• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

GOP: 100 People show up for "listening tour"

Catman said:
Jeb was a great Governor of Florida. He has the creds.
Click to expand...

That may be true....who knows...but people said Bush was a good Governor of Texas and I am doubting whether that was ever true.

The bottom line is, we've already had two Bush disasters on a national level, I'm not so sure we could survive a third.
 
disneydude said:
That may be true....who knows...but people said Bush was a good Governor of Texas and I am doubting whether that was ever true.

The bottom line is, we've already had two Bush disasters on a national level, I'm not so sure we could survive a third.
Click to expand...

As someone who lives in Texas, I will be the first to say that Bush was a very decent governor.
 
I was thinking of Jeb as a behind the scenes power.
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
2. if they do as jeb stated and abandon the reagan principles the party is doomed. careful what you wish for though, what will rise from the ashes will probably be worse..... for you.
Click to expand...

The fact of the matter is that they've already abandoned the conservative principles of Reagan, and that's exactly why those liberal clowns in the pizza shop can't get nominated. McCain's one advantage was his indisputable military record and name recognition.

I can't see Romney or Guiliani or yet another god-damned Bush getting elected to the Presidency. There's only one reason Jindal would get nominated, his skin makes him a perfect token-negro, even if he's not a negro, but the Democrats have a real half-breed negro of their own, so Jindal won't get elected.

No, the GOP better figure out that, as a party, they have to start not only sounding like Reagan-era conservatives, they not only have to start voting like them, too.

No more earmarks, no more spending increases, no more tax increases, no more defense cuts, no more unconstitutional processes.
 
Zyphlin said:
Except that you're trying to treat this like a giant event, in your typical overblown way.

Having 100 people in a place when you have space for 5000 is laughable.

Having 100 people in a place when you can barely fit 80 comfortably would be laudable.

Its all relative.
Click to expand...

No. It's nonsense. A nationally known figure like Romney even agreeing to such a pitiful arena is indicative of his desperation to have his face in the news. That such a small number turned out is indicative of the failure of the local GOP to advertise the event.

I would expect that someone with the prestige of Romney would be able to draw a crowd of a 100 by going to any random mini-mall and sitting down to a slice of pizza and just talking to the people there, without any advance ground preparation at all. People don't want to hear what yet another Taxachussetts liberal has to say, is all that can be garnered from his failure to draw a bigger crowd.
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
No. It's nonsense. A nationally known figure like Romney even agreeing to such a pitiful arena is indicative of his desperation to have his face in the news. That such a small number turned out is indicative of the failure of the local GOP to advertise the event.

I would expect that someone with the prestige of Romney would be able to draw a crowd of a 100 by going to any random mini-mall and sitting down to a slice of pizza and just talking to the people there, without any advance ground preparation at all. People don't want to hear what yet another Taxachussetts liberal has to say, is all that can be garnered from his failure to draw a bigger crowd.
Click to expand...

Romney MAY have more personal reasons for embarking on such a tour than just on behalf of the GOP.
 
Hey, disney dude, if social issues are such a failure, then how the hell did Bush become president? Last time I checked, that's all he campaigned on, TWICE.

So tell, was it really the social issues? OR, was it because the GOP ignored fiscal policy over the social issues, that brought them down?
 
disneydude said:
What happened?
Click to expand...
What happened is that Bush was overwhelmed. I've been doing a bit of research; compared to the presidency, Texas governors have virtually ZERO power. If you looked at Bush, he had a very lax attitude. As governor of Texas, he could get away with that and still fulfill all his duties, propose any new ideas he thinks up, and still come out as a good governor. As president, well, he couldn't do that. He had a lot more power, and therefore, a lot more responsibilities. There is no doubt in my mind, that he buckled under the weight of the office. Very similar John Quincy Adams, I think.
 
bhkad said:
He gives lessons 9 - Noon, Monday thru Friday.
Click to expand...

Rush, Palin and Joe the fake plumber should be the spokespeople for the 3 -400 people that are still left in the Republican Party.
 
disneydude said:
Rush, Palin and Joe the fake plumber should be the spokespeople for the 3 -400 people that are still left in the Republican Party.
Click to expand...

Keep in mind that 60% of the American people consider themselves Conservative, Rush says.
 
DarkWizard12 said:
Hey, disney dude, if social issues are such a failure, then how the hell did Bush become president? Last time I checked, that's all he campaigned on, TWICE.

So tell, was it really the social issues? OR, was it because the GOP ignored fiscal policy over the social issues, that brought them down?
Click to expand...

If you truly want my analysis, I'll give it to you.

Two reasons - 1. In the first campaign (which he actually lost) he was able to portray himself as a "likeable" guy and a lot of people were still trouble by Clinton's indiscretions. The Country was in good shape and people didn't really care about having a strong leader...they wanted a person that they "liked".
2. In the second campaign, Karl Rove ran a very successful campaign that preyed on people's fears. As history is now telling us, they relied on deceit and outright manipulation, but it was successful in scaring the American people that changing Presidents was not a good thing due to the imminency of a terrorist attack.
 
bhkad said:
Keep in mind that 60% of the American people consider themselves Conservative, Rush says.
Click to expand...

...a little hint BK.....you should be careful taking information from drug addicts....they aren't the best source of accurate information.
 
disneydude said:
...a little hint BK.....you should be careful taking information from drug addicts....they aren't the best source of accurate information.
Click to expand...

In August 2008, Americans answered that question this way: (1) 20% of Americans considered themselves to be very conservative; (2) 40% of Americans considered themselves to be somewhat conservative; (3) 2% of Americans considered themselves to be moderate; (4) 27% of Americans considered themselves to be somewhat liberal; (5) 9% of Americans considered themselves to be very liberal; and (6) 3% of Americans did not know or refused to answer.

Sixty percent of Americans considered themselves conservative.
Click to expand...

American Thinker: The Biggest Missing Story in Politics
 
Based on the USAToday article alone, it's pretty obvious that the Republican Party/GOP is very fractured. IMO, the real reason the GOP has lost it's foothold in American politics is they take such a rigid stance on everything! There's no flexibility with their ideology. What's ironic is if our forefathers had remained so steadfast in their ideals the very Constitution the GOP holds so dear would never have become what it is today!

As times change, people change. Their ideals change. They way of life changes. The world climate changes. And at some point the American value system changes. Over time, history will bare out what changes were good and which were bad. I'm not saying go with the flow, but I am saying have more of an open mind. Let in new ideas instead of rejecting them out of hand. The Era of Reagon was right for its time, but that time has passed. As my sister is so fond of saying, "Move around".
 
disneydude said:
If you truly want my analysis, I'll give it to you.

Two reasons - 1. In the first campaign (which he actually lost) he was able to portray himself as a "likeable" guy and a lot of people were still trouble by Clinton's indiscretions. The Country was in good shape and people didn't really care about having a strong leader...they wanted a person that they "liked".
2. In the second campaign, Karl Rove ran a very successful campaign that preyed on people's fears. As history is now telling us, they relied on deceit and outright manipulation, but it was successful in scaring the American people that changing Presidents was not a good thing due to the imminency of a terrorist attack.
Click to expand...
.

Bush won both the 2000 and 2004 elections. Is there a campaign he ran for president in preceding 2000 that everyone who's honest missed?

Because if there isn't, your post is all messed up.
 
Last edited:
Objective Voice said:
Based on the USAToday article alone, it's pretty obvious that the Republican Party/GOP is very fractured. IMO, the real reason the GOP has lost it's foothold in American politics is they take such a rigid stance on everything! There's no flexibility with their ideology. What's ironic is if our forefathers had remained so steadfast in their ideals the very Constitution the GOP holds so dear would never have become what it is today!

As times change, people change. Their ideals change. They way of life changes. The world climate changes. And at some point the American value system changes. Over time, history will bare out what changes were good and which were bad. I'm not saying go with the flow, but I am saying have more of an open mind. Let in new ideas instead of rejecting them out of hand. The Era of Reagon was right for its time, but that time has passed. As my sister is so fond of saying, "Move around".
Click to expand...
Meh, I don't really agree with that. People only change if you let them change, ideals can only change if you let them change, climate changes I guess, but climate has uniformity so...it's not really change.

the trick isn't really about "change" or, as you say, "flexibility", it's about "adaptability". If our system of government can adapt to changes, then it doesn't matter what happens to our culture, values and traditions, or society, anything short of an asteroid or nuclear holocaust, our system of government will always remain the same.
 
DarkWizard12 said:
Meh, I don't really agree with that. People only change if you let them change, ideals can only change if you let them change, climate changes I guess, but climate has uniformity so...it's not really change.

the trick isn't really about "change" or, as you say, "flexibility", it's about "adaptability". If our system of government can adapt to changes, then it doesn't matter what happens to our culture, values and traditions, or society, anything short of an asteroid or nuclear holocaust, our system of government will always remain the same.
Click to expand...

That's it right there! Adaptability!!

That's what I think makes a good president, his ability to adapt to any given situation. It's one of the reasons I like President Obama. Yes, he like presidents before him bring into the White House their own agenda, but he's receptive enough to at least listen to differing ideas and has shown an ability to adapt to varying social/political climates. Of course, some will say he changes with the wind, but what politician hasn't done that a time or two. :2razz:
 
Does anyone remember a time when certain conservatives kept making a poll every other week or so about how Obama, the great Orator could ONLY draw a "few" thousand people? I mean. How could the God-elect only attract so few people? But now the people who will lead the GOP in 2012 are making rounds for a party that has been shot to hell by 'socialists' and nobody on the right wants to hear? Where are our right wing friends who cared so much about Obama's 'low attendance' now? Oh right....
 
Sorry for being 50 posts late to class. :3oops:

Let's see....

100 people show up for GOP listening tour, huh?

That doesn't surprise me at all. I hear they make really good pizza there and it was free. That's a pretty darn good way to get 100 people to show if you ask me. Now THAT'S using the ol' noggin. Yessirree Bob!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom