- Joined
- Nov 8, 2006
- Messages
- 1,792
- Reaction score
- 1,475
- Location
- Hiding from the voices in my head.
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Right
If my assumption is correct, who takes over the wreckage that is the Republican party?
OK, I'm assuming Trump loses and loses big. Yes, things can change between now and the election, especially with the debates still in play, but right now the smart money is on Hillary. And I think Trump may suffer the worse Republican defeat in my generation. But this isn't what I want to discuss. If my assumption is correct, who takes over the wreckage that is the Republican party?
Will it be Trump or someone who picks up his "ideology"? I think Trump himself won't stick around after a loss, but someone could try to pick up the mantle and lead his followers with anti-PC, anti-trade, anti-immigrant, isolationist message. I don't see anyone the horizon though. And a good portion of Trump's supporters are not traditional Republicans. Many are typically apolitical. I think there is a good chance without Trump stiring up their passions they fade back into the background.
Will it be the establishment? Some folks have said the establishment will respond to an epic loss this year by saying to the Tea Party/hard right/extremists (their terms, not mine) "See we tried it your way and we loss massively". But Trump really isn't a hard right guy or a Tea Partier, at least in the original sense of the term. And there are still plenty of folks on the right who loath the establishment, while not being Trump backers. Many of the issues that caused people to embrace an outsider like Trump are not going away, even if Trump does.
In fact Ted Cruz was Trump's longest lasting rival and commanded a significant following of his own. He's more of the true Tea Party, fiscal conservative, anti-establishment guy. And I think after Trump goes down in flames, he's refusal to endorse Trump at the convention will be seen as a principled and correct stand. Endorsements mean little these days in terms of actual votes, so you can't really blame Cruz for a Trump loss, especially if I am correct and Trump loses big. But Cruz taking a public stand will be seen as brave and principled compared to establishment folks like the Bushes, McCain, Romney, et all who just sat things out. And much better than sell outs like Ryan who surrendered any shred of principles they may have still had when they endorsed Trump.
But Cruz has some weak points as well. He's not a very charismatic candidate to put it mildly. His likeability is low. I think Cruz will run for the nomination again in 2020 and have a very good chance, but is no lock to win. But I think the true fiscal conservatism he represents has a real chance of taking control of the party. That may or may not come tied to hardline social conservatism (which Cruz also represents quite well). Rand Paul could mount a comeback (though he has his own flaws as a candidate). Maybe someone who is not even on the radar.
In my mind, the Trump nomination has been an embarrassment and a disaster for the GOP. A low point for a party that I left 10 years ago for its continued failure to act upon the rhetoric it campaigns on. But in the wreckage, I hold out some hope that maybe something good can re-emerge. If that is the case, then maybe Trump's nomination isn't a total loss.
If you left the Republican Party, why would you care?
In the end, it will be those who vote as Republicans who will decide what the GOP will be. Clearly, those voters have rejected the status quo in the GOP and are seeking a different direction. Right or wrong, that is how it should work.
I care because I would love to come back to the GOP, but only if starts to live up to the rhetoric it preaches. Right now, I see the Democrats as a lost cause. There are a few issues I agree with them on, but the overall philosophy the party has embraced is not something I can endorse. So I continue (perhaps foolishly) to hold out hope that the Republicans will get their act together.
Obviously Republicans will be the ones to decide the fate of the party, but what will they decide is the question. There are several factions within the party who will be vying for power. I'm curious to see who people think can emerge as the leading faction in aftermath of a major defeat.
In my opinion, it's going to get worse before it gets better. Whoever wins the "I'm more conservative than the other guy" circular firing squad fustercluck will inherit the party, such as it is at that time. And they'll still claim the title of "conservative", though they are not to my mind conservative at all.
Here's why I think the GOP will continue to swing further to the right:
1 - Goldwater’s opposition to the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
2 - Nixon’s “Southern Strategy” wherein he deliberately sought the votes of the “negrophobes” in a successful effort to swing the Deep South from the Democratic party to the Republican party. The Deep South is now the strongest base of the GOP, and the leaders of the GOP in the Deep South are the children of the very same “negrophobes” whose votes Nixon sought. This is the source of much of the racism that informs Republican policies and political philosophy even today, as is made clear in a 1981 interview with Reagan’s political adviser Lee Atwater, for those policies and political philosophies are now unquestionably part of conservative political dogma.
<snip>
7 - And the single greatest factor, the one that not only enables but even magnifies the effects of all the above, is the eventual but essentially unstoppable demographic shift of the American population to majority-minority, wherein whites will only comprise a plurality of the population. In all history, I cannot think of a similar demographic shift that did not result in great violence. The more the dominant demographic’s power and influence diminishes, the more they will “circle the wagons” in order to preserve the power and influence they still have.
It is the confluence of the factors above that lead me to believe that the GOP - or at least the majority of the GOP that is so strongly supporting the current presidential nominee Donald Trump - will continue to “circle the wagons”, to become ever more strongly conservative (as they themselves define conservatism). Whether this will result in a true schism within the party or the birth of a new party, I cannot tell. But they will continue to shift further to the right for some time to come. The problem never will totally go away - racism will exist as long as there are different shades of skin - but hopefully, when the GOP suffers a resounding defeat of landslide proportions (which may not happen during this election cycle), the influence of the above factors will diminish, and so we may avoid the violence that has almost always accompanied great demographic shifts in the past.
Fair enough. I think people either forget, or don't know, that the Republican party all but didn't exist before it elected it's first President. In the cycle before, it hardly registered. So parties can and do rise from either nothing, or from the ashes of what they had become.
I have been a registered Republican for quite a long time. Call it many decades. I too am not pleased with the direction the party has taken in recent years, perhaps even a decade or so. I am not pleased with the influences that have been allowed to have greater impact than they I believe they should. However, I am a realist. I don't get everything I want all the time. Not suggesting you require that yourself.
I am heartened by the results of this election cycle in regard to the candidate for the Presidency. Not necessarily by the person selected, but by the voters who told the status quo to take a hike. That is a step in the right direction.
Race plays very little into most Republican's outlook.
I'm quite willing to compromise. I don't expect a candidate or a party to align with my beliefs perfectly. I'm a libertarian who was heartily in favor of Cruz knowing full well on drugs, gay marriage, some aspects of foreign policy, and other issues he's not in alignment with me. But I felt I could trust him on fiscal issues and a desire to create a government that was less intrusive and that was enough for me to set aside my differences with him on other issues.
But I can't say that about the establishment that had been running the party for the last 15 years. They've consistently been in favor of big spending (when they control the purse strings), interventionism, and big government.
I do agree that the one possible bright side to Trump's nomination is that the electorate collectively told the GOP establishment to go to hell. I hope that opens the door for other (better) outsiders to come in lead the party. But again I think the establishment will make the case that "see we tried it your way and we got our butts kicked (by Hillary of all people!), now let us go back to the way things were".
You seem to see most of this through a racial lens, where as I don't. I know lots of Republicans and none of them are worried about whites losing their majority. None of them are intent on maintaining some mythical white grip on power. Most of them genuinely want to see the best person for the job. They don't care about race. But they do object to diversity for its own sake, especially when it conflicts with merit. They would prefer a society where we don't walk an egg shells around anything that could be perceived as racial for fear of offending someone's delicate sensibilities. They don't think every time there are unequal results between the races that its automatically because of RACISM!
Most Republicans (and I should say, most people I know irregardless of party) I know are live and let live on race. They take people as they come. If you're a good person, black or white, they'll happily accept you into their lives. If you're a scumbag, parasite, or pain in the rump, they'll want little to do with you no matter what color your skin is.
Race plays very little into most Republican's outlook.
FYI, I was a Republican for most of my early life. I happily voted for Reagan and Bush 41. So please don't assume that I don't know what it means to be a Republican and a conservative.
NOW...I quite agree with you that most rank-and-file Republicans honestly believe that they aren't racist at all. But before we tackle what that sentence says, first, you must consider the timeline of events that I presented. Do you really, truly think that they are merely coincidence? Do you? Because most would look at that and see a pattern of conduct, of legislative decisions, all of which point to one thing: racism.
I know, I know, it's conservative dogma that the Democrats somehow convinced the minorities to desert the GOP...but look again at the timeline of events, and tell me why the heck minorities would want to stay with the political party that made all that happen! The Dems didn't lure the minorities away with "free stuff" - the GOP drove them away with racist policy decisions.
Okay, so let's go back to the Republicans-ain't-racist argument. Again, I quite agree that most Republicans do not believe themselves to be racist at all. But here's a story that I've had to tell too many times already. I used to be a racist. I and my entire family were racist, as were pretty much all the whites I knew. It was sort of part and parcel of growing up in the MS Delta. Thing is, we KNEW we weren't racist. We knew that we had no malice towards blacks, that we happily shared the food from our garden with them, we happily gave them money or clothes if they really needed them...and any of us would have risked our lives in a heartbeat to save a black man in trouble. That's how we knew we weren't racist...and we would have been very offended by anyone calling us racist.
But we were racist indeed...because as soon as the blacks were out of earshot, out would come all the n-word jokes, accusations, allegations, and assumptions. And we never realized how all those assumptions et al affected our social attitudes...and our votes. We were racist and we never knew it.
Look at the other conservatives even on DP - they'll swear up and down that they're not racist, but they'll eagerly try to show how blacks are more violent, less educated, that blacks are all about free stuff and victimhood. But they'll swear they're not racist...all the while never realizing how those allegations and assumptions affect their own attitudes, and their votes.
This, sir, is how GOP policy and politics wound up being so deeply informed by the racists. Y'all wanted the Deep South and got it through Nixon's "Southern Strategy", and now the still-quite-racist Deep South is the strongest base of the GOP. Do you really think the GOP could lay down with dogs and not get up with fleas? Do you think it was an accident that MS didn't finalize ratification of the Thirteenth Amendment banning slavery until THREE YEARS AGO?
Again, I agree that most Republicans honestly do not believe themselves to be racist. But that doesn't tell the whole story, does it?
We're getting well off topic here, but I would love to continue this discussion. Would you be willing to copy/quote the relevant posts and start a new thread to continue this discussion?
You see it here daily. Republicans, ALWAYS take the side of the Corps and the rich. Middle Class Republicans workers cut their own throats.
Of all the craziness of Trump I thought that his message about protecting MC jobs, and taking the Party back from the ulta-rich donors was a breath of fresh air in his message.
I keep hearing how the establishment GOP has to change, and that they have been rocked by this Trump revolution. I have my doubts. I see no change by the GOP, and quite honestly I see little change in the Republican rank and file. They are still willing to cut their own throats to protect the failed supply side policies of the establishment GOP. The policies that stagnate the MC and benefit the rich.
They think if Trump loses that they can reset the clock back 2 years, and do it right this time. These idiots have no idea yet of what Trump has unleashed by speaking up and being willing to lead the Rebellion. Which will not be going away, and believe it or not (not referencing you personally but rather USA generally) reality will not be ignored.
Fantasy never wins.
Sidewalks will be in such poor condition that only hover boards can be used...and the "kids" will be the average un-employed 40 year old...the real question is what does the republican party have to run on? It can't be the economy after the bush recession and repeated red state failures. It can't be the military after the Iraq war and after Obama killed Osama. They can still try running on sexual politics anti abortion and anti gay rights etc Which is why ted cruz had so much success he attracted a lot of religious supporters and he had a spanish last name which makes him kind of a minority.
So I predict 40 years from now the republican party will be mostly spanish speaking, strict religious catholics from mexico...... either that or its still just going to be a bunch of angry old white people yelling about the kids skateboarding on the sidewalks....
OK, I'm assuming Trump loses and loses big. Yes, things can change between now and the election, especially with the debates still in play, but right now the smart money is on Hillary. And I think Trump may suffer the worse Republican defeat in my generation. But this isn't what I want to discuss. If my assumption is correct, who takes over the wreckage that is the Republican party?
Will it be Trump or someone who picks up his "ideology"? I think Trump himself won't stick around after a loss, but someone could try to pick up the mantle and lead his followers with anti-PC, anti-trade, anti-immigrant, isolationist message. I don't see anyone the horizon though. And a good portion of Trump's supporters are not traditional Republicans. Many are typically apolitical. I think there is a good chance without Trump stiring up their passions they fade back into the background.
Will it be the establishment? Some folks have said the establishment will respond to an epic loss this year by saying to the Tea Party/hard right/extremists (their terms, not mine) "See we tried it your way and we loss massively". But Trump really isn't a hard right guy or a Tea Partier, at least in the original sense of the term. And there are still plenty of folks on the right who loath the establishment, while not being Trump backers. Many of the issues that caused people to embrace an outsider like Trump are not going away, even if Trump does.
In fact Ted Cruz was Trump's longest lasting rival and commanded a significant following of his own. He's more of the true Tea Party, fiscal conservative, anti-establishment guy. And I think after Trump goes down in flames, he's refusal to endorse Trump at the convention will be seen as a principled and correct stand. Endorsements mean little these days in terms of actual votes, so you can't really blame Cruz for a Trump loss, especially if I am correct and Trump loses big. But Cruz taking a public stand will be seen as brave and principled compared to establishment folks like the Bushes, McCain, Romney, et all who just sat things out. And much better than sell outs like Ryan who surrendered any shred of principles they may have still had when they endorsed Trump.
But Cruz has some weak points as well. He's not a very charismatic candidate to put it mildly. His likeability is low. I think Cruz will run for the nomination again in 2020 and have a very good chance, but is no lock to win. But I think the true fiscal conservatism he represents has a real chance of taking control of the party. That may or may not come tied to hardline social conservatism (which Cruz also represents quite well). Rand Paul could mount a comeback (though he has his own flaws as a candidate). Maybe someone who is not even on the radar.
In my mind, the Trump nomination has been an embarrassment and a disaster for the GOP. A low point for a party that I left 10 years ago for its continued failure to act upon the rhetoric it campaigns on. But in the wreckage, I hold out some hope that maybe something good can re-emerge. If that is the case, then maybe Trump's nomination isn't a total loss.
I think you're on to something with the Libertarian Party. I don't think that the party itself will necessarily replace the Republicans, but Libertarians that call themselves Republicans could very well take over the party. It is a message that resonates with young people because it is up to date on social issues while still being small government. I think that it is the best chance for the Republican party on the national level. They will continue to do well locally because of loyal voter turnout, but will be stumped nationally until they update their message.It appears that the GOP is horribly fractured at present. There is the evangelical branch, the tea party remnants, the moderates, the hard conservatives and the Trump supporters, who IMO are mostly of a " what we have isn't working so let's try something totally different" group. (You know, like the people who mistakenly say "it can't get any worse than this".)
I think one of two things will happen. A strong, popular charismatic leader will emerge and be able to placate enough members of each of the various factions to heal the party, or the GOP will die while some third party, right now probably theLibertarian Party will assume the position formerly held by the GOP.
Both will be a long, bad time for conservatism in the US.
Redress edit: Psychoclowns words deleted as I kinda went all Zyphlin in this post and exceeded the word count
I think the GOP Fractures into pieces after Trump loses and we get a new party. If he wins? Heaven forbid... those like myself who feel utterly betrayed find a new home. Either way, the GOP is diminished and ultimately through. Goldwater, for whom many try to claim this is an alike situation, for all of his faults he was principled. Trump IMHO, is not.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?