politics and politicians
See other politics and politicians Articles
Title: The GOP’s Serious Political Problem
Source:
Breitbart
URL Source: http://www.breitbart.com/big-govern ... ops-serious-political-problem/
Published: Aug 27, 2015
Author: Mike Flynn
Post Date: 2015-08-27 15:36:01 by cranky
Keywords: None
Views: 1207
Comments: 12
The Republican party is caught in this trap, facing a chaotic fight for the party’s nomination that is largely the result of its own missteps. Setting aside the Trump phenomenon, which is admittedly almost impossible, the unmistakable trend in current polling for the nomination is that the closer a candidate is perceived to be to the national party leadership, the less support they have from Republican voters. The top two candidates in the RealClearPolitics average of polls are Donald Trump and retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson. In the latest Quinnipiac poll, released Thursday, the two candidates command 40 percent of support out of a crowded field of 17 candidates. Their support is strong even across the entire ideological spectrum of the Republican party. Carson, for example, does as well among “very conservative” Republicans as he does among “liberal” Republicans. The Republicans in D.C. are still consumed with concerns about “tea party” Republicans, but the base electorate has already moved on. Every wing of the Republican party is looking outside of Washington for leadership. The genuine “outsiders” in the race; Trump, Carson, Carly Fiorina and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), together earn 47 percent support in the RCP average of polls. In the most recent individual poll, these four earn 52 percent support. Jeb Bush, who is the consummate establishment candidate, is stuck around 7 percent in national polls. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), a Bush-like candidate with more rhetorical skills, is also mired around 7 percent. Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, who has until very recently downplayed his potential outside status, has fallen from an early perch near the top of the GOP field to the back of the pack. National Republicans underestimate how furious the base of the party is with its leadership in Washington. The extent to which outsiders are dominating the national polls is the clearest proxy of this. Here’s an even more basic one; candidates who attack frontrunner Donald Trump fall in the polls, while those that attack “Washington” rise in the polls. National Republicans are adept at explaining ad naseum the legislative or procedural hurdles to reversing Obama’s agenda. What angers voters, though, is their lack of urgency in challenging Obama. Voters, rightly, feel that Obama is trying to fundamentally change the nation and take this threat far more seriously than Republicans in Washington. It is nothing short of political malpractice that Republicans put more effort into giving Obama expanded authority to negotiate a secret trade deal than dismantling any part of this legislative agenda. It was, even, the first substantive thing a Republican-controlled Congress did. Last week, South Dakota Sen. John Thune (R-SD) used the Republican’s allotted time to respond to Obama’s weekly radio address by touting Congress’ “accomplishments” since the GOP took control. Is it any wonder that Republican voters are in a foul mood? There is simply no way Trump dominates the GOP field without first having Republicans like Rep. John Boehner (R-OH) and Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) setting national strategy for the party. The Trump phenomenon currently upending the nomination fight is their creation. Republicans, though, seemed poised to make the situation far worse. The national party is still haunted by the 1992 election, when a sitting Republican President broke a campaign promise, ignored conservatives and invited a third-party challenge. The result of the Republican missteps then was Ross Perot and a Clinton victory. Rather than try to keep conservatives in the party, the RNC seems driven to try to legally prevent a third party challenge. At the first Presidential debate, Fox News, no doubt in consultation with the RNC, began the event by asking candidates if they would promise not to launch an independent run for the White House. State Republican parties in Virginia, North Carolina and South Carolina have announced plans to include a “loyalty oath” as a condition to qualify for the primary ballot. A candidate would have to legally swear not to run a third-party campaign for the White House, in order to be on the Republican ballot. There is nothing nefarious or illegal in the question or the oaths. A political party is a private entity and can obviously set rules about candidates who want to compete for its nomination. That said, these aren’t actions that arise from a strong party. It isn’t good politics to enter a campaign assuming that you will likely alienate a large chunk of your party’s supporters. In effect, the party is signaling to a not small part of their voters that it expects it will anger them but want them to promise, first, not to leave it if they do. The Republican party is also obsessed with what it perceives as the negative fallout of a long campaign for the nomination. The RNC has publicly said that it wants to limit the number of debates and rejuggle the primary calendar so the party can decide on a nominee earlier. The party has even moved up the date of its convention, believing, again weirdly, that a primary debate will keep it from focusing on the Democrat in the Fall. That worry might have had some resonance two decades ago, but betrays a fundamental lack of understanding of modern politics. Neither McCain nor Romney blew competitive elections because they didn’t have a few more weeks to run their campaigns. The result of this RNC obsession will likely blow up soon after Labor Day. CNN will broadcast the next Republican debate in mid-September. Like Fox, CNN will limit the participants to the “top 10" GOP candidates, based on polling data. The line-up for the debate is likely to be little changed from the debate broadcast on Fox in early August. This is because CNN has set rules for the debate essentially ensuring that the candidates who polled best in the earliest days of the campaign are invited. In other words, a debate of candidates in mid-September will be determined, in part, by how candidates were doing in the polls in July. When pressed on these silly rules, the RNC reverted to legalese that the rules for the debate had been published months ago. Fortunately for the RNC, no one noticed how ridiculous the rules were then. Unfortunately for the RNC, though, the rules obviously make no sense. Even the least informed voters will be able to see that the rule was designed to help candidates who would had the highest name ID in the earliest days of the campaign. The rule was intended to make it harder for an outsider candidate to break into the debate. These pushes to shorten the nomination contest and limit outsiders participation in the process will likely make the RNC’s ultimate fear, a third party challenge, more of a reality. “Loyalty oaths” are all fine and legal, but they sound better suited to other countries. The fight for the Republican nomination is likely to get even more chaotic. But, that’s what happens when a party decides to alienate its voters and commit suicide. 
A standard critique of many losing generals throughout history is that they were inordinately focused on winning the last war. Devising their strategy and the tactics to refight battles in the past, they ignored changes and new developments that fundamentally changed the terrain.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: cranky (#0)
The national Republicans do not "explain" the hurdles - they CREATE them and then use them to justify their activity. Here's a fact: the Republicans control the House of Representatives, which is a majority vote body. Which means that, if the Republicans WANTED to, they could pass ANY legislation they wanted to. The Democrats have no power to stop them. None. Here's another fact: the Republicans control the Senate, which is ALSO a majority vote body if the Republicans were to decide to make it one. Harry Reid, faced with Republican intransigence, simply struck down the filibuster rule for whatever he chose to. Republicans twisted their faces in rage, but did nothing. Republicans now are in control, and if they WANTED to, they could impose Reid's no filibuster rule, or even go farther and simply blow out the filibuster. Democrats have no recourse, except to the Supreme Court. And here's a third fact: the Republicans control the Supreme Court, and have continuously since 1969. Which means that IN FACT, the Republicans RIGHT NOW have the power to strike down the ENTIRETY of Obama's legislation, and pass anything they want, and the Democrats recourse only to the Supreme Court. Obama could veto, but the Congress could cut off the money for targeted programs - or even just cut off the money for Democrats and leave the money flowing to Republicans. The Republicans control the Legislature, the Courts and the power of the purse. The President can be completely euchered IF the Republicans USE THEIR POWER. BUT THEY DON'T. And then they make up plausible sounding bullshit about how their hands are tied. It's all a lie. Their hands are not tied at all. They have power to investigate, to block, to pass laws, to strike things down. They could neuter the President, if they WANTED to. They have the power to do what Reid did: turn the Senate into a majority vote body. The filibuster is not in the Constitution. Reid killed it, and the Republicans could erase it and pass whatever they wanted. The only "procedural hurdle" standing in front of the Republicans is their own unwillingness to use their power. They pretend otherwise, strenuously, but it's all a pack of lies, and every one of them who repeats it is a brazen liar who should be spit on and rejected as such. Republicans HAVE THE POWER RIGHT NOW. They CHOOSE not to use it to do anything other than to advance various parts of the Obama agenda - because the crony capitalists who control the Republican Party WANT THE OBAMA AGENDA. And rank-and-file Republicans, for their part, don't see and it historically have refused to see it. With Trump, they're waking up. The rank and file need to elect Trump, and then he needs to use his control of the party to eviscerate the crony capitalist control of the party.
I just don't see that happening. I can't see either national committee allowing Trump on their ticket. There are three kinds of people in the world: those that can add and those that can't
Then Biden will be President. Which is better than Jeb Bush being President.
Maybe. It's a long time till 11/16 and anything can happen but right now I think it's O'Malley's nomination to lose. There are three kinds of people in the world: those that can add and those that can't
Carson, Fiorina and Cruz sound like conservatives . There is very little difference in rhetoric between Trump and Bernie Sanders . Sanders calls for soaking the rich ;so does Trump . Trump talked about making those successful pay more in taxes "because right now they are paying very little tax, and I think it's outrageous." When asked about if he wanted to pay more taxes he said ,"That's right, that's right. I'm OK with it," ... "I do very well. I don't mind paying some taxes." He sounds like the Democrat's favorite crony corporatist Warren Buffett. In fact there is very little difference in his rhetoric than the emperor and Elizabeth Warren . His protectionist rhetoric is also right out of the Democrat playbook Besides that ,he also sounds Democrat in his rhetoric about the role of the Federal Government . Besides calling for a wall on the border he also calls for massive Federal government spending on infrastructure . He wants the Federal government to spend to build better bridges, highways, railroads. He also rejects GOP plans to overhaul Medicare. He doesn't want to limit the power of the Goverment . If anything ,he thinks he can be a bigger manager of big government . I'm positive that he will take the ruling model of the emperor and his executive actions and run with it . I'm pretty sure that he will not only use it as his managing model ;but he will be the emperor on steroids . The rank and file need to elect Trump, and then he needs to use his control of the party to eviscerate the crony capitalist control of the party. Trump is himself the epitome of a cronyist . That has been his business model going back decades . It doesn't impress me that his excuse is that he had to play the game to be successful . He was in fact a willing participant in the system he now claims to despise . The Democrats have no power to stop them. None. That of course does not explain reality . The truth is that the Republicans do not have the power to over ride a veto . When they tried to exercise their legislative power with a government shutdown they got raked over the coals by the national media ,and they suffered in public opinion. And here's a third fact: the Republicans control the Supreme Court, and have continuously since 1969. Which means absolutely nothing . SCOTUS with it's life time appointments is not accountable to the Republicans ;and that is evidently especially true of justices appointed by Republicans. You can't blame the Presidents who appointed Kennedy and Roberts . All evidence suggested that they would be solid conservative voices in the court . Something happens once they are nominated . Maybe they become concerned that they won't get invited to the beltway cocktail parties if they rule principally .Or maybe there is some conversion process where they suddenly stop ruling as their history predicted . Whatever ,it was the "conservatives " on the court that ruled favorably for national homosexual "marriage" ,and Obamacare . So it's a stretch to say that Republicans control SCOTUS . Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
ping
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
If Trump owns the polls by mid 2016... the (R) party will kiss his rich ass... and so will Fox News. You can set aside all you thought was standard in politics, because if Trump keeps this train rolling, you're gonna see shit you've never thought possible. I hope he wins.... it will open the door for other, non party affiliated people to try and fix this economy. I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
Hey pal, I have a clue for you. Government can not fix anything; irrespective of party affiliation. The anemic US economy is based on how the multi-national corporations have brought down the US economy.
Yes you can. Democrats understand the centrality of the Supreme Court to our political system, so they exhaustively vet their candidates, applying litmus test after litmus test. Only the most ideologically reliable are appointed to the Supreme Court. The Republicans do exactly the same thing. When a Republican takes the court, that Republican has been vetted just like a Democrat. The fact that Republican justices so reliably vote the way they do is because they were chosen to do that.
They should. Their "success" is based upon a rigged tax code that shelters the primary ways the super-rich make money, and makes up the difference by hammering wage-earners with quadruple taxation. It's vicious, Everybody should pay the same PERCENTAGE of his wealth in taxes. Right now, the rich are severely undertaxed, and the upper middle class are heavily overtaxed. That should be fixed, fast.
I completely disagree with the idea of a wealth tax. If you are calling for a flat income tax then I agree . If you think there are shelters then remove them . But to say that he's going to punitively tax them because he doesn't like the way they make a living is wrong. The fact that he would use the money for redistribution shows that he's more sympatico with the progressive liberal Democrat agenda than with the rank and file conservative Republican.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
National Republicans are adept at explaining ad naseum the legislative or procedural hurdles to reversing Obama’s agenda.
#2. To: Vicomte13 (#1)
The rank and file need to elect Trump, and then he needs to use his control of the party to eviscerate the crony capitalist control of the party.
#3. To: cranky (#2)
I can't see either national committee allowing Trump on their ticket.
#4. To: Vicomte13 (#3)
Then Biden will be President.
#5. To: Vicomte13 (#1)
(Edited)
The rank and file need to elect Trump, and then he needs to use his control of the party to eviscerate the crony capitalist control of the party.
#6. To: cranky, Redleghunter, TooConservative (#5)
#7. To: cranky (#2)
(Edited)
#8. To: GrandIsland (#7)
... it will open the door for other, non party affiliated people to try and fix this economy.
#9. To: tomder55 (#5)
SCOTUS with it's life time appointments is not accountable to the Republicans ;and that is evidently especially true of justices appointed by Republicans. You can't blame the Presidents who appointed Kennedy and Roberts
#10. To: tomder55 (#5)
Sanders calls for soaking the rich ;so does Trump . Trump talked about making those successful pay more in taxes
#11. To: Vicomte13 (#10)
#12. To: tomder55 (#6)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]