Hucks Army - Faith. Family. Freedom. [Grassroots] JOIN HUCKS ARMY | GET INVOLVED | FUNDRAISING | LINKS | LEADERSHIP | ABOUT
It is currently Tue Mar 19, 2019 12:20 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 87 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Nov 07, 2012 3:37 am 
Offline
Sergeant
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 12:36 am
Posts: 133
Location: Alaska
Likes: 0
Liked: 1
WalterCan wrote:
The hope of this country is not its political leaders. The hope of this country is that Christians will get their own houses in order and start living like Christians. America's political climate will follow its spiritual climate.


It's been forever since I've posted here, but I've been reading. Just wanted to say I agree with this whole-heartedly.



Post by blestmom Liked by: TheValuesVoter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 07, 2012 11:18 am 
Offline
***** General
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 11:12 am
Posts: 3819
Location: St. Augustine, FL
Likes: 194
Liked: 215
Two good things after this election is that Mitt Romney and Ron Paul will be out of the picture going forward (grasping, I guess, but looking for some positives).

I also agree with WalterCan. I posted this on Facebook last night: "God is still sovereign regardless of election outcomes and people desperately need the gospel. We need to live and share it."

_________________
Ken



Post by FirstCoastTerp has received Likes: 2 Huckabeliever, TheValuesVoter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 07, 2012 11:23 am 
Offline
***** General

Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 11:21 am
Posts: 2747
Location: Arkansas
Likes: 200
Liked: 653
TVV.

I'll stand by the argument that the Democratic Party has long based its appeal far more on "identity" politics than ideology. The Democratic coalition has far more ideological odd bedfellows than the GOP (like Socially Conservative evangelical African Americans and gay rights atheists; or the 77% of self described pro-life Hispanics who supported the most pro-abortion President in history). The Dems have built their coalition around the concept of the "oppressed."

Even those who are not of the "oppressed" groups (black; lationo; poor; homsexual) who "identify" with "identity" politics, like hipster/indy youth culture (whose fashion and taste mimic and copy "oppressed" peoples - even though they are extra-ordinarily privaledged themselves) or the academic post-graduate educated community that is thoroughly indoctrinated with the notion of WASP oppression as the central theme of American history and culture.

The Republicans are simply what is left of the notion of assimilated Americanism. They are actually an ideological party. This makes it harder for them to actually maintain majority status. A move right or left tends to have a zero sum game quality especially in relation to identity politics based on a belief in the fundamental unfairness of American systems and institutions.

Someone who believes themselves victimized by society is HIGLY predisposed to the belief that they are entitled to redress and restitution. The Democrats affirm this belief (and stoke it) and support ever increasing benefits which is seen by these groups as validation of both their claim of having been wronged (I am only in my position due to forces beyond my control they believe) and confirmation of the Democratic Party's love for them.

Republicans cannot win these groups because they neither believe the claim that they are oppressors and America a nation built by oppression, nor do they believe they would genuinely help these groups condition by furthering their entitlements and sense of entitlement.

Even if the GOP should embrace the Dem position they could not hope to win a bidding war with those who already have the upper-hand. Any change in the GOP position would not be seen as a change of heart endearing these groups to the GOP, but rather as concession exacted from "the man" by their Democrat champions.

Furthermore an expansion of government which is generally understood as the prefered method of redress (and only true expression of concern by the victimization cults) requires the GOP to move away from its ideological core and therefore proves a zero sum game as the party bleeds away Constitutionalists, Traditionalists, and Libertarians.

It will take the manifest failure of Democratic ideas to break lose any portion of the current Dem coalition. You see some of this with the school choice issue.

You could also see simple collapse. If there is just not enough money to beg, borrow, or steal, then the game is afoot. Middle-America could simple stop sending their sons and daughters to be indocrinated at 50,000 a year (or could simple run out of money to do it even if they still want to).

Meanwhile the best hope for the GOP are candidates who maintain their ideological faith, while possessing traits that help to deflect identity politic's lethal arrows.

Humble origins; ethnic heritage; a history of public compassion; all these are sheilds.

Look for Jindal/Rubio/Cruz/Martinez as the face of the GOP 2013.

_________________
"As for us, our days of combat are over. Our swords are rust. Our guns will thunder no more. The vultures that once wheeled over our heads must be buried with their prey. Whatever of glory must be won in the council or the closet, never again in the field. I do not repine. We have shared the incommunicable experience of war; we have felt, we still feel, the passion of life to its top."

Oliver Wendell Holmes


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 07, 2012 11:27 am 
Offline
***** General

Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:12 pm
Posts: 4153
Likes: 307
Liked: 525
FirstCoastTerp wrote:
Two good things after this election is that Mitt Romney and Ron Paul will be out of the picture going forward (grasping, I guess, but looking for some positives).

I also agree with WalterCan. I posted this on Facebook last night: "God is still sovereign regardless of election outcomes and people desperately need the gospel. We need to live and share it."


True on both points. As a matter of fact, not only is Mitt gone from the scene but the entire Mitt cheerleading section that have tormented Huckabee for five years have all been taken down several notches and have lost credibility. The people who have been talking nonstop about how "what conservatives need is a real conservative like Mitt Romney" are not going to be taken as seriously going into the future. Which means that in 2016, when there is a need for a new leader to come onto the scene and build a broad common-sense coalition, there won't be as many brash loudmouths who taunt them for reaching out to people or for not sounding angry enough. A lot of the bit actors who have steered the GOP into the situation it is in this morning are now recognized as not really knowing what they were talking about.

_________________
The Values Voter
http://thevaluesvoter.spaces.live.com


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 07, 2012 12:06 pm 
Offline
***** General

Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:12 pm
Posts: 4153
Likes: 307
Liked: 525
Southern Doc wrote:
TVV.

I'll stand by the argument that the Democratic Party has long based its appeal far more on "identity" politics than ideology. The Democratic coalition has far more ideological odd bedfellows than the GOP (like Socially Conservative evangelical African Americans and gay rights atheists; or the 77% of self described pro-life Hispanics who supported the most pro-abortion President in history). The Dems have built their coalition around the concept of the "oppressed."

Even those who are not of the "oppressed" groups (black; lationo; poor; homsexual) who "identify" with "identity" politics, like hipster/indy youth culture (whose fashion and taste mimic and copy "oppressed" peoples - even though they are extra-ordinarily privaledged themselves) or the academic post-graduate educated community that is thoroughly indoctrinated with the notion of WASP oppression as the central theme of American history and culture.

The Republicans are simple what is left of the notion of assimilated Americanism. They are actually an ideological party. This makes it harder for them to actually maintain majority status. A move right or left tends to have a zero sum game quality especially in relation to identity politics based on a belief in the fundamental unfairness of American systems and institutions.

Someone who believes themselves victimized by society is HIGLY predisposed to the belief that they are entitled to redress and restitution. The Democrats affirm this belief (and stoke it) and support ever increasing benefits which is seen by these groups as validation of both their claim of having been wronged (I am only in my position due to forces beyond my control they believe) and confirmation of the Democratic Party's love for them.

Republicans cannot win these groups because they neither believe the claim that they are oppressors and America a nation built by oppression, nor do they believe they would genuinely help these groups condition by furthering their entitlements and sense of entitlement.

Even if the GOP should embrace the Dem position they could not hope to win a bidding war with those who already have the upper-hand. Any change in the GOP position would not be seen as a change of heart endearing these groups to the GOP, but rather as concession exacted from "the man" by their Democrat champions.

It will take the manifest failure of Democratic ideas to break lose any portion of the current Dem coalition. You see some of this with the school choice issue.

You could also see simple collapse. If there is just not enough money to beg, borrow, or steal, then the game is afoot. Middle-America could simple stop sending their sons and daughters to be indocrinated at 50,000 a year (or could simple run out of money to do it even if they still want to).

Meanwhile the best hope for the GOP are candidates who maintain their ideological faith, while possessing traits that help to deflect identity politic's lethal arrows.

Humble origins; ethnic heritage; a history of public compassion; all these are sheilds.

Look for Jindal/Rubio/Cruz/Martinez as the face of the GOP 2013.


I look at the situation a bit differently. I acknowledge that the Democrats play class war games and even make plays into identity politics (the Republicans also do some of the latter in my opinion). But the reason that the Democrats won again isn't because of what the Democrats are doing, in my opinion. It's because of what the Republicans have been doing - and I'll explain. People who would otherwise consider choosing an alternative to the Democratic Party look over at the Republicans and they see something that scares them. And so, even though they disagree with the Democratic Party, they choose them anyway.

Just off of the top of my head, here are the biggest complaints that I've heard many black and latino friends and family members - people who actually agree with the GOP on a number of issues and who have voted Republican in the past - have expressed about the GOP. These are issues that prevented them from voting for the GOP. And most of this is just in the past four years.

1) They see such incredible, personal disdain by Republicans toward President Obama, a person who most people in this country like personally, and conclude that there must be some other reason why, from the very beginning, so many Republicans committed themselves to seeing him fail and be a one-term President. They believe that racism is a component of the intense, very vocal and very personal dislike and disrespect.

2) They see issues such as the "birther" issue, the "You Lie!" comment at the State of the Union address, over the top rhertoric ("Welfare President") as proof of #1 above. It's safe to say that the louder and the more personal and hyperbolic the rhetoric had become, the more minority voters felt put off by it. Also there was a feeling that everything that the President did, no matter what it was, was criticized and that even when he did something that was good (bin Laden raid) there were people who were refusing to give him credit for it. To many, this looks like deep, dripping resentment that is perceived to be based on something more than just disapproval with the President's policies or philosophy.

3) The illegal immigration debate, which includes many people who have principled objection to rules being violated and process being ignored, has been infiltrated by people whose agenda includes a racial motive. I oppose illegal immigration and I think most people, including many in the Hispanic community, feel the same way. However, some of the rhetoric that has been used by some on the right, including suggestions that America is being "invaded" by illegal immigrants, and suggestions that one of the problems with immigration from latin countries is that America's racial composition is changing, is very off-putting, especially to Hispanics. Suggestions that some people have made that the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution be removed have been downright scary to many.

4) The various state laws that have been enacted to oppose voter fraud (a problem for which there is little evidence of widespread existence) have been interpreted by many, including by me, as an attempt to trim down the voting power of minorities, who have been less likely to support the GOP. The comments of Pennsylvania's House of Representative Republican Leader Mike Turzai, who said this past June that these voter laws would deliver the state of Pennsylvania to Mitt Romney make the intent of this policy seem very clear. I personally believe that there were efforts in place to reduce the size of the portion of the electorate that leans toward the Democratic Party. I have also been troubled by the efforts of some groups who have openly challenged the validity of some long-term voters (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/true-vote-intimidating-minority-voters-polls/story?id=17618823) as well as the positioning of anti-voter fraud billboards in minority communities (http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/author-of-voter-fraud-billboards-steps-forth-m67deg6-176362521.html). I have not seen evidence of widespread voter fraud in recent times in the United States.

I have not talked about this issue much here but I myself have been quietly fuming about this one. It feels to me to be an effort by some in the GOP to discourage the votes of likely Democrats. This certainly seems easier than actually going out and engaging those voters and asking for their votes - something that I have not seen the GOP do when it comes to black voters in particular. But I think it has had the unintended effect of making people even more determined to vote. And to vote against the people who they think are trying to discourage them from voting.

Believe it or not, Romney actually received a greater share of the African American vote yesterday than McCain got in 2008. But these things, most of which have cropped up SINCE we started talking about this issue when this forum started, have exasperated an already bad problem and this, much more than anything that the Democrats are doing, is why the GOP is finding it more difficult to win national elections.

I am basing this on my own experience and the feedback that I've gotten from many conservative and moderate-right minority voters who would be perfect Republicans if not for the fact that they've grown to deeply resent and even hate the Republican Party. This problem will continue to get worse until either someone takes leadership and works to fix this gap or until the GOP finds itself permanently unable to win national elections and a new party, one with less baggage, emerges to oppose the Democratic Party.

_________________
The Values Voter
http://thevaluesvoter.spaces.live.com


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 07, 2012 3:00 pm 
Offline
Lieutenant General

Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 9:23 pm
Posts: 1049
Location: California
Likes: 151
Liked: 36
I follow Marco Rubio on Facebook and last night, he posted a statement about the presidential election. This is an excerpt from the statement that particularly caught my attention:
Quote:
"In the next Congress, I am committed to working on upward mobility policies that will ensure people who work hard and play by the rules can rise above the circumstances of their birth and leave their children better off. The conservative movement should have particular appeal to people in minority and immigrant communities who are trying to make it, and Republicans need to work harder than ever to communicate our beliefs to them."

An op-ed that I read last night conveyed that Republicans didn't lose this time due to lack of turn out. Evangelicals and Catholics showed up this year. Romney won big among Evangelicals and seems to have won the Catholic vote. The op-ed indicated that the electorate was virtually unchanged from 2008, that Obama won big among ethnic minorities and millennial generation (younger) voters. The op-ed also indicated that the Reagan coalition was in-tact for Romney and turned out this year, but the problem is that the coalition is too old and shrinking, overwhelmed by the largely changing demographics favoring Obama.

A post on ReligionDispatches.org shows that in Wisconsin, Romney won big among Christian voters, but still lost the state:
Quote:
Despite winning pretty big among the state’s white Protestants, Catholics, and white evangelicals, Romney couldn’t win: Obama won big among the “nones” (just 16% of the electorate, but Obama won them by a 73-24% margin) and non-whites (14% of the electorate, but Obama won them by a 78-18% margin), according to exit polling.


Republicans like Marco Rubio, Mike Huckabee, and Jeb Bush are right in saying that the GOP must do a better job in reaching out to ethnic minority voters. The demographics of this country are changing rapidly. Just take a look at Virginia and Nevada. Eight years ago, these states would have been easy victories for Romney, but today, the demographics are very different and favored Obama. Despite turning out the base and winning the independent vote, Romney was unable to win the election. The strategy that worked for Reagan failed to work for Romney and will fail to work for the GOP candidate in 2016.

I'll add some perspective to this. I live in San Diego county, generally a slightly conservative-leaning area with a lot of ethnic diversity. My parents are immigrants from the Philippines. They worked hard to achieve the American dream, working long hours to support our family and emphasizing to me and my siblings the importance of a good education. We're not socially liberal and neither are most ethnic minority families. So the GOP's social conservative platform and message of upward mobility should resonate strongly with ethnic minorities, but for some reason it's not.

Although San Diego county is conservative-leaning, many of the ethnic minority voters lean Democrat. They don't lean Democrat due to social issues, but because they feel that Democrats "care about the poor and middle class" while the Republicans "only care about the rich". The Hispanic community is further alienated by the perception of the GOP being "anti-immigrant". These are perceptions that the GOP must work hard to dispel, beginning via outreach to ethnic minorities.

My generation, the millennial voters, will be harder to reach. I agree with WalterCan that "The hope of this country is that Christians will get their own houses in order and start living like Christians" and QuoVadisAnima that "we need to re-evangelize this country - our political mess is the symptom not the disease".

From Bob Rice, a Catholic blogger:
Quote:
One “positive” thing you can say about Obama is that he’s done more to unite the Catholic Church in America than anyone in the past 50 years. He got every Catholic bishop to stand against him. He also did a lot to unite the Christian Church—remember Mike Huckabee saying, “Today, I’m Catholic!” Heck, he even got evangelical Christians to back a Mormon for president.

Quote:
But God does not want us asleep. He wants us awake. He wants us to do the same thing we’ve been doing: pray, work, and fast for our country.

http://bob-rice.com/2012/11/07/the-most-important-result-is-still-to-come/


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 07, 2012 10:31 pm 
Offline
** General
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 6:21 pm
Posts: 1288
Location: Washington State
Likes: 0
Liked: 11
Somehow I got on MoveOn.org's email list, here is how they summed it up:
Quote:
YAHOOOOO!! Thank you, thank you, thank you for everything you did to help reelect President Obama, send progressive champions like Elizabeth Warren, Tammy Baldwin, and Chris Murphy to Congress, and score other key victories down the ballot.

This is a victory for everyone who believes in a country and an economy that work for all of us, where the wealthy pay their fair share and everyone has the same rights—no matter what they look like or who they love.

We poured our hearts and souls into the fight. And together with our allies, YOU beat the money, YOU beat the dirty tricks, and YOU beat the lies.

And at the bottom of the email:
Image


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 3:53 am 
Offline
Lieutenant General

Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 9:23 pm
Posts: 1049
Location: California
Likes: 151
Liked: 36
The following article caught my attention:
Quote:
If only white people had voted on Tuesday, Mitt Romney would have carried every state except for Massachusetts, Iowa, Connecticut and New Hampshire, according to the news media’s exit polls. Nationally, Romney won 59 percent of the white vote, a towering twenty-point margin over Obama.

The pattern is not limited to the South, with its history of racism and segregation. Even in the deepest blue states, white voters went for Romney: 53 percent in California, 52 percent in New York, 55 percent in Pennsylvania.

http://www.thenation.com/blog/171093/bad-news-about-white-people-romney-won-white-vote-everwhere#

Obviously, the writer of the article is liberal; however, what I take from the article is the statistics, which show that the GOP must start winning over ethnic minorities. Republicans are trying to figure out why we lost when so many were expecting Romney to win handily. Some are leaving comments on conservative sites blasting evangelicals, suggesting that they did not turn out as expected. But evangelicals did show up in big numbers and overwhelmingly voted for Romney. Others are leaving comments suggesting that the social issues may have lost us the election and that we should toss out sanctity of life and marriage from the GOP platform. But such an action would cause evangelicals and Catholics to abandon the party in droves. Ethnic minorities and young voters were the decisive factor in this race. The GOP must begin turning things around right now by reaching out to minority voters. This is the only way we will have a fighting chance in 2016. I suggest we start e-mailing Reince Priebus. :)


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 4:00 am 
Offline
***** General

Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:12 pm
Posts: 4153
Likes: 307
Liked: 525
Grant wrote:
The following article caught my attention:
Quote:
If only white people had voted on Tuesday, Mitt Romney would have carried every state except for Massachusetts, Iowa, Connecticut and New Hampshire, according to the news media’s exit polls. Nationally, Romney won 59 percent of the white vote, a towering twenty-point margin over Obama.

The pattern is not limited to the South, with its history of racism and segregation. Even in the deepest blue states, white voters went for Romney: 53 percent in California, 52 percent in New York, 55 percent in Pennsylvania.

http://www.thenation.com/blog/171093/bad-news-about-white-people-romney-won-white-vote-everwhere#

Obviously, the writer of the article is liberal; however, what I take from the article is the statistics, which show that the GOP must start winning over ethnic minorities. Republicans are trying to figure out why we lost when so many were expecting Romney to win handily. Some are leaving comments on conservative sites blasting evangelicals, suggesting that they did not turn out as expected. But evangelicals did show up in big numbers and overwhelmingly voted for Romney. Others are leaving comments suggesting that the social issues may have lost us the election and that we should toss out sanctity of life and marriage from the GOP platform. But such an action would cause evangelicals and Catholics to abandon the party in droves. Ethnic minorities and young voters were the decisive factor in this race. The GOP must begin turning things around right now by reaching out to minority voters. This is the only way we will have a fighting chance in 2016. I suggest we start e-mailing Reince Priebus. :)


I completely agree with you. This is what I've been trying to say for four years.

And if you email Reince Priebus, please tell him that the best way to think about it is that the GOP must target EVERY voter of EVERY background. Exclude nobody and reach out to everybody.

I have been bothered by the fact that in the post-mortem of the election, I've only heard most Republican leaders talk about the need to win Hispanic voters and they don't bother mentioning African American voters. But they need to target every voter of every background and understand why various minority groups have negative opinions of the GOP. Black turnout was largely responsible for Romney losing Ohio and Pennsylvania as well as a factor for preventing him from taking Michigan. I remember only two occasions throughout the campaign when Romney made any attempt to communicate with black voters and even in the aftermath of the election, many leaders don't understand that they need to reach out to all.

The ONLY thing that is going to delay a complete fall over a liberal cliff in this country is if a conservative coalition that INCLUDES conservatives of every racial background comes together. The same-sex marriage victories and the country's political makeup is exactly what happens when you take a group of people with shared social values and then you divide them so that the whites mostly vote Republican and the blacks and Hispanics mostly vote Democrat. Our power and influence as values voters is then diluted and all of us lose as does the country. A divided house cannot stand. But the problem isn't going to fix itself and it requires leadership and vision.

_________________
The Values Voter
http://thevaluesvoter.spaces.live.com



Post by TheValuesVoter Liked by: FirstCoastTerp
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 9:13 am 
Offline
Captain

Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 1:01 pm
Posts: 209
Likes: 22
Liked: 3
Grant wrote:
The following article caught my attention:
Quote:
If only white people had voted on Tuesday, Mitt Romney would have carried every state except for Massachusetts, Iowa, Connecticut and New Hampshire, according to the news media’s exit polls. Nationally, Romney won 59 percent of the white vote, a towering twenty-point margin over Obama.

The pattern is not limited to the South, with its history of racism and segregation. Even in the deepest blue states, white voters went for Romney: 53 percent in California, 52 percent in New York, 55 percent in Pennsylvania.

http://www.thenation.com/blog/171093/bad-news-about-white-people-romney-won-white-vote-everwhere#



6 MILLION "EVANGELICALS" VOTED FOR OBAMA -- WHY?
Joel C. Rosenberg
(Washington, D.C., November 8, 2012) -- As the smoke clears from the wreckage of the Romney defeat on Tuesday, some intriguing yet disturbing facts are coming to light.

Fewer people overall voted in 2012 (about 117 million) compared to 2008 (about 125 million).President Obama received some 6.6 million fewer votes in 2012 than he did in 2008 (60,217,329 in 2012 votes compared to 66,882,230 votes in 2008). One would think that such a dynamic would have helped Romney win -- clearly it did not. Incredibly, Governor Romney received nearly 1 million fewer votes in 2012 than Sen. John McCain received in 2008. (In 2008, McCain won 58,343,671 votes. In 2012, Romney won only 57,486,044 votes.)

Why? How was it possible for Romney to do worse than McCain? It will take some time to sift through all of the data. But here is some of what we know from the 2012 election day exit polls:

That said, what I looking at most closely is the Christian vote, and here is where I see trouble:

* 42% of the Protestant Christian vote went for Obama in 2012. This was down from 45% in 2008.

* 57% of the Protestant Christian vote went for Romney in 2012. This was up from 54% that McCain won in 2008.

* When you zoom in a bit, you find that 21% of self-identified, white, born-again, evangelical Christians voted for President Obama in 2012. This means of the 117 million people who voted on Tuesday, about 24.7 million were evangelicals who voted for Obama. This was down from 24% of evangelicals who voted for Obama in 2008. (Of the 125 million people who voted in 2008, about 30 million were evangelicals who voted for Obama.)

* You'd think this decrease in evangelical votes for Obama would have helped win the race for Romney, but it didn't.

* 78% of evangelical Christians voted for Romney in 2012. Yes, this was up from the 74% that McCain received in 2008, but it wasn't nearly enough.

* To put it more precisely, about 5 million fewer evangelicals voted for Obama in 2012 than in 2008. Meanwhile, some 4.7 million more evangelicals voted for Romney than voted for McCain. Yet Romney still couldn't win.

It is stunning to think that 6 million self-described evangelical Christians would vote for a President who supports abortion on demand and was on the cover of Newsweek as America's "first gay president." Did these self-professed believers surrender their Biblical convictions in the voting booth, or did they never really have deep Biblical convictions on the critical issues to begin with?

Whatever their reasons, these so-called evangelicals doomed Romney and a number of down-ballot candidates for the House and Senate. This is what happens when the Church is weak and fails to disciple believers to turn Biblical faith into action.

Now consider this additional data....

[There is much more research and analysis in this article. To read the full column on the blog -- and/or to read IMPLOSION; or THE INVESTED LIFE: MAKING DISCIPLES OF ALL NATIONS ONE PERSON AT A TIME; or the new e-book, ISRAEL AT WAR; or to find links to the latest news and analysis of events and trends in the U.S., Israel, North Africa, Russia, and the Middle East -- please go to: http://flashtrafficblog.wordpress.com/.]

* TWITTER -- Please track the latest developments @joelcrosenberg.

_________________
A true follower of Christ is a follower of His Word. Jesus said, "Why do you call me, "Lord, Lord, and do not do what I say?"


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 9:27 am 
Offline
***** General

Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:12 pm
Posts: 4153
Likes: 307
Liked: 525
It's pretty simple, actually.

First, take the collection of people who self-identity as conservative or moderate, who are opposition to same-sex marriage and abortion and who think that we need to balance the budget. This collection includes millions of whites, blacks, Hispanics as well as people of other ethnic backgrounds.

Sounds like this wave of voters would be enough to stand united against the policies of the Democratic Party, right?

But then you take away more than 90% of the blacks and 70% of the Hispanics. They decide that they're not going to oppose the Democratic Party because the only alternative to the Democratic Party is the Republican Party. This is the party that, to most of these voters, are perceived as being either hostile to or apathetic to them. With no perceived reasonable alternative to the Democratic Party, they end up voting for the Democratic Party. Especially when they start to see evidence, through newly adopted state laws and restrictions to voting options, that many Republicans seem to want fewer of them to vote.

Oh yeah ... most of these voters live in huge numbers in swing states and are capable of swaying a close election in those states when most of them vote in one direction or the other. Nevada and its 6 electoral votes (huge Hispanic population). Colorado and its 9 EVs (Hispanics). Michigan and its 10 EVs (Blacks). Ohio and its 18 EVs (Blacks). Pennsylvania and its 20 EVs (Blacks). Virginia and its 13 EVs (Blacks and Hispanics). North Carolina and its 15 EVs (Blacks and Hispanics). Florida and its 29 EVs (Blacks and Hispanics, both of whom make up double digit percentages each of the state's electorate).

Almost all of the swing states are places where black and Hispanic voters live in such large numbers that, when one party fails to get much of the vote, we can turn the state one direction or another. In fact, the very reason that most of these swing states are swing states is because these are places where these groups, with whom the GOP has major image problems, live here and mostly vote for Democrats.

And so this united force of values voters end up being divided and voting in two different directions. This is why so many evangelicals voted for Obama. Because many of these evangelicals belong to demographic groups that the GOP has either ignored or irritated, largely by tone. And so while they look for an alternative to the Democrats they look across the street and see the ethnically monolithic party that seems to have too many people who have thinly veiled disdain or total apathy toward voters that look like them and who seem to make insulting and incorrect assumptions about what they want ("government checks"). And they vote Democrat.

And that's how we all lose.

_________________
The Values Voter
http://thevaluesvoter.spaces.live.com



Post by TheValuesVoter Liked by: FirstCoastTerp
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 1:31 pm 
Offline
***** General

Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 11:21 am
Posts: 2747
Location: Arkansas
Likes: 200
Liked: 653
Actually evangelicals represented the same share of the vote as last time. And while they did vote marginally more for Romney that was not the real story.

The real story for 2012 seems to be the lower turnout and the "disaffected" voter.

It looks like Obama won by turning out the base of his party in roughly the same numbers as 2008 (the total African-Ameircan turnout share of vote increased from 12.2% to 13%, BUT the absolute number rose only .02% which is far below the natural rate of increase - Hispanics kept pace with the natural rate of increase but did not "surge" [1.7%]).

What Obama failed to do was to win back any of his beachheads into traditional GOP demographics or among alienated DEM demographics. White evangelicals, working class Reagan Democrats, disaffected poor whites, suburban voters, ALL failed to show up for the "hope and change II" election.

BUT... Mitt did not win them either and made almost ZERO inroads into Dem Demos (only Jewish voters saw any kind of real movement and this is clearly not Romney but a terror of Obama related to Israel's survival).

Turns out that there was not so much a Demographics is Destiny model played out on Tuesday as a really bad candidate who could not take down a good candidate no matter how bad the situation has become for many. It looks like between 7-10 million whites just didn't show up to vote. It's not that they are dead, or necessarily GOP voters, they just couldn't see why it would make a difference.

They don't beleive in "Hope and Change" but they also failed to beleive that there was any hope for change for the better in a Mitt Romney.

The irony is that Demographics may be destiny but not in the way most often envisioned. The guts of the returns show a pretty clear break down that the Republican base is centered on intact marriages and functioning homes (which correlates strongly with employment, self-sufficiency, and community/values engagement – i.e. church attendance/civic clubs). The further you are from this nexus the more likely you are to vote for Obama, or it appears concerning disaffected whites, to not vote. I suspect when all the data is crunched we will find that the “missing white voter” is also single/divorced/never married with no or nominal attachment to community/values engagement – i.e. church/civic.

For GOP loyalists (like myself I'm now willing to admit) winning back these disaffected/disillusioned voters means determining the cause and effect in the relationships between marriage-church-self-reliance-and voting GOP.

The current GOP strategic leadership assumed that a cultural/values voter appeal would only further the alienation of these “disaffected” voters which is reasonable as they have largely checked out of community/values engagement in the first place and hear such appeals as personal condemnation of their “choices” (one indicator of the divide, from the GOP core strength, is the marriage rate drop to below 30% [from 70%] since 1960 among working-class whites while upper-middleclass marriage rates have stabilzed above 80%). In fairness it would have been very difficult for a Mitt Romney to have carried a full-throated values-voter argument, so his strategic options were set.

So the strategy became an “economy stupid” appeal based on a free-markets capitalism entrepreneurial “American Dream” “you built that” messaging. But this strategy risked being heard as condemnation as well. The appeal could easily be heard (or twisted) into a statement that, “if you only lifted yourself by your bootstraps you could have been successful like me,” This message approved by Willard Mitt Romney Esq. These potential Walmart Republican voters have watched the decline of manufacturing and blame Wallstreet for it not Obama (except for those directly in Coal Country). Reminding these voters of unemployment or foodstamps (35% of which are received by whites including military families whose rate of use tripled since 2008) did not automatically drive them toward Romney. These voters once believed in capitalism and the American Dream but are now fully in need of the welfare state for survival. Resentful of the benefits of capitalism by-passing them, realistic enough to see the fraud of a socialist utopia – they check out.

There may be a way to reengage these voters but Romney was not the man to do so.

Fortunately, after a brief fling with Obama in 2008, it turns out that Obama was not the man to reengage them either. We did not have realignment in 2008. We remain on the cusp.

_________________
"As for us, our days of combat are over. Our swords are rust. Our guns will thunder no more. The vultures that once wheeled over our heads must be buried with their prey. Whatever of glory must be won in the council or the closet, never again in the field. I do not repine. We have shared the incommunicable experience of war; we have felt, we still feel, the passion of life to its top."

Oliver Wendell Holmes



Post by Southern Doc Liked by: FirstCoastTerp
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 3:58 pm 
Offline
***** General
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 11:12 am
Posts: 3819
Location: St. Augustine, FL
Likes: 194
Liked: 215
I think that TVV's and SD's primary points are both valid and the GOP should take both to heart and act accordingly going forward.

_________________
Ken



Post by FirstCoastTerp Liked by: TheValuesVoter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 4:51 pm 
Offline
Lieutenant General

Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 9:23 pm
Posts: 1049
Location: California
Likes: 151
Liked: 36
While true that there were many disaffected voters that simply did not vote, it's also undeniable that the demographics of this country are changing and that minority voters have become a more significant voting bloc. Faith and values voters are still the GOP's most reliable voting bloc, but the Democrats have built a formidable coalition of minority and young voters. The GOP can't afford to continue utilizing the same old Reagan coalition strategy and expect it to work for much longer if they don't also draw in more minority voters.

If this year's election were held eight years ago, Nevada, Florida, and Virginia would have been easy wins for the GOP. But in recent years, Nevada, traditionally a business-friendly state, has seen a large increase in the number of Hispanic and Asian voters. Florida has seen an increase in Hispanic, particularly Puerto Rican, voters. Virginia now has a more considerable number of Hispanic, Asian, and black voters.

The GOP needs to do a better job of reaching out to both disaffected voters and all ethnic minorities, not just Hispanics. Black voters have become a more decisive factor in swing states and according to the 2010 census, Asians are now the fastest growing racial group in the U.S. Among many Asian families, there is a heavy emphasis on hard work and a good education. A majority of Filipino families are Catholic, socially conservative, and pro-military. There is no reason for the GOP to not try to attract more minority voters. For many minority voters, the GOP's platform actually resonates more with them than the Democrat platform- they just don't realize it. :D



Post by Grant Liked by: TheValuesVoter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 5:12 pm 
Offline
***** General

Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 11:21 am
Posts: 2747
Location: Arkansas
Likes: 200
Liked: 653
Grant wrote:
While true that there were many disaffected voters that simply did not vote, it's also undeniable that the demographics of this country are changing and that minority voters have become a more significant voting bloc. Faith and values voters are still the GOP's most reliable voting bloc, but the Democrats have built a formidable coalition of minority and young voters. The GOP can't afford to continue utilizing the same old Reagan coalition strategy and expect it to work for much longer if they don't also draw in more minority voters.

If this year's election were held eight years ago, Nevada, Florida, and Virginia would have been easy wins for the GOP. But in recent years, Nevada, traditionally a business-friendly state, has seen a large increase in the number of Hispanic and Asian voters. Florida has seen an increase in Hispanic, particularly Puerto Rican, voters. Virginia now has a more considerable number of Hispanic, Asian, and black voters.

The GOP needs to do a better job of reaching out to both disaffected voters and all ethnic minorities, not just Hispanics. Black voters have become a more decisive factor in swing states and according to the 2010 census, Asians are now the fastest growing racial group in the U.S. Among many Asian families, there is a heavy emphasis on hard work and a good education. A majority of Filipino families are Catholic, socially conservative, and pro-military. There is no reason for the GOP to not try to attract more minority voters. For many minority voters, the GOP's platform actually resonates more with them than the Democrat platform- they just don't realize it. :D


Grant, You are completely correct that demographics are changing. But they have ALWAYS changed. We've not been a "white nation" since 1915 as most Eastern and Southern Europeans were not considered at the time "white." We've not been a WASP nation since 1850 as Irish and Catholic Germans were either not Anglo/Saxon or not Protestant.

What we have ALWAYS been able to do is assimilate new groups into American society. Most in three generations. African-Americans, Native-Americans, and Jews, all had, and have unique and difficult histories which have slowed and truncated this process. There is no historical reason why shifting demographics should be our destiny. We are not a race, or collection of races. We are a People, founded on a proposition.

Republicans must be the champions of assimilation (as the were in the late 19th century when they realized that the only cure to the problem of Democratic Party - "Rum-Romanism-Rebellion" - was to "Americanize" the next generation.

Huckabee understood this with his call for GOOD students who were children of illegals to get the same access as citizen children to scholarships based on MERIT. The GOP cannot stop the Demographics in 2012 any more than the American Party could in the 1850's. But they can CONVERT the many into the one.

E Pluribus Unum.

To do this we must fight for the commanding heights of culture: media, education, religion in the public square. That is how "we" win - NOOOO!!!! that is how we preserve America for the next great generation of Americans.

_________________
"As for us, our days of combat are over. Our swords are rust. Our guns will thunder no more. The vultures that once wheeled over our heads must be buried with their prey. Whatever of glory must be won in the council or the closet, never again in the field. I do not repine. We have shared the incommunicable experience of war; we have felt, we still feel, the passion of life to its top."

Oliver Wendell Holmes


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 10, 2012 2:40 am 
Offline
Lieutenant General
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 7:19 pm
Posts: 1044
Likes: 8
Liked: 208
In my view there is a lot of over-analysis going on. What happened is really simple. We had a candidate at the top of the ticket who was uninspiring and unconvincing. He lost....and it had a trickle effect of depressing turnout which hurt in some of the down-ballot races.

What we learned from the changing demographics is that an Establishment Republican cannot win in an electorate that looks like 2008 and 2012. So what? The answer is simple; stop nominating Establishment Republicans. The establishment got a false sense of confidence because one of their own, George Bush got elected in 2000 and 2004. But if you remember back to 2000 Bush only won because of the Butterfly ballot in Palm Beach County, and he only won in 2004 by one state because he was running against the worst Democratic candidate in our lifetime. One could argue that his dad only won by riding the coattails of Reagan and again being up against a very weak candidate.

My point is that too much is being made of all this. A principled conservative that is strong on both fiscal and social issues can win. They don't need to change policies with regards to the new demographics. They just need to be able to relate to the people in those demographics. Latinos, Blacks, women, etc. need to know they care and aren't aloof and disinterested in their day to day struggles.

The establishment was the real loser in 2012, not conservatism.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 10, 2012 12:06 pm 
Offline
***** General
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 11:13 pm
Posts: 1623
Location: Atlanta, GA
Likes: 177
Liked: 225
WalterCan wrote:
In my view there is a lot of over-analysis going on. What happened is really simple. We had a candidate at the top of the ticket who was uninspiring and unconvincing. He lost....and it had a trickle effect of depressing turnout which hurt in some of the down-ballot races.

What we learned from the changing demographics is that an Establishment Republican cannot win in an electorate that looks like 2008 and 2012. So what? The answer is simple; stop nominating Establishment Republicans. The establishment got a false sense of confidence because one of their own, George Bush got elected in 2000 and 2004. But if you remember back to 2000 Bush only won because of the Butterfly ballot in Palm Beach County, and he only won in 2004 by one state because he was running against the worst Democratic candidate in our lifetime. One could argue that his dad only won by riding the coattails of Reagan and again being up against a very weak candidate.

My point is that too much is being made of all this. A principled conservative that is strong on both fiscal and social issues can win. They don't need to change policies with regards to the new demographics. They just need to be able to relate to the people in those demographics. Latinos, Blacks, women, etc. need to know they care and aren't aloof and disinterested in their day to day struggles.

The establishment was the real loser in 2012, not conservatism.
What happened Tuesday is inexcusable. The real lesson is that a majority of the electorate are too stupid to care about policy or consequences. To vote for a president with Obama's record amounts to malicious ignorance - I don't know what else to call it.

Republicans have lost the popular vote in 5 out of the last 6 Presidential elections. Since we can't change the demographics, in order to win those voters who don't care about life, liberty, and property rights, we have to give them what they want. We have to become the Santa Claus that Rush Limbaugh has been talking about this week. But how do we do that and also advance conservatism and constitutional principles?

The only answer I could come up with is the FairTax. The monthly prebate check might satisfy the zombies and dregs of our society while liberty-minded folks take solace in the fact that the government no longer takes a chunk out of our paycheck. The Fairtax will only be possible to pass in a wave election, with a president who will use the bully pulpit to push for it. The Fairtax would be a game changer in politics. There will be no more rich vs. poor, 99% nonsense. Everyone pays the same rate, everyone gets the same prebate. That takes ammo away from the left.

What else do these democrat voters want? They want an oppressor to fight against. They need someone to blame for their failures. We need to turn big government into "The Man". Ronald Reagan won, not because he was a conservative, but because he was a populist. A candidate who runs a populist campaign for more liberty will win.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 10, 2012 12:44 pm 
Offline
***** General

Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:12 pm
Posts: 4153
Likes: 307
Liked: 525
The "Santa Claus" that Limbaugh was talking about is almost as much of a myth as the real Santa Claus. It's an excuse that some Republicans use to justify the party's failures in sustaining and growing the base. It is easier to explain away the numbers by telling themselves that the reason they're failing is because most voters who don't vote with them want handouts from the government. In the same way that some people who don't take advantage of opportunities available to them and who struggle financially blame "the system" for their unwillingness to work hard and take risks, some Republicans make themselves feel better by telling themselves that the voters are all liberal moochers. "It's not us. We don't have to work hard." ironically, it's a case of conservatives using the victim mentality.

Let me ask everyone a simple and honest question. For those who think they know why so many voters, especially blacks and Hispanics, vote Democratic ... Have you ever asked any of them why they voted the way they do?

_________________
The Values Voter
http://thevaluesvoter.spaces.live.com


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 10, 2012 1:38 pm 
Offline
***** General

Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 11:21 am
Posts: 2747
Location: Arkansas
Likes: 200
Liked: 653
TheValuesVoter wrote:
The "Santa Claus" that Limbaugh was talking about is almost as much of a myth as the real Santa Claus. It's an excuse that some Republicans use to justify the party's failures in sustaining and growing the base. It is easier to explain away the numbers by telling themselves that the reason they're failing is because voters want handouts. In the same way that some people who struggle financially blame "the system" for their unwillingness to work hard and take risks, some Republicans make themselves feel better by telling themselves that the voters are all liberal moochers. "It's not us. We don't have to work hard." ironically, it's a case of conservatives using the victim mentality.

Let me ask everyone a simple and honest question. For those who think they know why so many voters, especially blacks and Hispanics, vote Democratic ... Have you ever asked any of them why they voted the way they do?


Good question. I can say yes, but I think I am in an unusual position. But the question is demographically just as valid in reverse. Self-segregation is pandemic.

_________________
"As for us, our days of combat are over. Our swords are rust. Our guns will thunder no more. The vultures that once wheeled over our heads must be buried with their prey. Whatever of glory must be won in the council or the closet, never again in the field. I do not repine. We have shared the incommunicable experience of war; we have felt, we still feel, the passion of life to its top."

Oliver Wendell Holmes


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 10, 2012 1:57 pm 
Offline
***** General

Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:12 pm
Posts: 4153
Likes: 307
Liked: 525
That is a good question, SD, and, I don't believe that many blacks and Hispanic voters understand Republican voters either. I think false assumptions are held by both sides. Many people assume, falsely, that most Republicans are racist, are rich, are hateful or just perpetually angry and that they oppose President Obama largely because of the fact that he is black. Likewise, many Republican voters falsely assume that most voters who who do not vote Republican are liberal, see themselves as victims, want handouts and support Obama because he is black. The tragedy is that both sides talk past each other and about each other but not to each other. If they did, they'd discover how much many of them have in common and how both sides are being used and misled about "us" and "them."

_________________
The Values Voter
http://thevaluesvoter.spaces.live.com



Post by TheValuesVoter Liked by: Grant
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 87 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
POWERED_BY