2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumIf Romney loses, will GOP transform itself?
I have a theory, that the Republican Party will seek to change its bad streak if Romney loses to Obama, by either becoming more progressive (as they should) or moving further right.
Since there are no moderate left in the party, my feeling is that right-wing pundits and Republican politicians, clueless as usual, will believe in and spread the notion that the party lost the last two elections because McCain and Romne were moderates (when in reality they are both right wing nuts).
This will result in a Republican Party that continues to destroy itself due to its radicalization. Candidates with even worse chances than Romney and McCain will be promoted and will lose badly.
What do you guys think?
Marzupialis
(398 posts)I wrote "wins" at first. My bad.
Dustin DeWinde
(193 posts)And like their fellow addicts they won't seek help until they hit rock bottom. in their case probably a Michelle Bachmann Rick Santorum ticket and a loss of 44 states before reality begins to dawn on them.
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)Reality never meant that much, their errors or lack of judgement are actually a vast liberal conspiracy. The main thing is to contain the damage they inflict. Remember 1/3 of the US aren't bright enough to piss in a boot without instructions.
Justice wanted
(2,657 posts)crazies.
Anyone who is a monderate or reasonable they are either forcing out or they are jumping ship.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)If Rmoney loses, it's because the ticket wasn't conservative enough and the GOP will double down on the 'baggery. Once the purity tests start, there's no stopping.
LeftofObama
(4,243 posts)talking to these people is like
No doubt they will say the repuke ticket wasn't conservative enough and they'll start all over again.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)The crazy base is only going to get the message: "we weren't crazy enough."
upaloopa
(11,417 posts)requirement. The economy recovers. Bills such as card check passes. Taxes are raised on the wealthy. Single payer passes. And the repugs lose power for another 40 years because they refuse to lose the tea party meme.
Booster
(10,021 posts)makes Mr. Obama look good. All the things you mentioned would move this country forward not backward and I don't really think they can pull the shit they have been pulling for another 4 yrs without everyone in the country calling them on it. They will bring their party down never to rise again. In my book, it's close to treason.
kestrel91316
(51,666 posts)for their failure.
GP6971
(31,220 posts)Look at what I call the "down range" elections.. Look at the local level and see what's happening. It's not pretty here in WA
trayfoot
(1,568 posts)Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)They'll temporarily move to the right for the primaries four years from now. Romney will be seen in the same mold as McCain, Dole and H.W. Bush - too moderate and why they lost.
This election isn't the true battle. 2016 will be the true battle. If Romney loses, they're going to lurch to the right in 2016 with someone that is backed by the tea-party and makes a hard sell of the conservative ideals.
IF they lose that election, look for them to blow it up and move toward the center.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)They've already written off blacks, hispanics, young people, women, and the educated "elite". Its going to be hard winning elections with a base of only old white people.
Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)If they don't, they won't win the presidency again. The Democrats learned this in the 80s & 90s - you can't just nominate ideologically pure candidates like McGovern, Mondale & Dukakis. You've got to move to the middle (Clinton). Clinton's election in '92 rewrote the political borders, taking once major swing states like California and turned them strongly Democratic, while also taking once Republican strongholds (Michigan, Vermont, New Hampshire, Connecticut and Maine) and made 'em strong Democratic.
If it takes a generation for the Republicans to find their middle, they'll become irrelevant.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)Assuming Romney losses, the 2016 primary is going to be a bloody cage match between about 10-12 different candidates.
In my estimation a partial list would be:
Jeb "Dynasty" Bush
Paul "Regressive" Ryan
Crisco Christie
Susan Martinez
Bobby Jindal
Mike Huckabee
Jon Huntsman
Rand Paul
Sick "man on dog" Santorum
Tim Pawlenty
Eric Cantor
creeksneakers2
(7,476 posts)They'll say Romney wasn't conservative enough if he loses.
socialist_n_TN
(11,481 posts)They'll mover further right. But I see that seems to be the general consensus.
dsteve01
(312 posts)They will continue to attack anything 'liberal' until their party implodes.
And so they will be reborn as the Neo-wigs or something.
Gothmog
(145,619 posts)The only way to transform the GOP is for the GOP to nominate someone like Goodhair/Perry or Santorum and then lose. If Romney loses in 2012, I see Ryan being the GOP nominee in 2016 and the GOP will be claiming that Romney was the reason why they did not win.
charlyvi
(6,537 posts)People fail conservatism. Kind of like Communism that way Let's hope it meets the same end before too much damage is done.
AlinPA
(15,071 posts)hate filled mob.
RBInMaine
(13,570 posts)Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)of the rabbit hole yet.
ThoughtCriminal
(14,049 posts)They will respond my moving further right.
If they win:
They will respond my moving further right.
Landslide, nail biter, scandal, disaster, triumph... Doesn't matter. The GOP history is to always move farther to the right. ALWAYS.
bucolic_frolic
(43,311 posts)It depends on if Romney loses, and if he loses BIG. That is a risk with
a radical like Ryan. A BIG loss will temper the party to moderate itself.
A normal loss will move the party to more extreme right.
Any loss will, I believe, be moderate because of all the vote counting
fraud, Citizens United money, Fundamentalist influence that causes
voters to vote against their own best economic interests, and the
electoral map - the country is really polarized.
bucolic_frolic
(43,311 posts)that all this money is skewing politics, that the corporate state will
emerge reinvigorated, more money, more right wing judges
that force libertarianism and remove protection of rights/environment/
social safety net. Everything becomes a matter of private property rights
(even financial assets) and political power.
And the sheeple follow because they're scared of violence, gays, equality
so they vote their ignorance.
Then you have Friendly Fascism, and no change in sight, because you have
ignorance and a poor education system.
Proud Liberal Dem
(24,438 posts)They'll have another meeting I'm sure where they'll talk about what they need to do in order hamstring President Obama for the next 4 years while they regroup and figure out to nominate a "real conservative". I've heard that Santorum will still be waiting in the wings for 2016 and is likely to be a "strong contender"!
The problem is that the GOP (or what's left of it) is in severe denial about why they lose. They blame the media (which is actually on their side and promoting their BS most of the time), they accuse Democrats and Democratic-constituencies for fraud that doesn't exist, they blame poor people, minorities, women, et. al for voting against them (and for being able to vote at all), they blame their nominees for not being "severely conservative" enough to win a national election, etc. They never stop and realize that most people are turned off by their increasingly out-of-touch messaging and policies and that they are being held hostage by the demands of their own constituencies, which demand ideological purity that prevents any kind of reasonable policies/governing.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)and will try to swing even further to the right.
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)If they don't seriously have their shit together by 2020 the demographic shift may be to much for them to ever recover from.
http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/articles/aia2010031101/
^snip^
The increase in the nonwhite share of the electorate over the next decade will have major consequences for electoral competition. If the Democratic Party is able to maintain anything close to the overwhelming advantage among nonwhite voters that it enjoyed in 2008, Republican candidates will need to win a considerably larger share of the white vote than their partys candidates did in 2008 or even 2004 in order to remain competitive in national elections. Under these circumstances, even a 60 percent share of the white vote would not be enough to give a Republican candidate a majority of the popular vote and the last Republican presidential candidate to win more than 60 percent of the white vote was Ronald Reagan in 1984.
An alternative path to victory for Republicans in future national elections would involve seeking to expand their Partys support among nonwhite voters. By winning a larger share of the nonwhite vote, a Republican candidate could be elected with considerably less than 60 percent of the white vote. But this would require the GOP to move away from its conservative base and closer to the ideological center because nonwhite voters tend to be strong supporters of increased spending on social programs and activist government.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Along the same lines, 65 percent of nonwhite voters, including 64 percent of African-American voters and 73 percent of Hispanic voters, supported the creation of a single-payer health care system in the United States compared with only 15 percent of Republican primary voters. And given a choice between more government services with higher taxes and fewer government services with lower taxes, 67 percent of nonwhite voters, including 67 percent of African-American voters and 68 percent of Hispanic voters, chose more government services with higher taxes compared with only 25 percent of GOP primary voters.
bhikkhu
(10,724 posts)I wouldn't put it past them, but I think it will take another few years of de-funding education before that will work here. And, of course, that guy wound up hung by his toes anyway.