Author Topic: What's next for GOP?  (Read 7227 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: What's next for GOP?
« Reply #90 on: December 12, 2012, 06:50:18 PM »

Offline BballTim

  • Sam Jones
  • **********************
  • Posts: 22885
  • Tommy Points: 1055
I didn't say he was incorrect. It's clearly less important than winning the election, and it's not really a sign of trends in the direction of democrats. The fact that Bush did better in almost every state in the country in the next election shows this. You also saw a big drop in support for Obama from 2008 to 2012. If there was an ongoing shift to the left we'd have seen Bush lose in 2004 and Obama win big last year.
I didn't say that you said that he was incorrect. I suggest that you pull the chain on this one before we divide by zero.

It's not "clearly less important" than winning the election if we are talking about party popularity, which is the subject as near as I can tell. Bush only barely carried Florida, he couldn't have done worse without losing. The 2004 election was against a different opponent, and as an incumbent president.

I'd say that it's likely that the differential between 2008/2012 can also be partially attributed to things like McCain vs. Romney, Sarah Palin, Bush hangover leaving Republicans home, the 2008 election not being representative of Obama's real support due to the financial crisis and "first AA president" thing... and this is just what I came up with off the top of my head. Never mind that Obama is one of the most centrist leftists we've had in a while, and GWB wasn't much of a conservative.

No, there are just all kinds of problems with your implications.

  Obama's still not a centrist, he's a leftist that couldn't competently forward his agenda. And if the point of your post was that there are too many variables in these elections to see any real voting shift then I'd agree with you.

Re: What's next for GOP?
« Reply #91 on: December 12, 2012, 07:10:25 PM »

Offline D Dub

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1661
  • Tommy Points: 75
Oh Timmy gotta love ya.  After you post this whole thing about % of victory margin & the importance of the trend; you're gonna tell me to ignore popular vote figures because all that matters is winning?   

Methinks you care more about the sport of debate than the content of the discussion.  No other way to explain that kind of blatant hypocrisy.
     

Re: What's next for GOP?
« Reply #92 on: December 12, 2012, 07:24:20 PM »

Offline BballTim

  • Sam Jones
  • **********************
  • Posts: 22885
  • Tommy Points: 1055
Oh Timmy gotta love ya.  After you post this whole thing about % of victory margin & the importance of the trend; you're gonna tell me to ignore popular vote figures because all that matters is winning?   

Methinks you care more about the sport of debate than the content of the discussion.  No other way to explain that kind of blatant hypocrisy.

  It's not hypocrisy, it's your inability to follow a discussion. I didn't say anything about percent of victory margin being important, I merely pointed out that Obama didn't win by a "huge margin".

Re: What's next for GOP?
« Reply #93 on: December 12, 2012, 07:44:28 PM »

Offline D Dub

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1661
  • Tommy Points: 75
There are huge portions of the white vote that no-showed though.

There is also reason to think that Obama got exceptionally large AA turn out, which he did, for non-repeatable reasons.

I think breaking down what % a demographic vote makes of the party vote inverts the analysis. Instead of white % of R vote is 95%, better to say 75% of white vote was R.

It's not like that 75% number doesn't cover a lot of lower income people, I don't see any reason a well articulated position cannot convince other chunks of the electorate (including AA, Hisp., and especially Asian.)

Bonus questions:
- how did past presidential elections break down along demographic lines?
- how does the % of demographics break down when normalized to the broader population?

Here's a decent breakdown of the most recent,

Re: What's next for GOP?
« Reply #94 on: December 12, 2012, 09:00:59 PM »

Offline Brendan

  • Ray Allen
  • **
  • Posts: 2988
  • Tommy Points: 72
    • Self Assay
I'm gonna pass on the last round there about trends: bottom line is BBallTim and I are saying popular votes don't show a trend, not that they aren't good read outs for the popular mandate behind a president (whatever that's worth.) As a foot note, if you think Obama is a centrist, your socialist meter is broken or you are just saying things to help your point regardless of veracity.

Now on the demographic breakdown:

% of votes (obama % of total / romney %)

white 70% (29/41)
black 13% (12/1)
hispanic 10% (7/3)
asian 3% (2/1)
other 2% (1/1)

If Romeny could swing that white vote from breaking 29/41 to 27/43 he's the next president. Accoding to this black % of the population is only 12%. So they are over represented in this election - historically black voters are under represented. Perhaps we've reached some great awakening, or perhaps white people just didn't love Romney that much and black people did love Obama.

As bad as republicans do with other minority groups, they do better than with blacks. So depending on which groups grow and if the other minority groups end up voting by individual circumstance, rather than by race - it could help Republicans.

Considering that support for SSM among Hispanics and Blacks is much lower than among Whites, it would make sense that a Republican politician skilled enough to remove that as a wedge issue would could win a substantial % higher of the white vote.

Re: What's next for GOP?
« Reply #95 on: December 12, 2012, 09:56:05 PM »

Offline nickagneta

  • Paul Pierce
  • ***************************
  • Posts: 27183
  • Tommy Points: 2043
Regarding the white vote, Obama picked up a huge victory in the young vote, white included. Perhaps the reason the white vote showed up less for Romney than expected is the loss of the young white vote to Obama.

I also have to think that there was an easy 3% of voters that probably voted Republican the last two elections due to Obama's race. That number might be conservative. If Obama was everything he is and had the same record and was white, I got to think the white vote for the Republicans would have been less and each victory would have looked even more impressive.

 

Re: What's next for GOP?
« Reply #96 on: December 12, 2012, 10:29:52 PM »

Offline Brendan

  • Ray Allen
  • **
  • Posts: 2988
  • Tommy Points: 72
    • Self Assay
highly dubious claim. the fact the Romney and McCain couldn't turn out the white vote argues the opposite, or that they are such exceptionally bad candidates that hypothetical 3% margin of racism mattered less than their terribleness.

Re: What's next for GOP?
« Reply #97 on: December 12, 2012, 10:35:16 PM »

Offline nickagneta

  • Paul Pierce
  • ***************************
  • Posts: 27183
  • Tommy Points: 2043
highly dubious claim. the fact the Romney and McCain couldn't turn out the white vote argues the opposite, or that they are such exceptionally bad candidates that hypothetical 3% margin of racism mattered less than their terribleness.
McCain wasn't a bad candidate. Palin was. I also doubt any Republican was winning in 2008.

Romney was a bad candidate but then again so was everyone else the Republicans trotted out in the primaries.

McCain's timing in winning the nomination and Romney's terribleness hurt their chances and doomed the Republicans. But the racism factor definitely made it closer than either should have been.

Re: What's next for GOP?
« Reply #98 on: December 12, 2012, 10:35:31 PM »

Offline BballTim

  • Sam Jones
  • **********************
  • Posts: 22885
  • Tommy Points: 1055
Regarding the white vote, Obama picked up a huge victory in the young vote, white included. Perhaps the reason the white vote showed up less for Romney than expected is the loss of the young white vote to Obama.

I also have to think that there was an easy 3% of voters that probably voted Republican the last two elections due to Obama's race. That number might be conservative. If Obama was everything he is and had the same record and was white, I got to think the white vote for the Republicans would have been less and each victory would have looked even more impressive.

  Obama won 60% of the youth vote, down from 66% in 2008. And Obama probably gets more votes because of his race than he loses.

Re: What's next for GOP?
« Reply #99 on: December 12, 2012, 10:46:56 PM »

Offline Celtics4ever

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8260
  • Tommy Points: 480
Quote
f Romeny could swing that white vote from breaking 29/41 to 27/43 he's the next president. Accoding to this black % of the population is only 12%. So they are over represented in this election - historically black voters are under represented. Perhaps we've reached some great awakening, or perhaps white people just didn't love Romney that much and black people did love Obama.

Would of, could of, should of....

He was hurt by going so far right in the primaries which alienated hispanics (self deportation).  The crazy positions and comments there dogged him the whole election.  The far right has litmus tests that do not do well in the general election in some ways.   

He hurt himself with the 47% comments too and alienated half of the voters.  He picked a divisive VP candidate to placate his base with issues regarding entitlements that most Americans do not share.

His own party killed him see Akin and Mourdock and the dumb comments that they made that alienated women and highlighted a medieval world-view. (rape and God and pregnancy).

Dwindling debate performances as well.   He owned debate one but was beaten in the final two.

I don't think this was even as close as the press made it.  Electorally, which is all that matters it was a landslide.   The press made it close for a good story but the pollster from the NYC accurately predicted this whole matter.  Nate Silver knew who was winning and he is predicting a landslide for Hillary in 2016 right now.  Check out 538.

Obama won latinos, black, young people and the women vote and some white males as well.   Romney's appeal was limited.

I think Obama was wise to run as defender of the middle class.   Romney didn't run as that and it cost him.  Regardless of race, a large percentage of the electorate identifies as middle class.

Re: What's next for GOP?
« Reply #100 on: December 12, 2012, 10:48:49 PM »

Offline nickagneta

  • Paul Pierce
  • ***************************
  • Posts: 27183
  • Tommy Points: 2043
And Obama probably gets more votes because of his race than he loses.
I very seriously doubt that.

Did you actually type that and keep a straight face?

Re: What's next for GOP?
« Reply #101 on: December 12, 2012, 11:36:52 PM »

Offline BballTim

  • Sam Jones
  • **********************
  • Posts: 22885
  • Tommy Points: 1055
And Obama probably gets more votes because of his race than he loses.
I very seriously doubt that.

Did you actually type that and keep a straight face?

  I know you think that your completely unverifiable claims are more accurate than most people's, but we live in a politically correct country and that obviously works in Obama's favor.

Re: What's next for GOP?
« Reply #102 on: December 12, 2012, 11:39:59 PM »

Online foulweatherfan

  • K.C. Jones
  • *************
  • Posts: 13001
  • Tommy Points: 1573
% of votes (obama % of total / romney %)

white 70% (29/41)
black 13% (12/1)
hispanic 10% (7/3)
asian 3% (2/1)
other 2% (1/1)

If Romeny could swing that white vote from breaking 29/41 to 27/43 he's the next president.

And if Generic 2016 GOP Candidate gets the white vote to swing to that proportion (about 62-38%), and every other race breaks exactly the same as this year, they lose.  2024, they get blown out.  2044, they're a third party. 

That's what's got the strategists so worried.  It's not some unsolvable problem but if the GOP doesn't find a way to branch out demographically it's in deep trouble.  I'm 95% sure they'll cobble together a new coalition one way or another - and I sincerely think we'll be better off once it happens - but it's a very real challenge. 

Re: What's next for GOP?
« Reply #103 on: December 12, 2012, 11:44:52 PM »

Offline BballTim

  • Sam Jones
  • **********************
  • Posts: 22885
  • Tommy Points: 1055
% of votes (obama % of total / romney %)

white 70% (29/41)
black 13% (12/1)
hispanic 10% (7/3)
asian 3% (2/1)
other 2% (1/1)

If Romeny could swing that white vote from breaking 29/41 to 27/43 he's the next president.

And if Generic 2016 GOP Candidate gets the white vote to swing to that proportion (about 62-38%), and every other race breaks exactly the same as this year, they lose.  2024, they get blown out.  2044, they're a third party. 

That's what's got the strategists so worried.  It's not some unsolvable problem but if the GOP doesn't find a way to branch out demographically it's in deep trouble.  I'm 95% sure they'll cobble together a new coalition one way or another - and I sincerely think we'll be better off once it happens - but it's a very real challenge.

  Over time they'll adapt whether they want to or not, because the candidates with the broader messages will end up beating the more "traditional" candidates.

Re: What's next for GOP?
« Reply #104 on: December 12, 2012, 11:58:48 PM »

Online foulweatherfan

  • K.C. Jones
  • *************
  • Posts: 13001
  • Tommy Points: 1573
% of votes (obama % of total / romney %)

white 70% (29/41)
black 13% (12/1)
hispanic 10% (7/3)
asian 3% (2/1)
other 2% (1/1)

If Romeny could swing that white vote from breaking 29/41 to 27/43 he's the next president.

And if Generic 2016 GOP Candidate gets the white vote to swing to that proportion (about 62-38%), and every other race breaks exactly the same as this year, they lose.  2024, they get blown out.  2044, they're a third party. 

That's what's got the strategists so worried.  It's not some unsolvable problem but if the GOP doesn't find a way to branch out demographically it's in deep trouble.  I'm 95% sure they'll cobble together a new coalition one way or another - and I sincerely think we'll be better off once it happens - but it's a very real challenge.

  Over time they'll adapt whether they want to or not, because the candidates with the broader messages will end up beating the more "traditional" candidates.

Absolutely.  Politics is kinda like the market or evolution that way - it always gravitates toward the most appealing message.

The Republicans aren't going anywhere - far too many resources and too much at stake.  Not inconceivable they could implode but very, very unlikely.  They'll figure something out one way or another, but they do need to find that broadly appealing message first, and how they go about it will determine how rocky the transition is.

 

Hello! Guest

Welcome to the CelticsBlog Forums.

Welcome to CelticsBlog