To astorian: Right, once again in black and white, we have a Conservative that thinks all moderates are just Liberals. Good god man, I voted and campaigned for Reagan, I am pro-military, pro-fiscal conservative but I am a liberal as I want to fight global warming and pollution and stay out of people’s personnel life. There is a lot more of us that you think and with the country down to 22% identifying as Republican there may be a lot less you Steele’s Republicans than you think.
Pinko. 
You sound like a typical moderate centrist to me…leaning left on some issues and right on others. It’s fairly typical to be labeled a ‘liberal’ if you lean left on any issue (of course, on this board it’s more typical to be labeled ‘conservative’ if you lean even towards the (US) middle :p).
The shame is that while both parties run towards the center during an election they both cater to the extremes in other respects.
-XT
I’ll talk about it.
In a thread around here awhile back where people chimed in about the (then occurring) Republican Convention I noted I was playing a game called, “Spot the minority”. I really did play this game with myself and it was truly amazing to note I was hard pressed to find a minority of any stripe there. Oh sure, there were some few but very, VERY few.
Among many issues Republicans need to eyeball changing demographics of our country and realize a “white only” party will get pounded repeatedly. Indeed if they manage to maintain a very “white only” memberships I predict they will collapse as a viable political party and will be relegated to the lunatic fringe. Another, more moderate and more inclusive, conservative party will replace them.
It’s not the rhetoric that matters. They have to actually help their moderates get things done. Michael Steele can say anything he wants (and it’s been proven that he does and is basically irrelevant) but that doesn’t change how elected officials will treat each other when the time comes to make a deal.
90% of black people typically vote for Democrats anyway, but “nearly all of them” voted for Obama?
90% is already nearly all of them. About 95% voted for Obama. Blacks are about 12% of the population so an additional 5% of that 12% voted for Obama (actually a lot less than that since it has to be further reduced to registered voters who showed up and voted) which means that they gave Obama maybe about one million more votes than they would normally give to a Dem.
There’s two other major demographics that you’re missing, and which are why the GOP is in trouble (especially if it doesn’t moderate its neanderthal social posturing). One of those is Latinos, and the other – the REALLY significant demographic for Obma – is younger voters. The GOP is getting older. People under 40 are far less socially conservative than they were 20 years ago.
Exactly.
-XT
That’s more or less why Michael Steele is now the RNC chairman and has gone around with his “urban suburban hip hop context” thing, but on his own he makes no difference. In 2004 the Republicans thought they’d be able to count on a large share of the Latino vote in future elections, but that didn’t happen because of the party’s stance on immigration and the race-baiting that often goes hand-in-hand with it.
Race wasn’t the issue, as evidenced by your own self-contradictory post: Obama got better turnout from black voters and a slightly bigger share of the black vote as well, but not enough to turn Kerry’s 3 million vote loss into a 9.5 million vote win. Simple math would’ve made that obvious to you. Democrats do very well among black voters anyway, and the difference in their support for Obama was not enough to push him over the top.
Only if all the black voters lived in Florida or Pennsylvania, which they don’t. I see Diogenes the Cynic said a lot of this already. The black vote did not flip Florida, Pennsylvania, Indiana, New Mexico, Virginia, North Carolina, Nevada and Colorado and one district in Nebraska to Obama all on its own. Even if you include Latino voters, that remains false. Obama basically did better than Kerry among every group except, I think, white men.
Step 1 would be: firmly show Mr. Steele the door.
I’m finding it hard to fathom how the Dems had Howard Dean and he actually avoided the spotlight, yet the GOP managed to get someone who does nothing but hog the spotlight… apparently, so everyone can watch him chew on his loafers yet again.
Because I’ve lived so long in one area, the GOP is convinced I must still be a True Believer as I once registered with them. Their infrequent calls are a source of much merriment to me, and consternation to their calling lackey.
… although I do occasionally vote for a Republican candidate. But not lately, and not for this lot of feckless losers.
IIRC it was black voter angst over gay marriage (while being in the liberal column generally the black vote is historically against gay issues) was considered enough to turn Ohio to Bush in 2004. Not that most of the black vote went to Bush but enough did. I believe had Ohio gone to Kerry in 2004 then Kerry would have won the election.
I have a vague recollection of Chris Rock berating black voters over this very thing in some stand-up sketch awhile back.
Steele was chosen precisely *because *of his ability to be a black Republican on TV.
'Zactly.
How’s that decision working out for them I wonder.
I’ve said this before: There is no evidence that gay marriage won the 04 election for Bush. The fact that my home state of Michigan, among others in 2004, voted for Kerry and against gay marriage, refutes that. Surprise, surprise, a lot of loyal Democrats voted for Democrats and still don’t like gay marriage.
I love Chris Rock’s standup, but I wouldn’t consider him a good source on the matter.
Well, me for one. I was registered to vote in the Republican primaries when I lived in California all through the 80s and much of the 90s. I believe government is run best at the federal level when it is careful about what it spends, yet does so with an understanding that it has an obligation to better our society in some way. I support the concept of environmentalism, including the EPA, but I’m not a believer in using the Act, or the concept, to obstruct growth in the country. I want a good education system, am not yet convinced that socialized education is a bad thing, but do not think the way to solve education issues is to simply throw more and more money on the system. I don’t believe in continued efforts at racially based affirmative action, both because I’m not convinced they work, and because I think they continue to divide through a dichotomy that shouldn’t exist (race). However, I don’t think that we should simply abandon those who grow up through disadvantaged environments; if we are going to act affirmatively to better the lot of such people, we need to do so without limiting those efforts to people who’s skin is darker than others.
I don’t believe that a “life” worth protecting in the same way a born person’s life is protected exists at the moment of conception, but I do believe that at some point in the gestation of a human fetus, some level of protection must be given to that potential live human. I’m not female, so I tend to defer on issues regarding abortion; I’m glad God didn’t saddle me with ovaries and I’ll say so to anyone who asks! 
But I am not comfortable with the concept of abortion as a method of contraception/birth control, and I believe that Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided upon LEGAL grounds, without regard to the moral issues involved.
I think people who identify as homosexual should be allowed to “marry” and register that relationship with the government, and be entitled to call themselves “married” and enjoy the fruits (and the stings!) of “marriage.” But I’m not so certain that government should be offering ANY distinction to people on the basis of whether or not they’ve accomplished some specific religious ceremony; I’d be much happier to simply call what everyone does a “civil union” for the purpose of the law and let individual religions decide what they will annoint with the status of “marriage.”
I believe in having a strong military, and using it as needed, but I think we have a responsibility to use that strength in a very careful manner. Gulf War I was a reasonable exercise in force; Gulf War II was stupidity personnified. I’ve worked on weapons systems in the past, and have no qualms about having done so (admittedly, I was very peripheral to the development, but my father was instrumental in the ongoing development of Sidewinder, Shrike and other missiles and I have no qualms about HIS activities). I would not participate in the military unless it was absolutely necessary to protect my country and loved ones, but I was proud to have a brother, and two brothers-in-law who served in the armed forces.
I think Mapp v. Ohio was a bad decision, and I’ve long opined that the exclusionary rule should be removed, in favor of some other method of remedying constitutional violations of our fourth, fifth and sixth amendment rights. Miranda has absolutely no basis in the Constitution. But by the same token, I consider the rights of the accused very important to safeguard, and am very leery of letting police set the limits of what they can do, since we see all too often that they will go to excess to accomplish what they perceive is a “just” result.
I believe the death penalty should be abolished, but I don’t think it violates the 8th Amendment.
So, as you see, I’m quite a good moderate. I have some conservative viewpoints, I have some viewpoints that are “liberal”, and I have some viewpoints that are not easily pegged as one or the other.
I stopped voting in the Republican primary in California in the mid-90s, as it became clear to me that the Republican party was sliding slowly down to the right, in an increasing attempt to pander to those who feel that their specific social mores should be enforced upon everyone, mores which are much more “conservative” than those of the majority of our population. When I lived in Ohio, I saw no reason to change that primary affiliation. Here in South Carolina, I listen to the local Republicans and wonder if they even look at their state at all. In a state with one of the highest unemployment rates in the nation (my current county has an unemployment rate of 18%!!), with vast areas of underperforming economy, growing social issues, and a general malaise that threatens to overwhelm the population, the only things the Republicans here can offer are “cut taxes more!” and “let people choose where to send their kids for education!” Right.
The last Republican candidate for President I voted for was G.H.W. Bush, and unless the party changes their viewpoint and philosophy, I’m not likely to support or vote for anyone else Republican in the near future. And that’s a shame, because frankly, the Democrats don’t have answers right now, and running on the “We ain’t THEM!” platform doesn’t make me particularly happy about having them in power.
If you take out the increased black votes from the mix, then Obama certainly loses Florida, Indiana, Virginia, and North Carolina.
I can’t see how you can’t say that the black vote didn’t cause Florida to flip when compared with 2000. It was only a 550 vote margin. ANY group could have been said to cause that flip.
Don’t ask, don’t tell works for the military.
This is just the same principle applied to a different situation.
On certain issues. Young people are much less anti-gay and more pro-environment, but opposition to abortion isn’t trending down.
Yep…“no evidence” :rolleyes:
He would have won the election without all of those states. I’m not sure what you’re saying is true, but I’m not sure where to go to compare the racial turnout in each state.
Which makes crediting black voters absolutely meaningless. In any case I compared 2008 with 2004, and not 2000.
Well, that’s just it, isn’t it? DADT doesn’t work for the military …or were you being ironic?