http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnew...tsman.html

This is interesting. There's a lot to read under the surface.

The last election, the GOP should have been able to win, easily. Obama had a poor economy to run on, or at least an economy that mos of the population believes is poor. Usually, the incumbant loses when the economy is tanking but in his case, it didn't happen. A large part of why they lost is because of the hard right policies alienating so many people. The dems didn't have to rally the base, the GOP did it for them. Nobody is going to rally the GLBT community better than Santorum. When they started talking about rape, that got the women riled up. Their quasi-racist immigration policies not only got black people out to vote, it turned hispanic voters into a democratic voting block.

So, after Obama won, one of the questions I was asking is of the Republican party: will they reject the extremism that cost them this election and become a more moderate party in order to win some elections? Or will they remain extreme and pander to a voter base that's dieing out? I have a suspicion Huntsman is doing the former, or he's trying to, anyway. It's going to be interesting to see how his message is received by the party elites.

At one point, Jon Huntsman was registering 0% in the polls of likely republican primary voters.

His understanding of what is left of that gang of misfits didn't get him very far.

http://gawker.com/5807467/jon-huntsman-t...-candidate

He's right, the Republicans will eventually find their feet again and the Democrats will become complacent. Unfortunately, the latter will probably come before the former, and thus, delay it.

That would require the Republicans, as a whole, to alienate vast swathes of their base. They'll never be nationally-relevant again as long as the evangelical wing steers the bird, and the window of opportunity they have selling fear of minorities to white voters is sliding inexorably shut.

The only way to avert the marginalization of the GOP is for some tremendous disaster to happen while Democrats are in control. But, even that may not be enough in ten years.

(December 31, 2012 at 7:05 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote: He's right, the Republicans will eventually find their feet again and the Democrats will become complacent. Unfortunately, the latter will probably come before the former, and thus, delay it.

You're probably right, but there's really some amount of uncertainty. I've watched political parties have terrible election cycles before, but they've always managed to bounce back. The problem is, to bounce back, they had to listen to their critics, compromise and change. The thing about the current GOP is that, as Huntsman said in the article, the current incarnation of the Republican party equates compromise with cowardice. They dismiss their opposition as traitors and the adamantly refuse to change.

And if you look at American history, you'll see several political parties have come and gone. I mean, nobody is voting for the Whigs or the Federalists, are they? I don't think we'll slip into all the way into a one party system, but we have had long periods where only one party had sigificant power. For example, Dems were in charge of the majority of the government from the 30's until the 90's. It's also possible the Republicans will disappear, only to be replaced with something else (hopefully, something more reasonable).

I found Huntsman to be the least objectionable candidate in the early republican field which would have been the kiss of death for him among the angry, old, stupid, white, male, idiots who form the "base" of the GOP.

The problem any republican faces, no matter how much he understands the need to appeal to a general electorate which comprises groups other than their base is that in order to get the nomination you have to get past the lunatic fringe which votes in the primaries.

This puts them in the position of having to move so far to the right that they are crippled in the general election. The problem with republicunts is that the more you tell them that they are becoming a minority party the more they shriek that "liberals" are out to get them and destroy their vision of a 1950's white America where Leave It To Beaver reigns supreme. I agree the republicunts can change....but how can they do it without voters?

(December 31, 2012 at 9:01 pm)Minimalist Wrote: I found Huntsman to be the least objectionable candidate in the early republican field which would have been the kiss of death for him among the angry, old, stupid, white, male, idiots who form the "base" of the GOP.

The problem any republican faces, no matter how much he understands the need to appeal to a general electorate which comprises groups other than their base is that in order to get the nomination you have to get past the lunatic fringe which votes in the primaries.

This puts them in the position of having to move so far to the right that they are crippled in the general election. The problem with republicunts is that the more you tell them that they are becoming a minority party the more they shriek that "liberals" are out to get them and destroy their vision of a 1950's white America where Leave It To Beaver reigns supreme. I agree the republicunts can change....but how can they do it without voters?

Quote:angry, old, stupid, white, male, idiots who form the "base" of the GOP.

...then you should be a perfect fit, angry old dude.