Republicans turn on each other

23 posts / 0 new
Last post
Republicans turn on each other



Before the election

Frum: The GOP Will Destroy America If We Reelect Obama, So We Must Let the GOP Win

Holy cats. First of all, this is almost certainly wrong. A Republican win would embolden congressional Republicans. They'd take it as a sign that they were right all along, that America really is a conservative nation and really does want to be governed according to tea party principles. They'd be over the moon with faith in their own righteousness and would demand absolute fealty from Romney. Sure, they'd ease up on things like debt ceiling hostage taking, but not on much of anything else. The tea party wing of the GOP would be reenergized and in no mood to feel like they had to compromise their principles even a little bit.

A loss, on the other hand, might have a salutary effect. It's no sure thing, but it just might start some real grumbling among the business class that bankrolls the GOP and the moderate class that's never gotten along with the tea party in the first place. It's really the only hope there is of provoking the Republican Party to eventually deal with its crackpot wing.

But instead, Frum makes the most overt form of the surrendering-to-terrorists argument that I've seen yet. If Obama wins, congressional Republicans will go completely ape and destroy the country. They will deliberately tank the economy and then impeach the president. Therefore, we have to give into them and turf Obama out of office.

It's appalling that people are seriously making this argument. What's worse, it's the relatively sensible people who are making it. This is simply nuts. No country can survive with this attitude. If congressional Republicans are truly a destructive and irrational force in American politics—and God knows, I agree with Frum about that—the answer is to fight them, not to surrender to them. That way lies madness.


After the election:

David Frum Points The Finger At Fox News For Romney's Loss


David Frum: How the GOP Got Stuck in the Past

The finger-pointing misses a bigger truth: Republicans have become estranged from modern America. Why fixating on the old glory days is bogging down the party’s futur


The GOP’s blame game


Denial. “I think this is premature,” Karl Rove protested on Fox News election night, after the cable network, along with other news outlets, correctly projected that President Obama had won Ohio — and therefore the presidency. “We’ve got to be careful about calling things.”

Bargaining. “We’re willing to accept new revenue under the right conditions,” House Speaker John Boehner offered Wednesday, shifting his budget negotiating posture before reconsidering the next day, but “the president must be willing to reduce spending and shore up entitlement programs.”

Depression. “If Mitt Romney cannot win in this economy, then the tipping point has been reached,” Ann Coulter said on Laura Ingraham’s radio show. “It’s over. There is no hope.”

Anger. “We should have a revolution in this country,” tweeted flamboyant mogul Donald Trump, who had served as a prominent surrogate for Romney. “This election is a total sham and a travesty.”

Acceptance. Uh, well, there hasn’t been much of that yetLaughing


Romney: Not white enough?

The Weekly Standard's Jay Cost calls on the GOP to nominate someone its base will really love -- like Richard Nixon

The headline is “Barack Obama and the Triumph of Identity Politics.” “Identity politics” is a conservative term for “attracting the votes of women and minorities.” (Mitt Romney’s explicit plan to turn out as many white people as possible is usually not considered “identity politics” for reasons you can probably figure out on your own.)




The future of the Republican Party Laughing

What not to do


Sate of Denial Laughing

The real blow to Republicans may be not that they failed to take the White House, but that they did not lose more heavily

So much for the comforting excuses. Sadly for Republicans, their party also has long-term problems, exposed by this election with alarming clarity. One is that party footsoldiers often pay lip service to the idea of a changing America, but few seem ready actually to see their party change: the proposed, but still-born, immigration reforms of Mr Rubio are anathema to the grassroots, for example. Many seem genuinely uncomfortable with the new America. Republican gatherings are strikingly white-skinned and grey-haired. Many in attendance voice nostalgia for a time when American workers lacked global competition from places like China, when traditional American (meaning their) values were unchallenged and—to cite their most frequent complaint—the poor either worked or went hungry.


2012 or Never

Republicans are worried this election could be their last chance to stop history. This is fear talking. But not paranoia.


Don't Republicans even vet their candidates?

I mean how can you nominate a candidate who hasn't paid taxes for 15 years via tax loopholes- there was some bulls*** about donations to the Mormon church or whatever.

(Remember the last Liberal Prime Minister Paul Martin putting his companies offshore to avoid Canadian income taxes.)

So you have a Romney as a presidential candidate who didn't dare release his income tax returns.

That left a very bad impression for a lot of voters.



Election leaves Republicans at a loss for answers


NorthReport wrote:

Don't Republicans even vet their candidates?

They do. And it was their job this election to make Obama appear to be the lesser evil.

They should win Academy awards for their performances. American politics is a three(only two, really)-ring circus. The Obamacrats are merely setting themselves up to take full blame in another four year's time. They will do little to help ordinary Americans. Obama is not a socialist or even social democrat - he's just a patsy, and his real constituents are the crime gangs on Wall Street. They will continue getting richer by looting the Treasury and bilking US taxpayers while unions and Americans in general are kicked around for another four years. Their plan is to suck even more tax money out of the economy apparently to fix the deficit, which will kill the economy some more while the one percent continue feeding off what's left of the corpse of American capitalism. It's finished. Kaput. It's time to lower the lifeboats even.  And whoa to those dim-witted politicos in nearby nations who tied their countries' economic wagons of fortune to the woman of Babylon standing on many waters even. It's all over but the weeping.

You maniacs! You finally did it!




America: Love it or be left behind

Obama can only do so much: Angry older whites have to decide if they want to secede from our multiracial future

 Love it or be left behind

The most delusional and divisive claim about President Obama’s election victory came, not surprisingly, from the disgraced Karl Rove, who told Fox News on Thursday that Obama “succeeded by suppressing the vote.” Make no mistake: Rove was talking about the white vote. Earlier that day Real Clear Politics writer Sean Trende had written a piece wondering about “disappearing” white voters, claiming white voter turnout had dropped significantly, by roughly 7 million votes, as whites rejected both parties. Since blacks, Latinos and Asians increased their turnout, as did women and young people, Rove couldn’t be talking about anybody but whites, and particularly older white men.

A quick reality check: Republican pollster Bill McInturff immediately debunked claims of disappearing voters of any color, reminding analysts that as always two days after a presidential election, many votes remained to be counted. The Thursday after the 2008 contest only 58% of the electorate had “turned out;” turnout climbed a bit above 62 percent when all the votes were tallied. In the end, turnout may be down this year, and it may well be mainly among whites, perhaps because of Hurricane Sandy. But to call that voter “suppression,” in the face of genuine voter suppression efforts by Rove’s own party – shortening early voting periods, attempts at repressive voter ID laws –  is just another example of the shameless capacity to degrade, project and flat-out lie that is Turd Blossom’s singular political brand – a brand that has, God willing, been terminally tarnished.

But Rove’s wail about “suppressed” white voters reflects his party’s broader outrage that the supposed “permanent Republican majority” he tried to build on the back of Kevin Phillips’s “emerging Republican majority” of the late 60s – the one that used racial appeals to make whites, especially the white working class, its cornerstone – no longer exists. Whites only made up 72 percent of the 2012 vote, down from 77 percent in 2010, and even Romney’s 59 percent of white voters, up from John McCain’s 57 percent, couldn’t make him president anymore.

Republicans will not go gently into that bad night, and thus we are hearing a range of reality-denying reactions, some of them flat out crazy. We’ve seen Rove’s deranged explanation for his party’s shellacking by what John Judis and Ruy Teixiera identified a decade ago as “the emerging Democratic majority:” Obama suppressed the white vote, Rove insists, primarily by running a negative campaign against Romney (John Kerry would like a word with you, Boss Rove). Let’s walk through a few others:

Obama’s emerging Democratic majority consists of slackers and moochers who just want things.

“People feel that they are entitled to things and which candidate, between the two, is going to give them things?” Bill O’Reilly said during his Tuesday self-pity party. “The white establishment is now the minority….The demographics are changing. It’s not a traditional America anymore.” A majority of Americans, O’Reilly opined, “want stuff. And who is going to give them things? President Obama. He knows it, and he ran on it.”

The self-satirizing Ann Coulter declared “It’s over. There’s no hope if takers outnumber makers,” reprising the failed VP nominee Paul Ryan’s Ayn Randian depiction of the American divide. Rush Limbaugh declared, “I went to bed last night thinking we’re outnumbered. I went to bed last night thinking we’ve lost the country.  I don’t know how else you look at this…Conservatism, in my humble opinion, did not lose last night.  It’s just very difficult to beat Santa Claus,” continuing the theme of the Obama coalition going to the polls for handouts.

That “the white establishment” built the modern social welfare state (albeit mostly for white people) is lost on O’Reilly, Coulter, Limbaugh and their ilk. That whites make up the vast majority of “takers” is likewise lost on them. But not on uber conservatives like Charles Murray, or the National Review’s dyspeptic hater Mark Steyn. “The fact is a lot of pasty, Caucasian, non-immigrant Americans have also shifted,’ and are very comfortable with Big Government, entitlements, micro-regulation, Obamacare and all the rest — and not much concerned with how or if it’s paid for,” Steyn wrote Wednesday.

No doubt a lot of the “pasty” folks Steyn talked about voted for Mitt Romney, since the red states are the new welfare queens, sucking more from Big Government than they provide in taxes. Don’t expect white GOP voters to process that contradiction in the early stages of grief, however.

The emerging Democratic majority can’t provide Obama a mandate without more white voters.

It’s not only GOP hacks who are saying stupid things about the white vote. Two days before the election Politico’s Mike Allen and Jim VandeHai declared that Obama’s problem with whites might make it hard for him to be the president of all America. “It’s possible,” the pair intoned darkly, that Obama “will get a lower percentage of white voters than George W. Bush got of Hispanic voters in 2000″ (he didn’t). Then they lowered the boom:

“A broad mandate this is not.”

Really? Let’s review. Obama won 93 percent of African Americans, 71 percent of Latinos and an astonishing 75 percent of Asian Americans, a group that used to split between parties. He won a majority of Catholics, Jews and Muslims as well as the religiously non-affiliated (he only lost white Protestants.) He won women and young people. The only group he lost was white people, and particularly older white people and extremely particularly older white men.

Does Obama have really have a problem attracting broad support? Or would the problem belong to the stubborn minority bloc that won’t vote for him, no matter what he does? Do the math, lads.

Unfortunately, it’s not just GOP hacks or their admirers at Politico who are making a version of this argument. In The New Republic before the election, the perennial booster of the white working class bloc William Galston complained that Obama had rejected Bill Clinton’s transformational, transracial appeal for a transactional, racial/interest group pitch:

For young people, lower rates on student loans. For Latinos, announce a non-legislative version of the Dream Act. For gays and lesbians, endorse same-sex marriage. For single women, pick a fight over contraception with the Catholic Church and run a national convention in which the centrality of abortion rights startled even seasoned observers. Bill Clinton’s mantra—safe, legal, and rare—is a distant memory. In its place: “Julia.”

As someone who tends to agree that Democrats shouldn’t write off the white working class entirely, I’m flummoxed by Galston’s pitch. For a guy who seems to think bread and butter issues should be more prominent than cultural ones, he apparently can’t see bread and butter issues if they’re targeted to certain newer members of the Democratic coalition. Lower interest on student loans, the DREAM act, no-cost contraception and health screenings, and even to an extent gay marriage are also economic issues. Galston might also note that the president did best with his cherished white working class voters in Rust Belt states where he delivered for them with the auto bailout and tougher moves on China. In Ohio, one of the states that helped to give Obama his second term, the president only lost white men by 10 percentage points, and he pulled even among white men with incomes under $75,000. (He won flat out won working class white women in Ohio, Wisconsin and Iowa).

When did nominal Democrats decide politics shouldn’t be about delivering “stuff,” anyway? What a patrician view of self-government. We pull together to do things we can’t do alone. For most of us, at some times in our lives, that involves getting “stuff” – help with college, or health care, or becoming citizens – that we can’t do alone. Or maybe it’s not “stuff” when it goes to white men?

Even more disappointing Tom Edsall, who normally is smart about class politics, took to the New York Times to lament Obama’s committed appeal to women:



Must-see morning clip: SNL on Mitt’s defeat

Mitt laments his loss outside on the balcony, drowning his sorrows in milk

Maysie Maysie's picture

Not making this up.

Why did Romney lose? Conservatives blame single women


Now that the shock of losing has settled in, the conservative media has moved on to the important task of castigating the various demographics that broke for Obama, a reaction that can in no way be one of the reasons said demographics dislike Republicans. Since Obama won basically everyone but nonurban white men and their wives, there are a lot of different groups to hate on, but a clear front-runner in the Blame Game has emerged: single women


There are many reasons for this divergence, including age, income, and racial differences between the single and married women, but right-wing media looks to be settling on a favorite explanation: Loose gals vote Obama.


this impulse to label single women as sluts is certainly no one's idea of voter outreach. But it does serve the dual purpose of demonizing Obama voters and reminding Fox News and rightwing talk radio audiences of their favorite porn narratives.


@ Maysie

I remember during the second debate the best Romney could come up with on reducing gun violence was for children to grow up with the influence of two (presumably straight) parents.

Maybe he wasn't a mis-match for the GOP after all.



Republicans, beaten and angry, disagree on what to do next

Stung by a changing electorate, conservatives debate how to fix the GOP – or whether it needs fixing at all.


How the election would have turned out without universal suffrage:

And be sure to click through to the piece on Ann Coulter saying she thinks she shouldn't be allowed to vote:

(and it was back in 2003, not just post-election ravings)


Republican right weeps over Obama's victory – then begins internal civil war

The clatween diehard conservatives and modernisers will dictate the fate of a party which increasingly seems to appeal only to angry, older white Americanssh be


How Bill Kristol could split the GOP in two

The influential conservative's call for a tax hike on the rich risks re-launching the Republican civil war of 1990


Big loser Paul Ryan bites the dust. They won't release the vote count so Ryan's horse must have got trounced. Laughing

Paul Ryan-Endorsed Candidate Loses Bid For GOP Leadership Role


McCain’s obscene hypocrisy

He says Susan Rice is unfit for office because she's "not qualified." This from the man who tapped Sarah Palin