So, out of curiosity, am I the only one who would prefer the GOP become sane rather than increasingly unhinged? De facto one-party rule isn't all puppies and blowjobs.
How do you see the Republican party coming back to sanity? The way I see it, the more the crazy far-right wing of the party gains power, the more moderate voters are turned to independents or Democrats and the more moderate elected Republicans are voted out because of their party's bad image. And the more moderate voters and elected Republicans are out of the party, the more power the crazy far-right wing gets. It's a vicious cycle, and at each iteration it leaves the party smaller and more crazy. I don't see any way for them to break out of it.
The only way I could see the republicans regaining power under such circumstances would be some sort of massive failure that could be tied directly and unequivicably to the democrats; We're talking like a major terrorist attack, collosal recession, Nuclear launch from korea or iran, ect.
So, out of curiosity, am I the only one who would prefer the GOP become sane rather than increasingly unhinged? De facto one-party rule isn't all puppies and blowjobs.
How do you see the Republican party coming back to sanity? The way I see it, the more the crazy far-right wing of the party gains power, the more moderate voters are turned to independents or Democrats and the more moderate elected Republicans are voted out because of their party's bad image. And the more moderate voters and elected Republicans are out of the party, the more power the crazy far-right wing gets. It's a vicious cycle, and at each iteration it leaves the party smaller and more crazy. I don't see any way for them to break out of it.
The only way I could see the republicans regaining power under such circumstances would be some sort of massive failure that could be tied directly and unequivicably to the democrats; We're talking like a major terrorist attack, collosal recession, Nuclear launch from korea or iran, ect.
Pelosi sex tape.
kildy on
0
Options
GoslingLooking Up Soccer In Mongolia Right Now, ProbablyWatertown, WIRegistered Userregular
So, out of curiosity, am I the only one who would prefer the GOP become sane rather than increasingly unhinged? De facto one-party rule isn't all puppies and blowjobs.
True, but as we're seeing, the GOP in its current form isn't going to become sane. At all. They made the argument that McCain wasn't far-right enough, so in 2012, the far-right will handpick their nominee- Palin, Rush, Gingrich, whatever- and pretty much force it on the moderates whether they like it or not. And when- not if, when- Obama skullcracks that nominee at the polls, the far-right has no excuses. Or at least, none they will be able to use and have people take them seriously. Until that, this is going to continue.
From there, one of two things will happen:
1. The far-right is forced into at least some form of capitulation, having been soundly defeated three, possibly four times at the polls in the span of eight years (pending 2010 results). No amount of glossing-over is going to mitigate the damage to their policy positions. By this time the older members of the far-right will have retired or died, and younger moderates begin to take the party back.
2. The Dems will have so thoroughly crushed the GOP- three, possibly four times in the span of eight years (pending 2010)- that the far-right simply ceases to be a viable political entity. Anyone remotely moderate will have fled to the Dems, and the Dems, by this time probably at a two-thirds majority in the Senate, will simply wait for the GOP, out of ideas and unwilling to produce new ones, to go the way of the Whigs. Then we wait for the Blue Dogs break off over some issue or other, and the two-party system reasserts itself.
It's that two-thirds margin that's the one to watch. All manner of power flows to a side that can get two-thirds- 67 Senate seats. You can veto bills, convict an impeached President, expel someone from the Senate, etc. Once that mark is hit, then the death of the minority party becomes a real possibility, and at the rate we're going, it may only be a few cycles away.
Gosling on
I have a new soccer blog The Minnow Tank. Reading it psychically kicks Sepp Blatter in the bean bag.
So, out of curiosity, am I the only one who would prefer the GOP become sane rather than increasingly unhinged? De facto one-party rule isn't all puppies and blowjobs.
How do you see the Republican party coming back to sanity? The way I see it, the more the crazy far-right wing of the party gains power, the more moderate voters are turned to independents or Democrats and the more moderate elected Republicans are voted out because of their party's bad image. And the more moderate voters and elected Republicans are out of the party, the more power the crazy far-right wing gets. It's a vicious cycle, and at each iteration it leaves the party smaller and more crazy. I don't see any way for them to break out of it.
The only way I could see the republicans regaining power under such circumstances would be some sort of massive failure that could be tied directly and unequivicably to the democrats; We're talking like a major terrorist attack, collosal recession, Nuclear launch from korea or iran, ect.
Pelosi sex tape.
That will never get out. Because no one in their right minds would see something marked "Pelosi Sex Tape" and choose to open it.
De facto one-party rule isn't all puppies and blowjobs.
It is if it's your party.
For a while, anyway.
Eventually it's usually good to have some sane opposition to stem the inevitable tide of corruption. I am no longer among those who believes that the GOP will be the source of anything remotely sane ever again.
Because the Democratic Party is still seen as "softer" on defense?
Maybe once Obama shows an effective withdrawl in Iraq, a winning strategy in Afghanistan, and a strong presence in foreign affairs, that will change, but for now they're still the party of the Iran hostage debacle and the Battle of Mogadishu.
Because the Democratic Party is still seen as "softer" on defense?
Maybe once Obama shows an effective withdrawl in Iraq, a winning strategy in Afghanistan, and a strong presence in foreign affairs, that will change, but for now they're still the party of the Iran hostage debacle and the Battle of Mogadishu.
Eh. But I could easily see them setting the GOP on fire over national security if they were so inclined, which the party is not and why they took shit situations and made them intrinsic to the party's image (which basically is because the party was/is stupid).
So, out of curiosity, am I the only one who would prefer the GOP become sane rather than increasingly unhinged? De facto one-party rule isn't all puppies and blowjobs.
Hi5!
I thought about joining, because I'm no fan of single party government.
But dude - would they have me? I rather think not.
If Steele were to resign, the chairmanship would probably end up going to that dude who was second choice in the elections. You know, the guy who joined the Republican party because he hated desegregation.
If Steele were to resign, the chairmanship would probably end up going to that dude who was second choice in the elections. You know, the guy who joined the Republican party because he hated desegregation.
Is it wrong that I can't really see that having any signifigant positive or negative impact on the Republican party?
If Steele were to resign, the chairmanship would probably end up going to that dude who was second choice in the elections. You know, the guy who joined the Republican party because he hated desegregation.
Is it wrong that I can't really see that having any signifigant positive or negative impact on the Republican party?
No. As far as image goes, he's probably a much better choice than Rush Limbaugh.
If Steele were to resign, the chairmanship would probably end up going to that dude who was second choice in the elections. You know, the guy who joined the Republican party because he hated desegregation.
If Steele were to resign, the chairmanship would probably end up going to that dude who was second choice in the elections. You know, the guy who joined the Republican party because he hated desegregation.
Is it wrong that I can't really see that having any signifigant positive or negative impact on the Republican party?
No. As far as image goes, he's probably a much better choice than Rush Limbaugh.
Kind of like Comparing a 10" black plastic dildo going in your virgin ass to a 9 3/4" Blue flexi going in your virgin ass if you ask me.
So, out of curiosity, am I the only one who would prefer the GOP become sane rather than increasingly unhinged? De facto one-party rule isn't all puppies and blowjobs.
No, you're not. Personally I would love to see an interplay between two complimentary political philosophies, with both of them keeping the other in check. Unfortunately, neither of the political parties want this themselves, since by their very nature they're constantly trying to grab more seats. I'm beginning to wonder if the cycle between "too powerful" and "obsolete" is unavoidable.
Also, to whoever said it - there's no way in hell Rush is going to run for political office. I'm sure the idea of holding a job where he would be judged on his performance would be terrifying beyond belief to him.
Also, to whoever said it - there's no way in hell Rush is going to run for political office. I'm sure the idea of holding a job where he would be judged on his performance would be terrifying beyond belief to him.
Indeed, it's much easier for rush to simply sit back and bitch or crow about the right/left wing politicians without ever having to get his hands dirty. Further, he already has the Gop addicted to his cock. Tha man would gain nothing by actually running for office.
So, out of curiosity, am I the only one who would prefer the GOP become sane rather than increasingly unhinged? De facto one-party rule isn't all puppies and blowjobs.
No, you're not. Personally I would love to see an interplay between two complimentary political philosophies, with both of them keeping the other in check. Unfortunately, neither of the political parties want this themselves, since by their very nature they're constantly trying to grab more seats. I'm beginning to wonder if the cycle between "too powerful" and "obsolete" is unavoidable.
Also, to whoever said it - there's no way in hell Rush is going to run for political office. I'm sure the idea of holding a job where he would be judged on his performance would be terrifying beyond belief to him.
Anyway, yeah I'm with Jeffe in theory, but I'm with everyone else in the "not going to happen anytime in the immediate future" reality.
Yeah. He owns a compound in Florida. The DNC had that inane slogan contest and put up billboards on the highway near his mansion. Another stunning example of money well spent.
Where does Rush live? Imagine him actually running for something then losing. Badly, even.
New York.
He has a condo or something in NYC (?) I think. But has threatened to move over some tax law they're inacting. I think. I'm too lazy to use the interwebs to find out exactly, but thats the jist of it, as I recall.
When I first heard about Steele telling GQ that Abortion was an "individual choice" I thought he was trying hard to help the Republicans come up with a more tenable set of policies, based on a mantra of individual freedoms. Even if he was trying to make the GOP more moderate (and I'm certain that he wasn't), I don't think the current party would be able to handle that kind of reform.
Where does Rush live? Imagine him actually running for something then losing. Badly, even.
New York.
Was New York for a long time, but he recently moved to Florida. Supposedly to avoid rising taxes in New York. A bunch of media people like Jon Stewart were all happy because they thought they forced him out. Really just another rich old white guy moving to Florida.
Smurph on
0
Options
AegisFear My DanceOvershot Toronto, Landed in OttawaRegistered Userregular
edited May 2009
Steele actually resigning would probably be a boon to Republican moderates. Sure, Steele wasn't as intensely partisan as the rest of the party at the moment, but he also was rather...batshit insane (the 'who the hell would ever think of this?' kind rather than the over-the-top-ideological-proposition kind) when it came to ideas for party reform.
Steele actually resigning would probably be a boon to Republican moderates. Sure, Steele wasn't as intensely partisan as the rest of the party at the moment, but he also was rather...batshit insane (the 'who the hell would ever think of this?' kind rather than the over-the-top-ideological-proposition kind) when it came to ideas for party reform.
Given that the alternative is a guy who joined the Republican party because he hated desegregation, I think they made the better choice.
And if that's the guy to replace him, they're fucked. If it's someone like Mitt Romney or John McCain, maybe it would be a step forward. But I wouldn't hold my breath. I don't see McCain leaving the Senate for it, and I don't see the Republican party accepting a Mormon as their party leader.
Posts
Wow. Accidental brilliance at its finest.
I came as quick as I could
Steele is definitely bringin' the unintentional lulz.
Pelosi sex tape.
From there, one of two things will happen:
1. The far-right is forced into at least some form of capitulation, having been soundly defeated three, possibly four times at the polls in the span of eight years (pending 2010 results). No amount of glossing-over is going to mitigate the damage to their policy positions. By this time the older members of the far-right will have retired or died, and younger moderates begin to take the party back.
2. The Dems will have so thoroughly crushed the GOP- three, possibly four times in the span of eight years (pending 2010)- that the far-right simply ceases to be a viable political entity. Anyone remotely moderate will have fled to the Dems, and the Dems, by this time probably at a two-thirds majority in the Senate, will simply wait for the GOP, out of ideas and unwilling to produce new ones, to go the way of the Whigs. Then we wait for the Blue Dogs break off over some issue or other, and the two-party system reasserts itself.
It's that two-thirds margin that's the one to watch. All manner of power flows to a side that can get two-thirds- 67 Senate seats. You can veto bills, convict an impeached President, expel someone from the Senate, etc. Once that mark is hit, then the death of the minority party becomes a real possibility, and at the rate we're going, it may only be a few cycles away.
It is if it's your party.
*shivers*
Especially if you happen to vote for the Puppies and Blowjobs Party.
I usually write them in on my ballot. I know the odds are slim at best, but hey, you never know!
Yeah. 9/11 just killed the GOP.
I fail to understand how people constantly keep saying that in light of recent history.
Eventually it's usually good to have some sane opposition to stem the inevitable tide of corruption. I am no longer among those who believes that the GOP will be the source of anything remotely sane ever again.
Bring on the Bull Moose party.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
Maybe once Obama shows an effective withdrawl in Iraq, a winning strategy in Afghanistan, and a strong presence in foreign affairs, that will change, but for now they're still the party of the Iran hostage debacle and the Battle of Mogadishu.
Eh. But I could easily see them setting the GOP on fire over national security if they were so inclined, which the party is not and why they took shit situations and made them intrinsic to the party's image (which basically is because the party was/is stupid).
I thought about joining, because I'm no fan of single party government.
But dude - would they have me? I rather think not.
I would pay to see this
Also, to whoever said it - there's no way in hell Rush is going to run for political office. I'm sure the idea of holding a job where he would be judged on his performance would be terrifying beyond belief to him.
What about bachman
Anyway, yeah I'm with Jeffe in theory, but I'm with everyone else in the "not going to happen anytime in the immediate future" reality.
New York.
Yeah. He owns a compound in Florida. The DNC had that inane slogan contest and put up billboards on the highway near his mansion. Another stunning example of money well spent.
He has a condo or something in NYC (?) I think. But has threatened to move over some tax law they're inacting. I think. I'm too lazy to use the interwebs to find out exactly, but thats the jist of it, as I recall.
Was New York for a long time, but he recently moved to Florida. Supposedly to avoid rising taxes in New York. A bunch of media people like Jon Stewart were all happy because they thought they forced him out. Really just another rich old white guy moving to Florida.
Currently DMing: None
Characters
[5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/5/19/733239/-Steele:-This-change-is-being-delivered-in-a-teabag!
You can watch the video at that link.
And if that's the guy to replace him, they're fucked. If it's someone like Mitt Romney or John McCain, maybe it would be a step forward. But I wouldn't hold my breath. I don't see McCain leaving the Senate for it, and I don't see the Republican party accepting a Mormon as their party leader.