America in 2012: Same Old Crap, Wonderful Democracy

[WIP]

The Republicans are in a difficult situation as they must think hard what to do to change in order to become electable again in the presidential elections. Like it or not but the USA is fast becoming a more and more secular country, so religious nutjobbery no longer appeals to the electorate at large.

I stopped following the election last weekend, and waited till Thursday before I started sifting through the wreckage again. After viewing some of the comical Republican and conservative pundit meltdown clips, I am thinking that the Republicans had no intentions of winning the majority in the first place! They were only concerned with winning the majority of the white vote....otherwise there is no logical explanation for their less than subtle race baiting this time around.

Previously, they have made half-hearted attempts to win as much of the minority vote as possible....if we look back to 2004, George Bush won 44% of the latino vote. This time it was less than 20%....Romney even lost the majority of the Cubans according to exit polls in Florida...which is totally unprecedented. But the consensus among the Repugnants has been growing over the last 10 years that their future is with the money and a fanatical core base of support, roughly the equivalent of the brown shirts of the fascist movements of the 1930's Italy, Germany and Spain.

The reason the strategy backfired so badly on them this time was that blacks and latinos...and women in general who represented a 18% gender gap....were so repulsed by the creeping fascism on the right, they organized for weeks to get registered and STAY registered - denying local level Repuplican attempts to cage their votes and knock them off the voter lists. In some areas of Ohio, Florida and other battleground states, there were constant problems inside the polling stations that didn't exist by coincidence in Republican strongholds. Surveys of polling sites on election night also indicated (no surprise) that over 80% of "poll watchers" were specifically "watching" or as it is otherwise known- attempting to obstruct or delay the vote in minority districts.

So, the surprise is only in respects to how the Republicans, and in particular the operatives like Karl Rove, wasted so much money on a strategy that was so obvious that it motivated people to get out and stand in line for hours at the polls, who would have never done it this time around just to support Barack Obama. And if the Obama Team has any brains, they will realize that they did not win because of their virtues, but only because what the Republicans offered up was so repulsive! If the Democrats don't drop their DLC - Clinton - so called third way, and concentrate more on being the party of the common people like the glory days of FDR and actually stand for something, then they will be swept aside by the party that overtly caters to the rich and powerful.

[bush_cheney2004]

.... But the consensus among the Repugnants has been growing over the last 10 years that their future is with the money and a fanatical core base of support, roughly the equivalent of the brown shirts of the fascist movements of the 1930's Italy, Germany and Spain.

The reason the strategy backfired so badly on them this time was that blacks and latinos...and women in general who represented a 18% gender gap....were so repulsed by the creeping fascism on the right,

Complete nonsense analogy, but great hyperbole. Let the record show that one of the reasons John Kerry lost to George Bush in 2004 was 45% support from Latino/Hispanic voters. That's the same Bush who invaded Iraq and Afghanistan, plus passed the PATRIOT Act.

Carl Rove was in on that one too.

Edited November 11, 2012 by bush_cheney2004

[bleeding heart]

Complete nonsense analogy, but great hyperbole. Let the record show that one of the reasons John Kerry lost to George Bush in 2004 was 45% support from Latino/Hispanic voters.

As WIP already pointed out in the self-same post.

[cybercoma]

Well thought out opinions are great.

You're too much, Shady.

[WIP]

Complete nonsense analogy, but great hyperbole. Let the record show that one of the reasons John Kerry lost to George Bush in 2004 was 45% support from Latino/Hispanic voters. That's the same Bush who invaded Iraq and Afghanistan, plus passed the PATRIOT Act.

And as bleeding heart already asked: what's your point? I already covered that point that Bush II was the last Republican presidential candidate to reach out to latino voters. In fact, he was trying to float another amnesty act like Reagan did in the 80's, but the growing "border security" movements like the Minutemen, succeeded in stalling it out with their nativist backlash. Notice that McCain -- another southern Republican, who had previously been considered a moderate who was sympathetic to latino issues had done an about face in 2008 and was talking about border fences and deporting illegals himself....so the Republicans were already on their way to becoming a whites only party four years ago.

Carl Rove was in on that one too.

Of course he was! And the outreach to latino voters by Bush was primarily the Turd Blossom's idea in the first place. He has no soul, and has no interest in policies other than whether they win or lose elections for Republicans, but Rove had enough brains to realize that with changing demographics, Republicans had a better opportunity of bringing in latinos than they did with winning a share of the black vote. I think you have to go back to Jack Kemp, before you can come up with a single Republican national politician who made any serious effort to win black voters. But Rove, and the Rove strategy got shouted down by all of the nativists emoting about Mexicans taking over.....and of course most of them never have thought about the fact that, if they live in California, Texas, Arizona and New Mexico, they are living in former Mexican territory to start with.

But this time around, Rove was not about outreach to latinos! This year's strategy was about voter harassment and suppression tactics which he was sure would be enough to suppress a large enough share of those black and brown votes to allow Republicans to slide in with that shrinking older white voter base.....but Rove's big plans backfired:

Why Voter Suppression Is Mostly a Republican Tactic

Voter Suppression Worked - In Reverse

Not that anyone should feel sorry for the Turd Blossom! He was earning commissions on the donations he received from the billionaires for his Crossroads GPS Super Pac; and he made money on the other end while placing ad buys. And that was one of the big flops right there, as we are now learning that Rove was concentrating on buying ad time on national radio and TV.....likely because that's where the biggest commissions are earned, while the more effective advertising was at the local level -- like the Democrats were doing in the battleground states. So, if Rove has damaged his reputation so badly that he never gets hired by anyone ever again, he's still a multimillionaire who likely had his best earning year ever as a political operative.

[bush_cheney2004]

And as bleeding heart already asked: what's your point? I already covered that point that Bush II was the last Republican presidential candidate to reach out to latino voters....

My point was straightforward....does "reaching out" to Latino voters include deporting illegals at a much higher rate by the Obama administration? Whether or not Republicans tried to woo Latinos or any other voters is not the same as outright voter suppression. One election cycle does not make for an Atwater-like election strategy. Many states saw majority support for better integrity in the registration and voting process regardless of those impacted.

The Democrats have a demographics problem with some "white" voters. Does this mean they have to do a better job of "reaching out"?

[sharkman]

Wip, you claim fascism and that blacks were so worried about this it energized them. It had nothing to do with Obama, who they had voted for in a block of over 90% last time? No no, this time they saw signs of nazism and brown shirt nonsense.

In another post you claim the media was not doing their jobs of investigating and reporting tactics of the Republicans and instead were lazy and only blamed both sides. You remind me of this guy I used to work with, he had a head on his shoulders and seemed really together. Until the topic of conversation got around to politics or international affairs, then he became very strident and saw conspiracies and cover ups and was rather unpleasant to be around.

Edited November 12, 2012 by sharkman

[WIP]

My point was straightforward....does "reaching out" to Latino voters include deporting illegals at a much higher rate by the Obama administration? Whether or not Republicans tried to woo Latinos or any other voters is not the same as outright voter suppression. One election cycle does not make for an Atwater-like election strategy. Many states saw majority support for better integrity in the registration and voting process regardless of those impacted.

Well, as long as Republicans are promising even worse, then they are not in any position to win Latino voters. As long as the voices are Sheriff Joe Arpaio, and every major Republican candidate wants to get their picture taken with him, then they become the even worse option. Obama didn't really have to do anything except make some noises about the Dream Act.

All of the campaigns by Republicans trying to gin up the voter fraud story, while they couldn't provide any evidence to support their claims, would come across as a blatant attempt to eliminate as many minority voters as possible. One of the tactics - the demand for photo ID with expiry dates....usually a driver's license...was pointed out a number of times that not everyone owns a car and has a driver's license. The lower the income, the more likely someone lives in an urban center, the less likely someone will own a car or have a current driver's license. But, even if it had a serious objective than creating a subtle form of poll taxes, there was little or nothing to gain from requiring picture ID, since that would only stop someone impersonating another voter. It was just part of a series of attempts to put roadblocks in front of the lower income demographic groups that are less likely to vote Republican. Although it should be noted that these tactics also hit at least some usually Republican supporters like the elderly and disabled veterans.

The Democrats have a demographics problem with some "white" voters. Does this mean they have to do a better job of "reaching out"?

The Democrats have had that 'white voter' problem ever since Lyndon Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act. He knew it would be a problem for his party in the South, and it would be a wedge issue in the northern states. But Johnson, RFK, and other Democrats took many years to step up on that issue. They reasoned that the alternative to doing something to improve the situation for blacks in America and do nothing, would have had worse repercussions over all. At that time, the U.S. economy was booming...the middle class was getting richer and still growing in size...so, I would suspect was that some of the thinking would be that whites outside of the deep south would give the benefit of the doubt to civil rights, the war on poverty and other programs to balance out living standards. And it worked.....at least for awhile!

The big problem for Democrats today, is that they try to fashion themselves as populists -- working on behalf of the poor, the marginalized and the downtrodden, but they want or need the money from many of the same people who finance the Republicans! So, they can never talk like Democrats of old. I recall a few years back coming across FDR's 1936 Democratic Convention speech accepting the nomination when he was running for re-election. One part that really jumped out was his comments about the bankers:"they hate me, and I welcome their hatred!". Can anyone imagine Obama or any other Democrat (Bernie Sanders doesn't count) even coming close to a statement like that today? The best we can get is multimillionaires should pay marginally more in income tax....no talk of real banking reform, prosecutions for fraud at Goldmann Sachs and others, no talk about a transaction tax.

[WIP]

Wip, you claim fascism and that blacks were so worried about this it energized them. It had nothing to do with Obama, who they had voted for in a block of over 90% last time? No no, this time they saw signs of nazism and brown shirt nonsense.

There was a lot of euphoria among blacks in 2008 on the thought of having a black president, and why shouldn't there be? There was a similar euphoria among some whites who thought something along the lines of 'look how liberal and progressive I am with my vote for Obama sticker on my car. But, that was last time. There were some harder to find voices in 2008, who wondered what he really stood for, and why Wall Street was funding his campaign back when he was running against Hillary for the nomination....but most people...even on the other side were willing to give him a chance and see what he would do.

In another post you claim the media was not doing their jobs of investigating and reporting tactics of the Republicans and instead were lazy and only blamed both sides. You remind me of this guy I used to work with, he had a head on his shoulders and seemed really together. Until the topic of conversation got around to politics or international affairs, then he became very strident and saw conspiracies and cover ups and was rather unpleasant to be around.

Aside from Foxnews and the night time lineup on MSNBC, the mainstream media tries to pretend to be nonpartisan. But, the real problem with MSM is that they are dependent on the same money that the politicians live on. Who's going to do a serious investigative report on ALEC or the role of Super Pacs in the electoral process? Why don't any reporters interviewing Ben Bernanke or other government officials ask them if they have any conflicts of interest, since they are in the revolving door between acting as government watchdog and working for major banks? Similar to a previous director of MMS who had previously worked for BP and Chevron on two separate occasions. It doesn't take a conspiracy theorist to become suspicious that many politicians and government officials are only in government to pass favourable legislation for when they go back to the private sector to cash in!

[eyeball]

..."religion is a disease of the brain," which pretty much says that all people who believe have a disease of the brain.

It would be more correct to say that religion is a disease of the mind. A disease of the brain would normally just involve tissue not thoughts, at least not until the disease hits something vital.

God forbid.

[August1991]

So what, exactly, made them "nutjobs?" Just the fact that they were Methodists, Lutherans, Quakers? Furthermore, our religious "nutjob" forefathers wrote freedom of religion and separation of church and state into our government. Doesn't sound like "religious nutjobbery" to me.

What exactly makes Americans nutjobs, I don't know. You're the American on this forum. You explain it.

I'm just pointing out that many foreigners (Catholics) perceive Americans as the crazy religious people (Protestants) who ran away from Europe. And it kind of makes sense that they (Protestants) would write a Constitution allowing themselves to be crazy in their own crazy way. If the lunatics ran an asylum, I wouldn't be surprised to learn that the first rule is that "there are no lunatics".

I'll define "religious nutjobbery" simply by pointing out that everyone who has religious beliefs is not a "nutjob."

Thank you for that helpful point. You almost sound like a Roman Catholic. Edited November 14, 2012 by August1991

[August1991]

Conrad Black has a rather more bearish view of the US outlook and politics. I find it somewhat pessimistic but without changes, not unlikely.

A shocking $3-billion was spent to keep a failed administration and mediocre congressional leaders (House Speaker John Boehner and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid) in place, operating a system that is very corrupt and is almost completely dysfunctional. Almost nothing worthwhile was said during the campaign about anything substantial.

I read that piece and reckoned that Conrad Black is increasingly either saying the obvious, or saying nonsense, and his usual verbose style is increasingly so.

----

The various quadrennial campaigns not only cost too much money ($6 billion this time), they also take far too much time. It's worth point out that Obama's gaffe in 2008 about "guns and Christians" occurred during a fund-raising event just like Romney's "47%" gaffe. Candidates spend far too much time raising too much money.

It's like the US-Soviet nuclear arms race.

The Supreme Court will (rightly) not impose a solution. So, I think that the only solution is for the Democrats and Republicans to agree on spending limits, money-raising tactics.

It would be good too if Iowa, New Hampshire et al could stop this "race to be early". Could they take turns?

[WIP]

It would be more correct to say that religion is a disease of the mind. A disease of the brain would normally just involve tissue not thoughts, at least not until the disease hits something vital.

God forbid.

It's still total bullshit that Dawkins came up with 20 years ago in his essay: Viruses of the Mind. Every belief could be classified as mind viruses by this criteria.

Edited November 14, 2012 by WIP