Can the Republicans fall in love again?

Does Beck really wield that much sway in the GOP? He doesn’t seem to be all that intelligent, constantly contradicts himself, and comes off, quite easily, as more of a buffoon than Limbaugh.

Well, the GOP purportedly does have a direct line to God, so yeah, it kinda does make sense. :stuck_out_tongue:

And I imagine my hair will grow back. Bachman’s just this side of crazy, and completely oblivious to her own shortcomings.

I’d actually love the GOP to nominate Bachman for President or VP. If that wouldn’t be the death knell for the party, nothing would. But even the Republicans aren’t that stupid.

I didn’t reference Beck as a leader so much as an exemplar.

The Republican bar is set pretty low, however. With respect to relative intelligence, Beck is the prettiest girl in the leper colony.

The discussion seems to be centered on whether the Republicans could become a solid and coherent political force. As such, it is a valid discussion.

However, there is a separate option that could easily return the Republican Party to power either/both in congreass or/and the White House: if the current economy stumbles, again, or some other significant catastrophe hits the country, any number of folks who dumped the Republicans in Congress or who chose Obama over McCain could flop back the other direction.

There are more Democrats than Republicans, but there are far more RINOs, DINOs, and true independents than there are committed members of either partiy. Some of the claims I have seen here in other threads tend to display a serious lack of historical awareness. In 1990, GHWB was “clearly” unbeatable for the 1992 presidential race. In 1992, the Democrats secured a “generational” control of Congress. The 1992 and 1994 elections made shambles of both beliefs. All politics is local and it has not been established that the Democrats have actually secured local control of very district or that the issues on which they actually won, (as opposed to the beliefs of their firmest adherents), are cast in concrete for 2012, (or even 2010).

A new love interest?

I’m 60 years old, a lifelong Massachusetts resident. When I was growing up, my state, and New England in general, had lots of positive, mature Republicans, people with the gravitas and ethical standards of, say, Eliot Richardson. One doesn’t see much of the frothing-batshit ignoramus Republicans in these parts, but these days one doesn’t see many Republicans in general, not in public office anyway.

I really miss the old-fashioned Republicans. As an unabashed liberal, I say they’re sorely needed and sorely missed.

Maybe Petraeus, although the surge might not be viewed in the same light as it currently is in a couple of years. I’m hoping he stays out of it though. I’m looking forward to watching the GOP primary candidates spending months trying to publicly out-nutjob each other to get the nomination. If Petraeus takes part he’ll be sensible and muted about military and foreign policy and so prevent the other candidates from coming out with entertaining whackadoodle stuff.

Agreed. I am generally liberal and usually vote Democrat but I don’t embrace the thought of a liberal party, or any party for at matter, without viable opposition to keep it in check.

This is a contradiction in terms. You CANNOT consider yourself a republican (not even a RINO) and think that Obama is the best President you have seen in your lifetime. If you agree that much with Obama’s stated policy goals then you are a democrat. Or did you mean that he speaks really well?

I’m not a Republican, but I think that Lincoln was the best President in US history.

I also voted for Obama, and agree with many of his policy goals, but I’m not a Democrat.

What’s the crack about “speaking really well?”

I shouldn’t speak for Yorick, but I don’t see it as anything more than meaning he’s a great speech giver - like Reagan or Kennedy. The guy expresses ideas persuasively.

Somehow I doubt that’s what he meant. The implication (and this is standard on the far right) is that being a “good speaker” is ALL Obama is. That’s he just reads off a Teleprompter, that’s there’s nothing more to him, and that people who support him are stupid for falling for it.

This is something they need to believe, no matter how asinine it is.

Yep Clinton was bad times. Full employment, no wars, a balanced budget. How could we allow those thing to happen.

Poor Hannity. He used to be the “Great American”. Now it’s some…some…funny underwear-wearing Mormon!


I don’t think you are ready to compare Obama to Lincoln…are you?

Are you a republican?

He speaks really well. Why does that have to be a crack?

No, Obama is more than just a great speaker. I don’t consider him an empty suit although I do believe he is in over his head. I think he is very adept at selling certain ideas to a public that would probably not be buying them otherwise. Of course, with his failure to get a public option for health care, I AM starting to rethink this.

Yeah, well, problem there is he isn’t actually trying to sell that idea. He’s letting it rot on the back shelf behind the stuck door in the outhouse nobody uses anymore.


I can almost agree with you. But, what was that speech to Congress all about? What about all those damn town halls? I just can’t understand why he would NOT be trying to sell this idea unless he knows it will go down in flames anyway. But, if that’s the case, I assume he would have distanced himself from it ASAP.