been around as early as the 1850's, and when pregnancy had a considerably high mortality rate, even those anarchic methods were safer. Women in many cultures have held power throughout the history of human kind.
Also, what fasient said.

Sorry, but the cake is a lie, pal.

Dominate is a verb. Are you looking for the word 'dominant'?

Yeah, but that's not social conservatism. That's anti-science. Like AGM.

The anti-science comes from social conservatism, they have a world view and fabricate claims to support it. So it actually is social conservatism, the anti-science is merely a symptom.

That woiuld be a vast improvement over today.

Another thing I can never understand.

TWO Republican office seekers say something very stupid...and people vote against an entire party because of it. That makes no sense.

A final thing.

The Republicans getting 80% of the white vote (my goal) would "not be good for America".

Yet.

The Democrats (currently) getting 93% of the black vote and 73% of the Hispanic vote shows that that they are a "diverse & inclusive" party.

That makes no sense whatsoever.

The Democrats get so many votes from blacks because the Republicans made it policy to alienate them, that's the difference.

I don't think you understand at all. This isn't about two guys mouthing off about rape. Its about the whole edifice that allows these people to have a voice at all. Its not like the rest of the Republican party disowned these two loonies; as evidenced by everyone else on that page (including the VP choice) this is pretty much the norm for the party.

Lets not even get into the House Committee on Space, Science, and Technology.

Can you be more specific?

Is it all about social programs and affirmative action?

So, blacks get alienated just because the Republicans don't want to play Santa Claus?

That is a revolting attitude and it doesn't matter where it comes from. Black, White, whomever.

Whatever happened to JFKs "Ask what you can do for your country."

Can you provide evidence that the comments by the "two loonies" are broadly representative of the majority of the Republican Party.

Or is this along the lines of "if someone opposes abortion then they must believe things like that"?

Because that is assuredly a false assumption.

And please explain your problem with the House Committee on Space, Science and Technology.

From what I've observed, since the 1980s, the GOP has generally been considerably more supportive of space exploration than the Democrats.

The demographic boat has sailed and Republicans have been left at the dock.

A lot of it is their own doing.

They could have remained the party of Gerald Ford, an inclusive, secular, ecumenical. and socially libertarian party based on a platform of a slow and measured pace of economic change and a pro-business orientation. People like Arnold Schwarzenegger and George Pataki were winning elections on that basis as late as the last decade, in the country's biggest and most prosperous states. Mitt Romney won an election in Massachusetts as the same kind of Republican.

But the GOP allowed the Tea Party and the religious right to hijack them--not learning the lesson Democrats learned the hard way in the 70s, never to let your fringe take you over. They've purged the remaining moderates (like Dick Lugar) out of the party or forced them to bend to the will of the Tea Party. The result is an image (rather accurate) of a party which tolerates misogyny, intolerance, xenophobia, homophobia, a disdain for public education (a special concern of young adults and young families with children), and an excessive orientation toward the interests of the elite at the expense of the rest of us. That's an image that will stick for women, Latinos, African-Americans, young adults and young families for a generation or more to come. Put them together and they already form a majority coalition.

If Republicans now move sharply back to the center, maybe they'll survive as a party and be nationally competitive once again in 15 or 20 years. But by then, whole generations will have drifted away...it may be too late to rescue their image among the people who are already a voting majority and will be for many years to come. 100% of the votes of old white guys won't win an election in most states and most districts. That's the takeaway from 2012.

Sweet Jesus.

No it's not because they're looking for Welfare Santa to pop down the chimney. I'd say it's much more due to the Southern Strategy that the Republicans used to tr and garner white Southern votes for the latter half of the 20th century.

So, black voters today look back and think "Damn, Richard Nixon appealed to southern whites".

And if the so called "Southern Strategy" was supposedly so effective in the south, then why not not try expand a version of it elsewhere?

http://www.sacbee.com/2012/11/11/4975144/electorate-has-changed-so-must.html

Good read.

I have to say I really hope that one day you do get to run for president, because your strategies would ensure the election had that landslide victory you were saying Ameriva needed to unite it.

Be careful what you wish for.

You're just taking for granted that blacks, whites, and Hispanics can't be motivated by simply lining up for goodies.

Even freeloaders can vote for something greater than themselves if they are properly inspired.

Dayton, one member of the House Science Committee is one of the idiots who made the stupid statement about rape. Another republican member has denounced the theory of evolution as coming straight out of the pits of Hell. These are members of the SCIENCE committee, put there by their party leaders. Do the math, will you?

Dayton doesn't think it's a problem because he shares those views, or others like them. He's not going to realise the problem without fixing this first.

I don't actually need to provide evidence that they're representative of the majority of the party since this entire thread is about perception of said. You asked "Why is social conservativism so toxic?"

There ya go - the perception is that the Republicans are indeed trying to legislate their way into the bedroom, into women's wombs, into the private lives of everyone. And not only into their private lives; but also where-ever these issues might enter into the workplace.

Ok, so what? Its not my image that needs to be improved to win elections. You can't ask the question and then be upset that you don't like the answer.

Do I need to mention Paul Broun? Or Akin (mentioned as part of the Team-Rape anyway). How about the Chair tacking on provisions against pornography on a bill for science funding? Hall tried to tank funding for science education and he's the chair of the damn committee! The Republicans have staffed their side of the committee with these people - intentionally! Its not like they were accidentally placed there or even managed to win a vote of their electorate.

The face of the Republicans at least since the mid-90s has been this way - do we need to dig out threads on Terry Schiavo again?

It wasn't 'two loonies' you fucking moron. Read the damn article. And their mistake was actually acknowledging and trying to defend the REPUBLICAN PARTY PLATFORM, that calls for a Constitutional Amendment banning abortion, without exceptions for rape and incest. Like you those drooling idiots were too stupid to realize most of the country finds those views repugnant, and that the party line was thus to never mention the party platform. They opened their mouths and the stupid just fell out.

Kinda like you when you turn on a computer.

Yeah, 'cause we're soooooo threatened.

Wait, I was supposed to yell something?

"There are none so blind as those who will not see."

Dayton, and if we're honest most of the Republican Party, are deliberately closing their eyes and trying not to see the obvious. They don't like what it means so they'll pretend not to see it and hope it goes away. It won't.

Just two? Out of how many GOP committee members?

Provide evidence I share those views or retract your statement and apologize.

It seems to me that Democrats and liberals can make outrageous over the top statements simply as campaign rhetoric and no one takes it too seriously.

Yet.

Republicans make outrageous over the top statements and it is taken as black letter representations of basic Republican beliefs.

Once again on demographics.

No on has answered this.

Why do people seem to think that growth of the Hispanic population out of proportion to the non Hispanic population growth will be endless and perpetual?

That makes no sense.

Please. Is it a month since most of the board was rendered speechless by your views on domestic violence, premarital sex and free speech? In the past you've openly admitted fascist leanings and defended terrorist atrocities. There's no exaggeration needed where your dangerous idiocy is concerned.

You really are determined not to understand, aren't you? I believe another poster asked you why Asians went so hard for Dems and so far your only responses as to any of the election turn outs has been "they hate white people" and "they want welfare".

Are you really that stupid? Or do you have some sort of vague acknowledgement of reality which your willing to give us? Right now it isn't looking like you're very bright or that you are even slightly aware of what is going on in this country.

Here's a hint: Your right wing social war bullshit is pissing everyone else off, it has nothing to do with welfare or your mythical black hatred of white people (or hispanic or Asian or women) and instead you're deliberately avoiding the obvious. Keep up with the right wing nonsense social war crap and you'll keep losing. It's as simply as that and everyone here is laughing at you for refusing to see such an obvious thing.

What "views on domestic violence"? I'm against it and I always have been.

What is wrong with being against premarital sex? that is kind of one of the most basic tenants of most major world religions.

And what have I said about free speech you find upsetting. Aside from thinking that people should have to use their names on the internet.

and what "terrrorist atrocities"? Mention that again and I'm reaffirming my belief that you sent a copy of my post here to my former principal a few years back.

When did I say that regarding Asians?