• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

RNC: Voters see GOP as ‘scary’ and ‘out of touch'

6

66gardeners

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 7, 2013
Messages
1,651
Reaction score
418
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
The Republican National Committee concedes in a sprawling report Monday that the GOP is seen as the party of “stuffy old men” and needs to change its ways.

RNC Chairman Reince Priebus has dubbed the report an “autopsy” of the party’s 2012 failures and a roadmap forward. Priebus is scheduled to unveil the 98-page report at a news conference Monday morning at The National Press Club.
“There’s no one reason we lost,” Priebus plans to say, according to prepared remarks. “Our message was weak; our ground game was insufficient; we weren’t inclusive; we were behind in both data and digital; our primary and debate process needed improvement. … So, there’s no one solution: There’s a long list of them.”

“Asked to describe Republicans, they said that the Party is ‘scary,’ ‘narrow minded,’ and ‘out of touch’ and that we were a Party of ‘stuffy old men,’” it states.


Read more: RNC: Voters see GOP as

What's scary about Republicans mandating that the government force women to have giant probes stuck in their privates against their will and against their doctor's wishes?
 
66gardeners said:
The Republican National Committee concedes in a sprawling report Monday that the GOP is seen as the party of “stuffy old men” and needs to change its ways.

RNC Chairman Reince Priebus has dubbed the report an “autopsy” of the party’s 2012 failures and a roadmap forward. Priebus is scheduled to unveil the 98-page report at a news conference Monday morning at The National Press Club.
“There’s no one reason we lost,” Priebus plans to say, according to prepared remarks. “Our message was weak; our ground game was insufficient; we weren’t inclusive; we were behind in both data and digital; our primary and debate process needed improvement. … So, there’s no one solution: There’s a long list of them.”

“Asked to describe Republicans, they said that the Party is ‘scary,’ ‘narrow minded,’ and ‘out of touch’ and that we were a Party of ‘stuffy old men,’” it states.


Read more: RNC: Voters see GOP as

What's scary about Republicans mandating that the government force women to have giant probes stuck in their privates against their will and against their doctor's wishes?
Click to expand...

The fact that they can do so and also call themselves the party of "small government" while doing it? :)
 
Deuce said:
The fact that they can do so and also call themselves the party of "small government" while doing it? :)
Click to expand...


Well then can try, but it looks like they're not getting away with it - hence, their autopsy report.
 
what is scary is that they had to commission a 98 page report to find that out
 
Aybody of modest means who would send money to the RNC to fund this crap deserves to be poor.
 
I'm a voter, and I see the republican party as representing the interests of one class, but which crafts its appeal to quite another.

I suppose were it possible to have the two coincide, it would be a remake of the Beverly Hillbilies.
 
I see this as a way to embrace the Libertarian side of the party. Get the party out of social issues with a message of no government intrusion. Start a message of a humble foreign policy that gets away from the "bomb any disobedient country." Only go to war with a declaration from Congress. Start promoting fiscal conservatism in order to make the national deficit the primary target of the Republican party.

That would work a lot better than what is happening now. Sever ties with religious social right wing and embrace the Libertarians.
 
Frankly, there's nothing "scary" about the republican party unless you're of the mind that you should have the right to sit on your ass, and have your needs met, regardless of your input. I don't agree with them on the abortion issue (the ones who wish to make it illegal), and I don't like all the special interest groups they pander to, but that the same with the democrats as well. They are both taking us into the poor house, it's just that one party is taking us at a little slower pace than the other, and we're going to end up in the same place of fiscal ruin either way.

If you choose your political party based on the fact that the other one is a boogieman, then you're essentially still a child.
 
lizzie said:
Frankly, there's nothing "scary" about the republican party unless you're of the mind that you should have the right to sit on your ass, and have your needs met, regardless of your input. I don't agree with them on the abortion issue (the ones who wish to make it illegal), and I don't like all the special interest groups they pander to, but that the same with the democrats as well. They are both taking us into the poor house, it's just that one party is taking us at a little slower pace than the other, and we're going to end up in the same place of fiscal ruin either way.

If you choose your political party based on the fact that the other one is a boogieman, then you're essentially still a child.
Click to expand...

So would you stop demonizeing us democrats as your parties boogieman?
 
lizzie said:
If you choose your political party based on the fact that the other one is a boogieman, then you're essentially still a child.
Click to expand...

Then most of the right are still children, because they demonize Obama as the socialist, Marxist, Muslim Boogyman. Remember what most of the hard-lined right said that they weren't voting for Romney they were voting against Obama. Children.
 
TheNextEra said:
Then most of the right are still children, because they demonize Obama as the socialist, Marxist, Muslim Boogyman. Remember what most of the hard-lined right said that they weren't voting for Romney they were voting against Obama. Children.
Click to expand...

I didn't say they aren't. I personally think most people could use a strong dose of grow-up these days, and get a grip on how to live as mature adults, and stop whining about how the government doesn't do enough.
 
AreteCourage said:
I see this as a way to embrace the Libertarian side of the party. Get the party out of social issues with a message of no government intrusion. Start a message of a humble foreign policy that gets away from the "bomb any disobedient country." Only go to war with a declaration from Congress. Start promoting fiscal conservatism in order to make the national deficit the primary target of the Republican party.

That would work a lot better than what is happening now. Sever ties with religious social right wing and embrace the Libertarians.
Click to expand...

You'll need to go with specifics. The GOP has been giving lip service to "less government!" for decades now, and what have they actually done on the subject? Hell one of their candidates couldn't even remember which government agency he supposedly wanted to get rid of.

So what should they put on the platform?
 
Deuce said:
You'll need to go with specifics. The GOP has been giving lip service to "less government!" for decades now, and what have they actually done on the subject? Hell one of their candidates couldn't even remember which government agency he supposedly wanted to get rid of.

So what should they put on the platform?
Click to expand...
[emphasis added by bubba]

and you have seized on the crux of the GOP's problem
folks are finally catching on to the fact that what it purports to embrace and what it actually does are two very different things
 
Deuce said:
You'll need to go with specifics. The GOP has been giving lip service to "less government!" for decades now, and what have they actually done on the subject? Hell one of their candidates couldn't even remember which government agency he supposedly wanted to get rid of.

So what should they put on the platform?
Click to expand...


First of all...do NOT put social issues on the platform at all. Republicans need to distance themselves from abortion, marriage, and those things.

Immigration...they mustn't take such a hard line stance. They have to appease the Hispanic population in our country. This past election cycle saw them try and ostracize those people....wrong move. We have millions upon millions of illegal immigrants in this country and we cannot round em up and mass deport while building a fence at the border of Mexico.

This is the platform I would like to see besides immigration.

-A full audit of The Federal Reserve and Pentagon
-A Federal Spending Freeze until our debt is under control
-Zero foreign aid while we're in a deficit
-Pass A Federal Balanced Budget Amendment
-Start scaling back the War on Drugs. I would like this process to be fast, but I know better. Start reducing funds to the DEA until eventually it can be abolished.
-Abolish Homeland Security (TSA along with it)
-No wars unless Congress gives a formal declaration where we have a plan of attack and immediate withdrawal. Absolutely no nation building.
-Reduce funding for the Defense Department over a set of years. We're now at 800 Billion annually for it...after the audit we can start reducing the funds by cutting waste without severe cuts to personnel (at first). I would like to see it reduced from 800 Billion to around 250 Billion within 5-10 years.
-Abolish the Patriot Act
-Take out the provisions in NDAA that restrict due process.
-No Drone Strikes on American Citizens without the right to due process (unless an attack is under way).
-Restrict war powers of the executive branch
-No president shall be allowed to bypass Congress on things that involve Constitutional rights.
-No corporation is too big to fail...EVER
-Term limits on Congress (one 6 year or a possible two 4 year terms)
-Reduction in lobbying (as much as possible).
-Any backroom deal is illegal and all parties should be subject to prosecution.
-Entitlement reform to go along with Defense funding reform. Reductions are needed in both areas.
-Reform the Department of Education or abolish it.

That is some of my ideas...I probably have more but none are on top of my head at the moment.
 
AreteCourage said:
First of all...do NOT put social issues on the platform at all. Republicans need to distance themselves from abortion, marriage, and those things.
Click to expand...

In that instant they have just lost 30% of their voting block.
 
66gardeners said:
The Republican National Committee concedes in a sprawling report Monday that the GOP is seen as the party of “stuffy old men” and needs to change its ways.

RNC Chairman Reince Priebus has dubbed the report an “autopsy” of the party’s 2012 failures and a roadmap forward. Priebus is scheduled to unveil the 98-page report at a news conference Monday morning at The National Press Club.
“There’s no one reason we lost,” Priebus plans to say, according to prepared remarks. “Our message was weak; our ground game was insufficient; we weren’t inclusive; we were behind in both data and digital; our primary and debate process needed improvement. … So, there’s no one solution: There’s a long list of them.”

“Asked to describe Republicans, they said that the Party is ‘scary,’ ‘narrow minded,’ and ‘out of touch’ and that we were a Party of ‘stuffy old men,’” it states.


Read more: RNC: Voters see GOP as

What's scary about Republicans mandating that the government force women to have giant probes stuck in their privates against their will and against their doctor's wishes?
Click to expand...

I see both major parties as being 'out of touch'. They don't function for the people anymore, it's all about favors and back scratching and what they think the citizens need, not what we actually DO need.
 
AreteCourage said:
First of all...do NOT put social issues on the platform at all. Republicans need to distance themselves from abortion, marriage, and those things.

Immigration...they mustn't take such a hard line stance. They have to appease the Hispanic population in our country. This past election cycle saw them try and ostracize those people....wrong move. We have millions upon millions of illegal immigrants in this country and we cannot round em up and mass deport while building a fence at the border of Mexico.

This is the platform I would like to see besides immigration.

-A full audit of The Federal Reserve and Pentagon
-A Federal Spending Freeze until our debt is under control
-Zero foreign aid while we're in a deficit
-Pass A Federal Balanced Budget Amendment
Click to expand...
Foolish absolutism. Debt is not inherently bad. Picture a business with the ability to borrow nearly unlimited funds at interest rates lower than inflation. (effectively a negative interest rate) The business would be foolish to ignore that ability. Before you say it, no, this does not mean you can just borrow forever and continually pile up debt. Blanket spending freezes are also missing the point. Some things are supposed to get more expensive, because population increases. More drivers means more road maintenance. A higher population means more people utilizing various social safety nets. More inspectors for the greater number of food production companies. Spending cuts or freezes shouldn't be done in such a blind fashion.

-Start scaling back the War on Drugs. I would like this process to be fast, but I know better. Start reducing funds to the DEA until eventually it can be abolished.
-Abolish Homeland Security (TSA along with it)
Click to expand...
Spun as "soft on crime and defense." Isn't that what the GOP has been doing for decades about liberals?

-No wars unless Congress gives a formal declaration where we have a plan of attack and immediate withdrawal. Absolutely no nation building.
Click to expand...
More absolutism. If we'd withdrawn from Afghanistan "immediately," the taliban would have just immediately retaken power.
-Reduce funding for the Defense Department over a set of years. We're now at 800 Billion annually for it...after the audit we can start reducing the funds by cutting waste without severe cuts to personnel (at first). I would like to see it reduced from 800 Billion to around 250 Billion within 5-10 years.
Click to expand...
You could probably cut the DOD budget in half just by making their acquisition process less stupid.

-Abolish the Patriot Act
Click to expand...
If you want to get rid of the whole thing, clearly you haven't read it. More absolutism.

-Take out the provisions in NDAA that restrict due process.
Click to expand...
Name them.
-No Drone Strikes on American Citizens without the right to due process (unless an attack is under way).
Click to expand...
This is essentially how it already works.

-Restrict war powers of the executive branch
Click to expand...
Vague.

-No president shall be allowed to bypass Congress on things that involve Constitutional rights.
Click to expand...
This is already the case, unless you have something specific you perceive as being unconstitutional?

-No corporation is too big to fail...EVER
Click to expand...
Ok by me.

-Term limits on Congress (one 6 year or a possible two 4 year terms)
Click to expand...
They're called elections.

-Reduction in lobbying (as much as possible).
Click to expand...
Free speech.

-Any backroom deal is illegal and all parties should be subject to prosecution.
Click to expand...
Vague.
-Entitlement reform to go along with Defense funding reform. Reductions are needed in both areas.
Click to expand...
Vague.

-Reform the Department of Education or abolish it.
Click to expand...
Vague.

That is some of my ideas...I probably have more but none are on top of my head at the moment.
Click to expand...

Obama wanted to "reform health care." It sounds nice, but the details are important, wouldn't you say?
 
Tigger said:
In that instant they have just lost 30% of their voting block.
Click to expand...

I'd say more like 60%. Republicans have used wedge religious issues for over 30 years now. They won't get any votes getting rid of the right religious wing nuts in their party.
 
Muddy Creek said:
I'd say more like 60%. Republicans have used wedge religious issues for over 30 years now. They won't get any votes getting rid of the right religious wing nuts in their party.
Click to expand...

I think you underestimate the number of Lemmings on the Right as much as many around here underestimate their number on the Left.
 
Deuce said:
Foolish absolutism. Debt is not inherently bad. Picture a business with the ability to borrow nearly unlimited funds at interest rates lower than inflation. (effectively a negative interest rate) The business would be foolish to ignore that ability. Before you say it, no, this does not mean you can just borrow forever and continually pile up debt. Blanket spending freezes are also missing the point. Some things are supposed to get more expensive, because population increases. More drivers means more road maintenance. A higher population means more people utilizing various social safety nets. More inspectors for the greater number of food production companies. Spending cuts or freezes shouldn't be done in such a blind fashion.
Click to expand...

16 Trillion Dollars in debt is something to be concerned with. The Federal Reserve is allowed to pump endless amounts of money into the economy which inevitable creates a bubble that will burst in the future. Our infrastructure is already decaying to a terrible point. However, make sure you understand that I'm only talking about Federal issues. State funded infrastructure will have to be decided by those states. As far as the other areas go...I'm sure we could probably take the funds we gain by getting out of wars, and ending the War on Drugs...pump that into rebuilding our infrastructure and creating new jobs to do so.

We cannot allow our currency to continue to devalue at its current rate. The dollar has lost significant value over the past decade must less since when we left the Gold Standard. The only thing keeping us away from Hyperinflation is our "World Reserve" status on the global market. When that ends (and it will)...it won't be pretty to say the least. Other countries are looking for ways to get out of the dollar for trading resources such as oil.


Spun as "soft on crime and defense." Isn't that what the GOP has been doing for decades about liberals?
Click to expand...

That is the problem of Neo-Cons. They think everything that goes against their initial plans is "weak" on some front. They have been attacking the left for that which is beyond idiotic to me.

More absolutism. If we'd withdrawn from Afghanistan "immediately," the taliban would have just immediately retaken power.
Click to expand...

They will regain power when we leave in 2014 as well. Afghanistan is a country that has a history of other nations coming in and trying to change their rule. They always end up reverting back...see the Soviet's in the 80s and us now. If we are to go to war...we need a plan to victory (contingencies may happen) and a plan for withdrawal. We should never nation build...it wastes money we don't have.
You could probably cut the DOD budget in half just by making their acquisition process less stupid.
Click to expand...

No doubt.

If you want to get rid of the whole thing, clearly you haven't read it. More absolutism.
Click to expand...

The language in The Patriot Act is sometime vague and sets precedent for power to be grasped. Checks and balances are part of our country and this act bypasses a lot of it.

Name them.
Click to expand...

Sections 1021 and 1022
This is essentially how it already works.
Click to expand...

Would like it to be something official...not "just how it works."


Vague.
Click to expand...

Politicians getting paid for their vote by a corporation or some other entity.
This is already the case, unless you have something specific you perceive as being unconstitutional?
Click to expand...

Executive Order 10990 allows the Government to take over all modes of transportation and control of highways and seaports.

* Executive Order 10995 allows the government to seize and control the communication media.

* Executive Order 10997 allows the government to take over all electrical power, gas, petroleum, fuels, and minerals.

Ok by me.
Click to expand...

I figured I wouldn't get much resistance on this issue.


They're called elections.
Click to expand...

Yep...and term limits should be imposed. We have it on our president...we should have it on our other elected officials.


Free speech.
Click to expand...

Yes, I should have been more specific. I'm talking about those lobbyists who try to buy votes.


Vague.
Click to expand...

Bribing for a vote.
Vague.
Click to expand...

Yes I left this one vague because it is open to discussion on what we can do. I don't have all the answers on specifics, but I believe reform discussions have to be on the table for entitlements.

Vague.
Click to expand...

I would like to see the Department of Education reform the way they evaluate schools. I cannot stand holding schools accountable to a standardized test. It stifles creative teaching and learning. Our schools resemble prisons in the way they institutionalize people. Critical thinking and creativity do not flourish in our schools as they should.



Obama wanted to "reform health care." It sounds nice, but the details are important, wouldn't you say?
Click to expand...

Details are important, but that is why we discuss them. Those were my general ideas...I didn't expand upon some until you asked me to do so.
 
Tigger said:
I think you underestimate the number of Lemmings on the Right as much as many around here underestimate their number on the Left.
Click to expand...

No, they don't have many left. Whereas the democratic party keeps growing in numbers. Even claiming the "independents", republicans are losing.
 
AreteCourage said:
Executive Order 10990 allows the Government to take over all modes of transportation and control of highways and seaports.

* Executive Order 10995 allows the government to seize and control the communication media.

* Executive Order 10997 allows the government to take over all electrical power, gas, petroleum, fuels, and minerals.



.
Click to expand...

FactCheck.org : Obama’s Executive Orders

We’ve received several emails that claim Obama is using his executive powers to create martial law. They’re not true.

The email claims that Obama has issued 900 executive orders but lists orders that previous presidents signed. The email also inaccurately describes those orders.

Another viral email cuts and pastes a constituent newsletter from Republican Rep. Kay Granger of Texas. She falsely claimed that an Obama executive order created martial law. Granger has since retracted her statements and removed the newsletter from her website.

It’s true that President Obama is increasingly using his executive powers in the face of staunch Republican opposition in Congress. He’s changed federal policies on immigration and welfare and appointed officials without congressional approval. But Obama’s executive actions have nothing to do with martial law.

Executive orders originated under George Washington, and their use stems from interpretations of Article II of the Constitution — which created the executive branch — and from presidential precedent.

Obama has not issued 900 executive orders. He has signed slightly fewer orders than President George W. Bush during this point in his first term, according to the University of California, Santa Barbara, which tracks executive orders. Obama has issued 139 executive orders as of Sept. 25. (The U.C. website listed 138 orders on Sept. 25, the same day Obama signed order 139). Bush issued 160 executive orders through Sept. 20, 2004, a comparable amount of time.

The viral email that claims Obama has signed 900 executive orders lists 13 orders as evidence, all of which previous presidents signed in the 1960s and 1970s.

Presidents number their executive orders consecutively. The first executive order that President Obama signed was EO-13489, which dealt with presidential records. Obama’s predecessors signed any executive order with a number lower than 13489.

The first executive order the email lists and attributes to Obama is 10990, which John F. Kennedy signed in 1962. The order reestablished a council to oversee safety of civilian federal employees. It did not — as the email claims — allow a government takeover of the nation’s seaports, highways and other modes of transportation.
Click to expand...

Are you a paid employee of Kay Granger, or just someone who believes anything they read on right wing blogs?
 
Granger, the Texas congresswoman, made false claims about an executive order that Obama actually signed in March. Writing in a constituent newsletter, Granger claimed that Obama’s “National Defense Resources Preparedness” order amounted to martial law, adding that it was “unprecedented” and “above the law” and lacked congressional oversight.
The order was none of those things — and Granger said as much in a subsequent statement. Since the Korean War, Congress has granted the president the authority to ensure that national resources — such as the food supply and various industries — will be available to meet national security needs in times of war and other emergencies. That power is granted under the Defense Production Act, a law that dates to 1950 and must be reauthorized by Congress every few years. (The act expires in 2014.)
Like presidents before him, Obama issued an order updating the resources covered under that act, which allows presidents to delegate authority to various federal departments and agencies. For example, Obama’s order authorizes the secretaries of Defense and the Interior “to encourage the exploration, development, and mining of strategic and critical materials and other materials.”
President Bill Clinton issued a similar executive order in 1994. Some people misunderstood that order as well, prompting the Congressional Research Service to write that Clinton’s order “has nothing whatever to do with declarations of martial law. It has no effect at all on continued powers of Congress or the federal courts during periods of war or other national emergencies.”
Granger removed the newsletter from her website. And she took back almost all of her claims in an April 30 newsletter “clarifying” her position.
Click to expand...

If you work for Granger, I'd be ashamed if I were you. Liar and manipulative politician.

Kay Granger, Representative from Texas's 12th District - GovTrack.us


Some of Granger’s most recently sponsored bills include...

Click to expand...
 
Muddy Creek said:
No, they don't have many left. Whereas the democratic party keeps growing in numbers. Even claiming the "independents", republicans are losing.
Click to expand...

That's fine. I'm not a Republican, and Conservatives such as myself don't see elections as the ultimate form of change in society anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom