That was then. This is now. (Republican campaigns)

[Dittohead not!]

[h=1]A year from Election Day, GOP faces chaos it hoped to avoid[/h]

WASHINGTON (AP) — After a devastating loss in the 2012 presidential election, the Republican Party entered a period of intense self-reflection and emerged with a firm promise to learn from its mistakes.
[h=2]

​

[/h]




The GOP vowed to avoid a prolonged and vicious 2016 primary. It concluded it must embrace an overhaul of the nation's immigration laws and adopt a more welcoming tone to win over women and minorities.
Yet a year from Election Day 2016, the GOP primary is a rough and bumpy competition.

"Devastatingly, we have lost the ability to be persuasive with, or welcoming to, those who do not agree with us on every issue," the report found. In addition to an improved tone, the RNC outlined a single policy imperative: "We must embrace and champion comprehensive immigration reform. If we do not, our party's appeal will continue to shrink to its core constituencies only."

Last time around, after losing despite having (IMO, at least) clearly the better candidate, the Republicans decided on what had to be done to win next time around. Instead, they appear to be intent on losing once again.

At least, that's the way it looks to Steve Peoples, Lisa Lerer. and to me. What do you think?

 

[betuadollar]

[h=1]A year from Election Day, GOP faces chaos it hoped to avoid[/h]





Last time around, after losing despite having (IMO, at least) clearly the better candidate, the Republicans decided on what had to be done to win next time around. Instead, they appear to be intent on losing once again.

At least, that's the way it looks to Steve Peoples, Lisa Lerer. and to me. What do you think?

I think Bush as lead reformer is just more of the same. And that's not good enough anymore.

 

[Glen Contrarian]

[h=1]A year from Election Day, GOP faces chaos it hoped to avoid[/h]





Last time around, after losing despite having (IMO, at least) clearly the better candidate, the Republicans decided on what had to be done to win next time around. Instead, they appear to be intent on losing once again.

At least, that's the way it looks to Steve Peoples, Lisa Lerer. and to me. What do you think?

That's what we on the Left have been saying for the past couple years, that the GOP had a "moment of clarity" after the 2012 loss in which they realized they needed to reach out to immigrants, minorities, and women...and then they went back to insanity as usual...

...and of course, whenever we on the Left said such things, we were castigated for it. So...after Hillary wins (assuming she lives through election day), the GOP will have another "moment of clarity"...and then after Hillaryphobia sets in ("She's destroying America!!!!"), just as it set in soon after Bill Clinton and Obama were elected, the Right will go back to insanity as usual.

It's going to be deja vu all over again.

 

[gdgyva]

the democrats are handing the nomination to Hillary

she has the money, the name, and the backing

the pubs are slugging it out, and will until super tuesday or so

by then we will have a top 3 or so

my take is that it will be trump, carson, and rubio

and rubio will come out in the end as the nominee

how that will come out come next november, i dunno

but i dont see it as a runaway for Hillary

 

[Dittohead not!]

the democrats are handing the nomination to Hillary

she has the money, the name, and the backing

the pubs are slugging it out, and will until super tuesday or so

by then we will have a top 3 or so

my take is that it will be trump, carson, and rubio

and rubio will come out in the end as the nominee

how that will come out come next november, i dunno

but i dont see it as a runaway for Hillary

if you're right about Rubio, then it's not a runaway for Hillary. If it's Trump or Carson, then she'd have to try hard not to win. As long as the Democrats don't shoot themselves in the foot like the Republicans did in '12, then she's the next president.

 

[Moderate Right]

The Republicans have had their heads in the sand ever since wanting to bring more minorities into the fold. Right from the get go their strategy was in just convincing these people that their policies were better for them than the Democrat's policies. It was never about refining their policies to attract more of these voters. I agree Trump and Carson will be out and Rubio will be the nominee. He could put Carly on the ticket as VP to attract some women while he goes after the young and hispanics. Of course none of these people are going to vote Republican in droves but if the Republicans can double these votes from the previous election then that could go a long way. I think Carly could deliver a certain percentage of women voters. I would like to see her and Hillary go at it. Hillary doesn't represent all women and Carly could pick off those that are leery of Hillary.

 

[Sabanist]

[h=1]A year from Election Day, GOP faces chaos it hoped to avoid[/h]





Last time around, after losing despite having (IMO, at least) clearly the better candidate, the Republicans decided on what had to be done to win next time around. Instead, they appear to be intent on losing once again.

At least, that's the way it looks to Steve Peoples, Lisa Lerer. and to me. What do you think?

Until republicans start touting freebies, youll never see another one elected potus. Eventually they will to get elected, but what will it matter. The fall of the us as we know if today is inevitable. Im not talking zombie apocolypse, but a split. Itll happen in my lifetime. Perhaps then the liberals can truly destroy themselves in whats left

 

[Sabanist]

The Republicans have had their heads in the sand ever since wanting to bring more minorities into the fold. Right from the get go their strategy was in just convincing these people that their policies were better for them than the Democrat's policies. It was never about refining their policies to attract more of these voters. I agree Trump and Carson will be out and Rubio will be the nominee. He could put Carly on the ticket as VP to attract some women while he goes after the young and hispanics. Of course none of these people are going to vote Republican in droves but if the Republicans can double these votes from the previous election then that could go a long way. I think Carly could deliver a certain percentage of women voters. I would like to see her and Hillary go at it. Hillary doesn't represent all women and Carly could pick off those that are leery of Hillary.

Only liberals vote because of race and sex.

 

[Sabanist]

the democrats are handing the nomination to Hillary

she has the money, the name, and the backing

the pubs are slugging it out, and will until super tuesday or so

by then we will have a top 3 or so

my take is that it will be trump, carson, and rubio

and rubio will come out in the end as the nominee

how that will come out come next november, i dunno

but i dont see it as a runaway for Hillary

I doubt rubio will get the support. He is the weakest of the candidates. No executive experience, his whole adult life in politics, and irresponsibility with his own money, and his campaigns. If republicans vote him as the nominee then they are no better than the democrats who only vote because of the color of your skin and the rhetoric out of your mouth

 

[Sabanist]

That's what we on the Left have been saying for the past couple years, that the GOP had a "moment of clarity" after the 2012 loss in which they realized they needed to reach out to immigrants, minorities, and women...and then they went back to insanity as usual...

...and of course, whenever we on the Left said such things, we were castigated for it. So...after Hillary wins (assuming she lives through election day), the GOP will have another "moment of clarity"...and then after Hillaryphobia sets in ("She's destroying America!!!!"), just as it set in soon after Bill Clinton and Obama were elected, the Right will go back to insanity as usual.

It's going to be deja vu all over again.

And liberals will win because the american public is pretty stupid.

 

[Dittohead not!]

Until republicans start touting freebies, youll never see another one elected potus. Eventually they will to get elected, but what will it matter. The fall of the us as we know if today is inevitable. Im not talking zombie apocolypse, but a split. Itll happen in my lifetime. Perhaps then the liberals can truly destroy themselves in whats left

What makes you think Republicans don't tout "freebes"? Who supports bailouts of too big to fail industries, for example?

 

[Threegoofs]

I doubt rubio will get the support. He is the weakest of the candidates. No executive experience, his whole adult life in politics, and irresponsibility with his own money, and his campaigns.

Hmm. Sounds like Thomas Jefferson. Minus the smarts.

 

[Threegoofs]

What makes you think Republicans don't tout "freebes"? Who supports bailouts of too big to fail industries, for example?

And tax cuts for everybody! Paid for by cutting foreign aid!
(And Planned Parenthood, unless we fold like wet newspaper when we need to pass a budget)

 

[Glen Contrarian]

And liberals will win because the american public is pretty stupid.

Hm. Let me see here:

Clinton - biggest economic boom in American history. Had a budget surplus his last two years.

Bush - took the budget surplus, slashed taxes, invaded a nation that posed no threat, and left us in the worst economic condition since the Great Depression

Obama - took over in the middle of the Great Recession when we were losing a half million jobs per MONTH...and now we've had over sixty straight months of positive private-sector job growth - the longest such streak in American history.

Deeds, not words. Which side has brought prosperity, and which side brought ruin?

Ah, but I get it - you're not allowed to EVER think that maybe, just maybe the liberals might not be out to destroy America, and that the conservative politicians are just selling you a bill of goods....

 

[gdgyva]

I doubt rubio will get the support. He is the weakest of the candidates. No executive experience, his whole adult life in politics, and irresponsibility with his own money, and his campaigns. If republicans vote him as the nominee then they are no better than the democrats who only vote because of the color of your skin and the rhetoric out of your mouth

weakest of the candidates?

not in my book

guess that is why we all have opinions

he is HEADS above Bush.....

Probably on same level as Cruz, but wont turn away the voters that Cruz might

Carson just isnt presidential....seems like a wonderful, intelligent, thoughtful man

But i cant see him leading the boy scouts, much less this country

Trump is a wild man....love some things about him....hate others

I think he is unelectable...but again, just my opinion

Fiorina and Kasich have some decent points but i see them both as VP types, not headlining the ticket

 

[Moderate Right]

I think people in this thread are looking at this too much like a horse race. Before the race starts you look at a horse's stats and achievements and pick the most qualified horse to bet on but then when the race starts all bets are off and those hard looked at stats go right out the window. You did all that hard work to pick the horse most likely to win, only to find out that the person next to you who bet on their birthday winds up with the winning ticket. If you were to look at the stats before the race very few would pick either Trump or Carson.

 

[Sabanist]

What makes you think Republicans don't tout "freebes"? Who supports bailouts of too big to fail industries, for example?

Idk, what republicans do support that. Can you show me a candidate that has supported that?

 

[Sabanist]

weakest of the candidates?

not in my book

guess that is why we all have opinions

he is HEADS above Bush.....

Probably on same level as Cruz, but wont turn away the voters that Cruz might

Carson just isnt presidential....seems like a wonderful, intelligent, thoughtful man

But i cant see him leading the boy scouts, much less this country

Trump is a wild man....love some things about him....hate others

I think he is unelectable...but again, just my opinion

Fiorina and Kasich have some decent points but i see them both as VP types, not headlining the ticket

What exactly makes him heads above bush to you?

 

[Sabanist]

Hm. Let me see here:

Clinton - biggest economic boom in American history. Had a budget surplus his last two years.

Bush - took the budget surplus, slashed taxes, invaded a nation that posed no threat, and left us in the worst economic condition since the Great Depression

Obama - took over in the middle of the Great Recession when we were losing a half million jobs per MONTH...and now we've had over sixty straight months of positive private-sector job growth - the longest such streak in American history.

Deeds, not words. Which side has brought prosperity, and which side brought ruin?

Ah, but I get it - you're not allowed to EVER think that maybe, just maybe the liberals might not be out to destroy America, and that the conservative politicians are just selling you a bill of goods....

Timelines do not explain causation, legislation passed without bush's help caused the housing bubble which led to the crash. In a vacuum you may be right. But thats not the real world. I could list the things bush, obama, clinton failed at and succeeded but whats the point? You are a leftist.

Tell me, what law did clinton draft and passed that caused the prosperity? Or bush? I can point to several executive actions by the current potus that were bad ideas.

 

[Sabanist]

Hmm. Sounds like Thomas Jefferson. Minus the smarts.

Are you comparing marco rubio to thomas jefferson? Then we have nothing more to discuss.

 

[Cardinal]

A year from Election Day, GOP faces chaos it hoped to avoid







Last time around, after losing despite having (IMO, at least) clearly the better candidate, the Republicans decided on what had to be done to win next time around. Instead, they appear to be intent on losing once again.

At least, that's the way it looks to Steve Peoples, Lisa Lerer. and to me. What do you think?

"Intense self-reflection?" Seriously? I have yet to hear a mainstream Republican narrative from 2012 that is anything other than "People voted for handouts."

 

[Dittohead not!]

Idk, what republicans do support that. Can you show me a candidate that has supported that?

It's what they support after the election that counts.

 

[justabubba]

I think people in this thread are looking at this too much like a horse race. Before the race starts you look at a horse's stats and achievements and pick the most qualified horse to bet on but then when the race starts all bets are off and those hard looked at stats go right out the window. You did all that hard work to pick the horse most likely to win, only to find out that the person next to you who bet on their birthday winds up with the winning ticket. If you were to look at the stats before the race very few would pick either Trump or Carson.

can't disagree with that at all

 

[justabubba]

Timelines do not explain causation, legislation passed without bush's help caused the housing bubble which led to the crash. In a vacuum you may be right. But thats not the real world. I could list the things bush, obama, clinton failed at and succeeded but whats the point? You are a leftist.

Tell me, what law did clinton draft and passed that caused the prosperity? Or bush? I can point to several executive actions by the current potus that were bad ideas.

clinton pushed money at small businesses
especially tech businesses that conservative banks were historically wary of financing
something Obama will not be found guilty of doing

 

[Absentglare]

Timelines do not explain causation, legislation passed without bush's help caused the housing bubble which led to the crash. In a vacuum you may be right. But thats not the real world. I could list the things bush, obama, clinton failed at and succeeded but whats the point? You are a leftist.

Tell me, what law did clinton draft and passed that caused the prosperity? Or bush? I can point to several executive actions by the current potus that were bad ideas.

Without President Bush 2's help? What legislation? Did he veto it ?

Cite source, because that doesn't sound right.



President Bush 2's own policies created the housing bubble. But after your anti-leftist prejudice expression, i can guess why you would refuse to acknowledge the truth.