General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums4 speakers for the Republican response - is that uniting or dividing??
Does 4 speakers indicate that the Republican Party is divided?
Or are they simply attempting to put together a coalition to win the next election and the media is apt to go along with it?
What say you?
NRaleighLiberal
(60,015 posts)kentuck
(111,103 posts)AlinPA
(15,071 posts)okaawhatever
(9,462 posts)who support that part. The don't want the Latinos to know what Mike Lee says about removing the government safety net. They don't want Rand Paul fans to hear what the Latino congresswoman has to say about immigration, and so on.
This is the Republican party putting on different faces to appeal to smaller groups who would never buy their agenda if they knew the whole truth.
kentuck
(111,103 posts)Hit the nail on the head!
AleksS
(1,665 posts)You can't tell different people different things if you only have one speaker.
If you have four speakers, then each one can tell a different lie to their specific audience, and no one will be the wiser.
I have this feeling that we'll hear:
Channel GOP 1: The GOP is reaching out, embracing and empowering the Latino community and women!
Meanwhile, on
Channel GOP 2: We need more transvaginal ultrasounds to stop all these sluts from having abortion parties!
Meanwhile, on
Channel GOP 3: We need to get these illegals out of here, and stop them from using their cantaloupe calves to haul drugs into our country!
Meanwhile, on
Channel Rand Paul: Yargle blargle! Monkey pancakes!*
Of course no one in the major media outlets will point out the inconsistency, but I really really really hope one of the progressive voices can bubble it out into the open.
*Courtesy of EarlG and the picture of the moment.
okaawhatever
(9,462 posts)lostincalifornia
(3,639 posts)TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)Some for self-promotion, some for party promotion.
reformist2
(9,841 posts)Warpy
(111,275 posts)If it were possible to have the Republicans on without listening to the President first, they'd do it.
It's overkill and everybody but the Freepers will be channel surfing halfway through the first one.
wandy
(3,539 posts)The Teapublican mind set demands uniformity.
You need only look to their simplistic cookey cutter, bumper sticker answers to todays problems.
Polly says "no climate change" and so fort and so on.
No matter how much venom is spewed in the various "rebuttals" ,,,
it's bound to confuse them.
Unfortunately, the venom is the only thing they will respond to.
Why not four. The more the better.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)TeamPooka
(24,229 posts)kentuck
(111,103 posts)...but I'm not sure?
They were able to bring the Tea Partiers back into the Party in 2009-2010. Divide and conquer, maybe??
AleksS
(1,665 posts)That's an interesting thought.
All it takes is for one of them to make a monumental f-up, and that'll be the headline the next day. 4 speeches= 4x the chances for someone to say something stupid. (And I think we all agree, the chances of a (r) saying something stupid is already pretty high.)
Last year, did anyone talk about what Rubio said? No, it was his water chugging. Etc., etc., etc. We just need one of these fools to be, well, foolish, and that'll be the narrative tomorrow.
4 speakers? 4 times the chances for the GOP to (once again) shoot itself in the foot by having one if its standard bearers accidentally say what they're really thinking.
TeamPooka
(24,229 posts)Make your point, Say good night and get off the fucking stage leaving them wanting more.
You don't give 4 sermons at church.
How many folks are going to go "Ooh three speakers just wasn't enough!"
lpbk2713
(42,759 posts)of a team of four horses pulling in four different directions.
This should be a typical GOP cluster fugg.