The Republican Party Has A Serious Problem
Posted by Jeff Pruitt - 11/6/08 @ 2:28 am - Filed Under 2008 National Elections, Featured
I’ve been poring over the exit polls and there are three glaring weaknesses the Republican Party is going to have to correct in the near future if they are going to compete in 2012.
First, young voters are moving away from the Republican Presidential candidates in droves. You now have a generation of voters that probably equate the disastrous presidency of George W Bush to Republicans. To give you some context, Gore won the 18-29 vote by 2 points, Kerry won it by 9 and Obama won it by 34.
Second, new voters are not voting Republican. First time voters went to Gore by 9, Kerry by 7 and Obama by 39.
Lastly, Latinos are the fastest growing minority and they have completely abandoned the GOP. Gore won the Hispanic vote by 27, Kerry only won it by 9 but Obama won it by 36.
You cannot be a viable party if you lose these 3 groups by such massive margins. Of course there’s always the chance that this was a one-time anomaly due to the general disdain for President Bush but I don’t think that tells the whole story…
(Data from CNN exit polls of 2000, 2004 & 2008)
Comments
41 Responses to “The Republican Party Has A Serious Problem”
Leave a Reply
Jeff:
You are right. The “general disdain for President Bush” doesn’t tell the whole story. You left out one major point.
Both parties have got to weed out corruption and greed. It’s one thing to talk about “cleaning house” but, the proof is in the history.
Don’t try and sell the voter on what you are “going to do”. When you’re in there, get it done! That’s the way to restore faith and win elections. Yes, I know. Ted Stevens may still win his seat.
I’ll give the Republican party one suggestion, and its geared towards the local level:
In the right-hand corner of this website is a general link to area blogs - the Local Blogosphere.
The site commonly known as Fort Wayne News frequently lists links to stories which seem to appeal to the more ultra, rightwing, neo-conservative, fear-mongering, chauvinistic segment of the Republican party. Many stories which are linked to the Fort Wayne News site could easily be chalked up to using fear and propaganda to drive Americans and our country further apart.
I do not feel the Republican party, in general, embraces the ideals represented by the Fort Wayne News site. The individual who runs the site appears to relish in the role of being antagonistic, divisive and apathetic to anyone who may not share his own narrow ideas.
I would encourage local Republicans to DISTANCE themselves from this website and individual if they are interested in attracting and maintaining a more moderate following.
Jeff, I don’t think it tells the whole story either but I bet it’s a significant chunk of it. If you are in the 18-27 demographic you have literally been raised in with a Bush White House.
Think abut from the time you were 10-19 years old W has been President. Then in this election you are presented with Barack “Change” Obama or John McSame… it’s just seems like a no-brainer of a choice.
I think another piece of this puzzle is the role that the divisiveness of this election and the strident Us vs. Them message that was being put out by the McCain/Palin campaign is just a huge turn off for many Republican voters. I’m no fan of the Republican Party so my opinions are biased but my family are dyed-in-the-wool, evangelical Christian, registered Republicans and they voted for Obama.
I’m paraphrasing but my father put it best, “the divisiveness of the current Bush administration and the McCain campaign and the use of the Christian faith as a weapon to divide makes me believe that the Republican party today no longer represents me…”
@Andy
I can’t stomach Fort Wayne News either, what’ the last headline I see
“gays get testy”
Is that part of an ongoing series, did I miss the:
“women get uppity”
“mexicans get lazy” and
“blacks eat fried chicken”
“I can’t stomach Fort Wayne News either”.
Yep, good ‘ol 1st Amendment. Poor slob will have to spend the next four years foaming at the mouth and shoveling sh..!
A fine example of “Joe Sixpack”! Oh well………..
skeptigator:
It’s obvious from your blog you’re a liberal democrat, so why would enjoy Fort Wayne News? As for “testy” maybe you should look it up. Wait, I’ll do it for you:
-testy-
One entry found.
Main Entry: tes·ty
Pronunciation: \ˈtes-tē\
Function: adjective
Inflected Form(s): tes·ti·er; tes·ti·est
Etymology: Middle English testif, from Anglo-French, headstrong, from teste head — more at tester
Date: 1523
1 : easily annoyed : irritable
2 : marked by impatience or ill humor
Sounds like you and Andy are the testy ones.
Andy’s also a self admitted liberal, so I suppose it should be not to his liking either. If you don’t like it, quit going there. Just like if you don’t like Limbaugh, change the channel.
My guess is next you’ll both want to toss the 1st Amendment out the window and have bloggers included in the Fairness Doctrine. Maybe you should start a blog of your own Andy?
And one more thing. Who said the republicans need more moderates?
What, it needs more pro-abortion Catholics, is that it? Do we need Republicans that want to embrace wealth redistribution? Do we need anti 2nd Amendment Republicans? No, that’s not what the GOP needs. It doens’t need moderates. It needs to get to being the party of Ronald Reagan again and back to its root core values.
Why in the do you think McCain lost? He’s one of the biggest moderates in the party.
Penny,
If you think that the GOP can win the white house back with Limbaugh and Palin fans, well then get ready for many decades of dem rule. The GOP has to find away to attract independents. A larger and larger percentage of the voting population are independents and moderates.
Limbaugh and Palin? Did I say that or are you trying to put words into my mouth (again)?
“The site commonly known as Fort Wayne News frequently lists links to stories which seem to appeal to the more ultra, rightwing, neo-conservative, fear-mongering, chauvinistic segment of the Republican party.”
How is Dan Turkette a chauvinist?
Robert, poking around the site I’m hard pressed to find a “chauvinist” spin on anything
Robert -
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/chauvinist
Mr. Green-Jeans, that sort of thinking is part of the reason McCain was so ineffective in his campaign. You win campaigns by rallying your base and picking off enough independents to get 50% + 1. You don’t win by telling the base to go fly a kite and then trying to make up the difference among the same independents your opponent is fighting for. Non-conservative Republicans like McCain rarely win, and when they do (like G.W. Bush), it’s because they successfully disguise themselves as conservatives. Truly conservative Republicans, like Reagan, rarely lose.
The solution to the failure of the anemic “moderate” McCain isn’t for the GOP to try harder at being lukewarm. Republicans have had a successful message of social conservatism and small government since Reagan. Bush abandoned that message, and the GOP got killed in 06 and 08. There’s a lesson there, and it doesn’t teach us to press forward with a bland moderate message.
Okay Andy, I’ll grant you that. I think Robert and I were thinking more along the lines of an attitude of superiority toward members of the opposite sex.
Since that’s obviously not the case here, what is wrong with aggressive patriotism?
Nothing.
Well said Rumpole.
Rumpole, in the last 50 years, you can point to one “true conservative” (your definition) that won. Not much evidence to support your position that the GOP must move to the far right to win. If you think that the GOP can win the white house back by nominating a far right winger, I think your nuts. Plus, the electorate has changed dramatically since the 80s. New voters are much more likely to view themselves as independents.
Trust me, the Palin crowd cannot get it done in 2012, period.
Another thing that Reagan had going for him is that he was a true conservative that did not spend inordinate amounts of effort harping on issues such as gay marriage and other social issues. I would expect that Reagan was probably much more of a libertarian on social issues than anybody ever realized. He was, remember, from California.
Mr. Green-Jeans, are you saying you wouldn’t get behind my 2012 Quayle-Palin dream ticket?
Penny-
The definition of Chauvinist can also include:
“an extreme bellicose nationalist”
I don’t know about you, but I get a little suspicious when I encounter individuals who fit this type of description. That is, people who are “eager to fight”, “aggressively hostile” and quite frankly - belligerent.
If this is your definition of “aggressive patriotism”, and you view this as a positive and admirable trait to have, then I couldn’t disagree with you more.
@penny
I hesitate to comment but i will…
Liberal = yes; Democrat = not really
I know this can’t happen in your hyper-partisan world but I voted for Obama and Mitch Daniels, Kevin Knuth and Paul Moss and “Anybody But Souder”.
… and not to belabor *my point* but since you didn’t get it the first time, I’ll try again.
I was attempting to make a point that in addition to the issues about the younger demographic that those people that I personally know who are part of what one commenter calls the core Republican base actually voted for Obama because of some the tactics employed by the current administration and the current Republican campaign as well as the hijacking of their personal faith as a political tool, *and they are sick of it*.
As for the “My guess is next you’ll both want to toss the 1st Amendment…” comment. You obviously didn’t actually *read* our website. And seriously? you think that because I disagree with someone’s opinion that I therefore want to abolish the 1st amendment, that is some very curious thinking. Just because you think that way doesn’t mean everyone else does.
I actually love the definitions you gave for testy,
1 : easily annoyed : irritable
Easily annoyed? Like someone steps on your toe or taking away Civil Liberties…
2 : marked by impatience or ill humor
Impatience? How much longer do gays need to wait before they are treated like full humans? Ill humor? I guess I don’t get the joke either.
skeptigator:
I still don’t see anything wrong with the word testy. The definition certainly doesn’t say anything to indicate that.
What?
Gays are impatient?
Gays full of ill humor?
Gays become irritable?
What are you reading into this that I’m obviously not seeing (from your perspective, that is)?
Dan is a nationalist, sure. There are nationalist Democrats as well. I’d even say that Neal Boortz would be an example of a nationalist Libertarian. I don’t endorse nationalism, but it simply isn’t the case that the GOP has a monopoly on it.
skeptigator,
Are you seriously arguing that legislatively defining marriage to be what it has been recognized to be for just about all of human history is treating gays as “less than human”? So, I suppose we’re also treating polygamists as less than human because we don’t recognize their multiplicity of committed relationships as marriages?
Mr. Green Jeans
Your posts are wrong on about 100 different levels. Let me name a few.
(1) The GOP has to find a way to attract independents.
That worked wonders for McCain and Bush I. The problem is the messenger or the presentation, the message does not need tweaking. For example, when’s the last time someone described themselves as a “fiscal liberal?” We’ve almost succeeded in killing off the Mondale types.
(2) Reagan did not “harp” on social issues.
Amazing. Were you out of the country during the 80’s ? Reagan was continuously denouncing abortion and communism (gay righs wasn’t in vogue back then). He nominated Bork and Scalia for god’s sake. That contention undermines your entire post.
(3) Only one true conservative president in the last fifty years.
Maybe, but he was also the greatest president of the twentieth century. I guess the lesson that you take away from that is not to emulate him.
(4) The Palin crowd cannot get it down in 2012.
As opposed to the McCain crowd?
Interesting you think (Andy, et al) anyone could blame one site, one person, one idea or one blog for the ill-fate of the local GOP in ANY city or county. What little you know about how organizational structure works or even group-dynamics.
My blog, this blog, or anyone else’s blog who shows an opinion and is well-followed is what it is–a forum or a slate or whatever that author wants it to be.
If makes people think and react and can entertain, has it done it’s job?
If it irritates and makes people squirm has it done it’s job?
If it makes you feel all gushy and marvelous inside has it done it’s job?
Maybe you, and others, who are afraid of strong opinion better go back to your tea sipping and hope for change instead of being asked to think about it.
As far as my opinion on the ills of the GOP, I believe leadership has a great deal of responsibility. And the apathy which has let them get away with it is shameful. This too, shall change.
As for Fort Wayne News blog (Dan T.) has every right to do what it does. At times he makes some great points and at times he is pretty insulting. His style follows his belief of “poking people in the eye” with his blog.
I can site you blogs around Indiana that are much like his but present the other side of the isle. That is their thing.
I enjoy the guys here and many of the posters because they are closer to the middle from both the left and right. Where the vast majority of both sides resides.
If the Democrats think Indiana has changed then think back. LBJ won Indiana in 1964 and the state returned Blue there after. Indiana has split their vote at the highest levels of the state for years.
Look at the dollars spent in ads and how much Obama out spent McCain. Look at the primary race and the face time Democrats had. Plus toss in the problems we face because of the financial problems. Right or wrong add on McCain was painted with the Bush paint brush. The most massive get out the vote operations ever seen in the state. We had a black man running for the highest office and drew 90+% of their vote. Obama has promised so much to so many that everyone that voted for him could find a reason as to why. Yet, Obama had a difficult time carrying the state.
Now if Obama had won the state by 10+ points and pulled Jill Long Thompson along then there may be some merit to the issue of Indiana flipping.
I have not looked at state wide returns to see if Obama assisted anyone in winning an elected seat. We saw here in Allen County and Northeast Indiana he provided no ground swell.
Regardless to Steve Shine saying how well the local GOP is, many others say he is dead wrong. Because Shine says so does not make it so… Sadly the local Democrat Party is little more then a nice social club. Which is a sad as we all would do better if we had two strong or equal parties in Allen County.
There is Kevin Knuth, who at times is second to Dan T. at “poking people in the eye” he also provides the local media as the official voice of the Democrat Party. Dan has never spoken for the party.
Right now Obama is seeing the start of a fire storm I am sure he hopes will flicker out over becoming a full blown massive brush fire. The same sex marriage issue brewing in California and may well explode all across America. Law suits over the vote has already been filed in the courts. Which means they will work their way through the federal court system and may well be reviewed by the Supreme Court.
A segment of the population Obama claimed to represent will be looking for him to support their cause. How he walks the walk through this issue could well be around in 2012.
Good Luck in 2012 Keith.
Looks like the “move further to the right” plan will definitely work out great for you.
Your memory of Reagan is different than mine. He certainly did not wear his religion on his sleeve in my memories. If you think Palin and her ilk are the way back to Pennsylvania avenue well then you are Exhibit A as to why the GOP finds itself in this mess.
PS Keith,
If you think McCain lost this race because he was not “right” enough, then it shows a complete lack of political acumen.
McCain ran this race with a 500 pound anvil around his neck by the name of “W”. The fact that he did as well as he did is nothing short of a miracle.
I think there are two things that have taken root for individuals to not select McCain:
1.) Lack of work ethic - I believe that today’s youth fear the hard work needed to succeed. Growing up I worked in farm fields at the age of 10, and I have no fear of being in horrid work conditions. However, our young people wish to be doctors, lawyers, teachers, etc. - and while there is a considerable amount of time and effort given to white collar professionals, picking vegetables and bailing hay in 100 plus degree working degrees is alot tougher!
2. Women are looking for a savior - If you look at the number of divorced and single women that voted for Obama; I think that today’s women are so much about getting a man that can provide their financial security and all that jazz! Maybe its my work ethic, I figure that work comes before the man; I can provide for myself!
(As a conservative, not really a bible thumper, I think that is biblical in nature for this to be happening.)
WATCH OUT FOR DEER = THEY CAN TOTAL YOUR CAR!
Green Jeans
Who said anything about religion? Reagan did not wear his religion on his sleeve, but he wore conservatism on his sleeve, his lapel, on the cuff of his pants, and everywhere in between. While as a lame duck president, he tried to shove Bork down a Senate’s throat that was solidly democratic. He walked the walk, why do you think conservatives are still looking for the next incarnation twenty years later?
Also, history will demonstrate that every time a President has drifted left (Bush I and II, Carter), he has failed. Every time a President has either drifted right (Clinton) or stayed right (Reagan) he has succeeded. I guess that’s a coincidence in your book.
So, you stick with your McCains, your Lincoln Chaffees, your William Welds, your George Patakis. That’s been SUCH a recipe for success. Why don’t you and all those other Country Club Republicans with your collared shirts and your fancy four door sedans leave and form the Milquetoast Party and let us real Republicans get some things accomplished.
Mr. Green-Jeans,
George W. Bush is a paragon of “Republicanism”–a doctrine that was roundly repudiated this election. Keith Cumtwa and I are talking about “conservatism”–a doctrine that the Republican presidents since Reagan have abandoned.
If you think Bush’s disapproval rating is due to his similarities to traditional small-government conservatives like Reagan, it shows, as you put it, a complete lack of political acumen.
Recommended reading: “Buck Wild: How Republicans Broke the Bank and Became the Party of Big Government” by Stephen Slivinski. Published in 2006, it shows how the GOP became the party of big spending.
Jennifer Griggs -
“Maybe you, and others, who are afraid of strong opinion better go back to your tea sipping and hope for change instead of being asked to think about it.”
I’ll choose hope & change over a chauvinistic, nationalist every opportunity I get, especially when America’s future is at stake.
You did bring up a good point though - “think(ing) about it”. I have and continue to “think” about it, and it is my hope others would do the same. I feel far too many Americans have lost this ability to actually THINK for themselves and formulate their own unique opinions and ideas. In a day and age of 24/7, in your face, news/opinion, corporate-funded media, its far too easy to just fall in line, choose one of two sides, and regurgitate the divisive propaganda that is being funneled into our brains on a non-stop basis. As you probably are aware, thinking requires real effort and the ability to sort through and decipher all the noise, static, chatter and sometimes hate - what I feel the Fort Wayne News site appears to be.
And by the way, how did you know I love tea ? Nothing like a good cup of chai to start the day off with.
Andy (whoever you are),
I will never claim my blog to be fair and balanced, but I do try to counter the bias of the mainstream media, both nationally and locally. I started this blog because at the time (Jan 2006) there wasn’t a conservative blog in NE Indiana.
I try to blog about issues that are of interest to my target audience, which is conservatives. I know that many liberals that don’t like the blog yet visit it often, and they keep coming back. If you (or they) want the 180 degree version of my blog, I’d suggest going to http://www.blueindiana.net. As Penny said, if you don’t like it, why visit?
If you really believe that divisive propaganda is being funneled into your brain on a non-stop basis” you must be listening to the wrong talk show or reading the wrong paper, or, watching CNN.
Hate: That’s a pretty strong word. I hate no one, and cannot recall ever hating anyone in the past.
I have take exception to your pseudo-intellectual suggestion that I espouse “hate”. Maybe it was this post that you read that reminded you of hate?
Wrong. There is no comparison between Hitler and the Nazi’s treatment of Jews and American sentiment for people that have broken the law to enter this county. Hitler saw the Jewish people as inferior and was out to create a master Aryan race. That’s no comparison to how people feel about Spanish people. They’re not hated and you don’t read about hate crimes being perpetrated against Mexicans everyday do you?
The fact is they’re here illegally. My great grandfather immigrated here from Italy “legally” and still suffered from discrimination. However, that was at the hands of other immigrants - your Irish ancestors included. For the record, I have Irish ancestors as well. Illegal immigrants are a drain on our school systems, social welfare systems and healthcare systems. I think the term is freeloader.
Or maybe this post, “Republican Idiots”?
Maybe it’s my firm belief on some of the following issues:
- Gay rights. No, they don’t need them, (including gay marriage) we do not need to create another “special class” of citizen.
- Pro-life. It’s murder, period.
- 2nd Amendment Protection. - Bang!
- 1st Amendment - Let Boy Scouts exercise free speech (it’s ok to ban gays)
- Global warming is a myth, and Al Gore’s an ass.
- illegals - ship em all back.
Or is it my stance against Sex Offenders that you consider hateful?
I give up. You paint me with this “hate brush”, but you’ve yet to back it up with any substantive examples. As J.Q. said I can be insulting at times, but there’s no hate going on here.
Dan Turkette-
It seems I have gotten your attention. Keep in mind, this is my OPINION, but I call the Fort Wayne News site for what I believe it to be - anything but “news”. People are free to visit the site - fill their minds with its rhetoric and content, but I can assure you, I will not be one of them.
I for one, appreciate an elevated discussion or a civil debate. Our democracy is at its best when ALL sides are represented and given an equal opportunity to be heard. But to be perfectly honest with you , I find it difficult to take you seriously when your words typically take on the form of a child who throws a temper tantrum in times of strife. He or she proceeds to scream louder and louder and then typically throws his or her arms violently about in a desperate attempt to get his or her own way.
Some may view this type of behavior as commendable and a viable way of getting one’s point across. Sorry, I recognize it for what it is: distasteful and immature.
Respectfully disagreeing with someone is a trait I admire. When I encounter an individual who resorts to petty, personal, name-calling attacks when he or she is attempting to argue a point, it is a definite turn-off for me. Others may feel differently, and that is their right to do so.
Case in point - there will always be a market for the those who subscribe to the lowest common denominator. However, critical thinking and reason are starting to come back into vogue in America again, and they couldn’t have arrived any sooner.
Andy,
I really didn’t think you’d answer the question.
Our democracy is at its best when ALL sides are represented and given an equal opportunity to be heard.
Then start your own blog. :)
“Respectfully disagreeing” in liberal speak means “no disagreeing.” See Fairness Doctrine.
“…there will always be a market for the those who subscribe to the lowest common denominator….”
True dat! Case in point, may I introduce your President-elect: Mr. Barack Obama!
That’s right folks! As endorsed by MTV and Nickelodeon: The same Barack Obama that brought you such hits as Hope….Change….FUTURE!!! and YES WE CAN!!!, countless vapid talking points, empty platitudes and other such buffoonery…all geared to garner the favor of the so-called downtrodden and weak-minded. And of course, we can’t forget the scared, self-loathing, guilt-ridden middle class.
Oh well. At least W did a nice job of socializing the banking industry to pave the way for the new administration’s agenda. I always thought banks would be the LAST thing to go the way of socialism, but apparently I was mistaken. I’m not sure there’s anything left that Obama can do to screw us all much worse than that.
If anybody seriously has any questions about the problems Republicans have, just hit the rewind button and watch the last couple of weeks worth of news. Republicans have long been the mouthpieces for unmolested capitalism, but when comes right down to it, they don’t have the stones to reap what was sown. Blame whomever you wish, but Barack Obama did NOT socialize the US banking system…a so-called Republican did…and therein lies the biggest problem with Republicans.
Andrew,
Excuse me on the bailout but just how many Democrats in both houses voted for it? Now don’t come up with the BS that they missed the point that these banks could do anything they wanted with the money. The only people I five a pass to on the bailout are the ones who voted against it!
I also invite you to watch who is tried for fraud and other charges. It will not be the top level Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac people.
You are very narrow minded or have no clue that it take both houses of congress to get bills passed. The Democrats could have stopped this EVIL from happening but they just piled on.
While we are at it what happened to pay-as-you that the Democrats promised for the past two years with regards to the budget?
[...] Pruitt posted about looming problems the Republican Party must deal with. His post is an interesting read and I [...]
Ok, JQP…let’s pretend like congress engineered that monumentally stupid plan and then made Bush think it was his idea….just to sell it to us.
Nay, it was most certainly the reverse of that. Why would anyone be surprised that a Democrat majority in the house and Senate would vote to pass FRIGGIN’ SOCIALISTIC LEGISLATION??? It had to be a wet dream for them to get that piece of dung served to them on a silver platter….OF COURSE they were going to vote for it!!!
I find it astoundingly ironic that you would have the stones to call me “closed minded” or portray me as ill-informed while you’re sitting here trying to plead the case for excusing and/or pitying the poor little Bush administration for getting bullied by the big bad Democrats in congress to push our entire financial industry into a socialistic quagmire. What a joke. I’ve got an idea for you: Type less, read more. You literally plaster tomes of material across many a local blog, some of which is extremely coherent…but some of it almost seems as if you’re just drunk. Your last comment reflects the latter.