Christie hurling bombs at Boehner...

[B-Large]

The Libertarian Party will never be more than what it is today, as the current organization of the FEC and federal and state election laws opperate in a way designed to purpetuate the existing two party system and maintain the existing two parties. There's alot of old money and power at stake were any change to be made to this system, and those who have it will not allow the system that guards them disapear.

 

The shift will have to be internal, rather than extenal.

 

While I don't disagree the path would be an uphill battle on a steep grade, if there is enough departure from the main parties and demand of the legitimacy of an addtional party, it can be changed... the R and D's are too comfortable and complacent in Washington, that is why both parties have failed the American people lately... I mean this is America, where in the compeition, why should 2 parties have the lock on the politics? People should demand better.....

[ExiledInIllinois]

 

It will happen, and they already are beginning to. The question is how long will it take for the transition to complete, and how many elections will they lose between now and then.

 

Yeah... Just looking @ it from a pure numbers game. Everybody wants to receive but, they don't want to give. Are things mathematically possible to loosen up on the benefits (which means going socially liberal) and stay fiscally conservative? After all, this is the big knock on the democrats... Right?

 

What are the repubs going say: "Okay, we will recognize all marriage... But nobody gets benefits."

 

It is going to be tricky fence to straddle.

 

 

[B-Large]

Yeah... Just looking @ it from a pure numbers game. Everybody wants to receive but, they don't want to give. Are things mathematically possible to loosen up on the benefits (which means going socially liberal) and stay fiscally conservative? After all, this is the big knock on the democrats... Right?

 

What are the repubs going say: "Okay, we will recognize all marriage... But nobody gets benefits."

 

It is going to be tricky fence to straddle.

 

I think there are ALOT of people who support equal treatment and right under law, than don't support a Welfare State.... Its probably more clear than we think.... heck, I'm there

[TakeYouToTasker]

While I don't disagree the path would be an uphill battle on a steep grade, if there is enough departure from the main parties and demand of the legitimacy of an addtional party, it can be changed... the R and D's are too comfortable and complacent in Washington, that is why both parties have failed the American people lately... I mean this is America, where in the compeition, why should 2 parties have the lock on the politics? People should demand better.....

 

Individuals should demand better. "People" are apathetic and powerless.

 

The gatekeepers have constructed an entirely insular system which protects them, because the system can opnly be changed from within, and they decided who gets in.

 

From Wiki:

 

"Ballot access laws in the United States vary widely from state to state. A brief outline of such laws follows (incomplete).

Alabama: Major party candidates are nominated by the state primary process. Independent candidates are granted ballot access through a petition process and minor political party candidates are nominated by convention along with a petition process; one must collect 3% of the total votes cast in the last election for the specific race or 3% of the total votes cast in the last gubernatorial election for state-wide ballot access. The figure for 2006 state wide ballot access was 41,012 good signatures. Be aware that the validity of signatures generally means that 20-30% more signatures will need to be collected to ensure that the goal is achieved. To retain ballot access a third party has to poll 20% in a state wide race and it will retain state wide ballot access through to the next election.

Arizona: To gain ballot access, a new political party must gather signatures on a county by county basis, achieving over 20,000 good signatures from registered voters. Once this has been achieved the party must run a candidate for Governor or President who garners at least 5% of the vote to maintain ballot access for an additional two years, maintain at least 1% of registered voters registered with their party, or gather approximately the same number of signatures again every two years. The Democratic, Libertarian, and Republican parties have ballot access by voter registrations. In 2008, the Arizona Green Party gathered enough signatures to gain ballot access.[7]

California: Per section 5100 of the California Election Code, ballot access requires one of the two conditions below to be met.[8]

If at the last preceding gubernatorial election there was polled for any one of the party's candidates for any office voted on throughout the state, at least 2 percent of the entire vote of the state.

If on or before the 135th day before any primary election, it appears to the Secretary of State, as a result of examining and totaling the statement of voters and their political affiliations transmitted to him or her by the county elections officials, that voters equal in number to at least 1 percent of the entire vote of the state at the last preceding gubernatorial election have declared their intention to affiliate with that party.

Colorado: Colorado has relatively lax ballot access requirements, but requirements differ for major and minor parties. For major party primary candidates (Democrat, Republican, and American Constitution parties are major parties for 2012 because of the votes drawn by ACP candidate Tom Tancredo in 2010), C.R.S. 1-4-801 requires statewide candidates (including US Senate) get 1500 signatures per congressional district. US House and State legislature candidates need 1000 signatures. Candidates may also be named to ballots by a caucus, county assembly, and state or district assembly process; a candidate who draws less than 10% of an assembly is ineligible to petition on the same primary ballot. For minor party candidate, the petition requirements are eased under C.R.S 1-4-802. For U.S. Senate, 1,000 signatures are required; for U.S. House, 800 signatures; for State Senate, 600 signatures; and for State House, 400. Sometimes these requirements are relaxed even further based on the voting statistics of the district.[9]

Kentucky: Kentucky uses a three-tier system for ballot access, using the results of the previous presidential election as the gauge. If a party's presidential candidate achieves less than 2% of the popular vote within the state of Kentucky, that organization is a "political group". If the candidate receives 2% or more, but less than 20% of the popular vote in Kentucky, that organization is a "political organization". Parties whose candidate for president achieves at least 20% of the popular vote are considered "political parties". Taxpayer-funded primaries are achieved as a "political party". Automatic ballot access is obtained as a "political organization" or "political party", and these levels require only 2 signatures for a candidate to run for any partisan office. There is no mechanism for placing an entire party on the ballot in Kentucky, other than achieving "political organization" or "political party" status. Candidates of "political groups" and independent candidates must collect a minimum of between 25 and 5000 signatures to run for any particular partisan office. Filing fees apply equitably to all levels.[10] Traditionally, the state only tracked voter registration affiliation as Democrat (D), Republican ®, or Other (O). Beginning as of January 1, 2006, KAR provides for County Clerks to track the voter registration of Constitution ©, Green (G), Libertarian (L), Reform (F), and Socialist Workers (S), as well as independent (I);[11] though a number of County Clerks have not been complying with this regulation.

Louisiana: Louisiana is one of the easiest states to get on the ballot. Anyone may obtain a spot on the ballot by either paying a qualifying fee, or submitting petition signatures. For independent candidates for President (or non-recognized parties) the fee is $500 or 5000 signatures, with at least 500 from each Congressional district. Recognized Parties simply file their slate of Electors - their access is automatic, no fee or signatures required. For statewide office, the signature requirement is the same as that for President, but the fees are $750 for Governor and $600 for all other statewide offices. District and local office fees range from $40 or 50 signatures for a small town office, to $600 or 1000 signatures for US House. All signatures for district offices must come from within that district. If the office is for a political party committee, the signatures must be from people affiliated with that party. For Presidential Preference Primaries, the fee is $750 or 1000 signatures affiliated with that party from each Congressional district.[12](pdf) Presently, Louisiana law only allows for Presidential Primaries if a party has more than 40,000 registered voters statewide. Currently, this only applies to the Democrat and Republican Parties. Louisiana law changed in 2004 under efforts from the Libertarian Party of Louisiana to relax rules in place at that time for recognizing political parties in the state. There are now two methods to gain official recognition. Method A allows a party to be recognized if it pays a $1000 fee AND has 1000 or more voters registered under its label. To retain recognition, it must field a candidate at least once in any four-year period in a statewide election - with no requirement on performance in the election. (Presidential Elector, Governor, Senator, Lt. Governor, Secretary of State, Attorney General, Treasurer, Comm. of Insurance, Comm. of Agriculture) To date, the Libertarian Party and the Green Party have used this method to attain and retain official party recognition. Method B allows a party to be recognized if one of its candidates in a statewide race or for Presidential Elector achieves 5% of the vote. To retain recognition, it must repeat the 5% tally for statewide office or Presidential Elector at least once in any four-year period. To date, the Reform Party has used this method to gain and retain official party recognition. Due to their size, parties recognized by these methods are exempt from certain laws governing public elections of political committee offices and from certain financial reporting requirements until their membership reaches 5% of registered voters statewide. Recognized political parties in Louisiana are allowed to have their party name appear alongside their candidates on the ballot, and for their party to be offered as a specific choice on voter registration cards. Non-recognized parties appear as OTHER, and the party name must be written in on the registration card. Non-affiliated voters are listed as N for No Party. It is prohibited to use the words "Independent" for a political party name. In the 2008 and 2010 Congressional elections, Louisiana briefly experimented with closed primaries for House and Senate. Under this system, recognized parties participated in semi-closed primaries before the general election. Only one candidate from each party was allowed on the General Election ballot. (there was no limit for OTHER or NONE) An attempt to pass a law differentiating "minor" parties similar to the rule for Presidential Primaries was defeated but made irrelevant by Louisiana reverting to its "Jungle Primary" system where all candidates, regardless of number from any party, all compete together on the same ballot. If no one achieves a majority, a general election is held as a run-off between the top two, also regardless of party affiliation.[13][14](pdf)

Maryland: Party certifications are done for each gubernatorial cycle (e.g. 2006–2010). If the number of registered voters to a political party is less than 1%, then 10,000 petition signatures must be gathered for that party to be considered certified. A party must be certified before voters can register under that party. A party can also be certified for a two-year term if their "top of the ticket" candidate receives more than 1% of the vote.

Minnesota: Major party candidates are nominated by the state primary process. Independent and minor political party candidates are nominated by a petition process; two-thousand signatures for a statewide election, or five hundred for a state legislative election. Candidates have two week period to collect nominating petition signatures. Independent candidates may select a brief political party designation in lieu of independent.

Missouri: Missouri exempts parties from needing to gather signatures if they attain 2% of the vote in a statewide election.[15]

New York (main article: qualified New York parties): To be recognized as a political party, the party must gain 50,000 votes in the most recent gubernatorial election. (There are, as of 2011, six such parties. Three of them, however, have primarily resorted to electoral fusion and usually only nominate candidates already on either the Democratic or Republican lines. The sole exception is the Green Party.) This allows for primary elections and allows statewide candidates to be exempted from having to petition. Any other candidate must file petitions. For statewide candidates, 15,000 signatures are required and must be taken from a majority of the state's congressional districts. All state legislature and congressional candidates must file petitions regardless of party nominations, except in special elections. Persons running as independents or from outside one of the qualified parties require three times the number of signatures as those running in established parties.[16]

North Carolina: North Carolina's law pertaining to ballot access is codified in N.C.G.S Chapter 163 Elections and Election Law:[17]

New Political Parties: According to N.C.G.S. §163-96(a)(2)[18][19] for a New Political Party to gain access to the election ballot they must obtain signatures on a petition equal to at least 2% of the total number of votes cast for Governor in the most recent election by no later than 12:00 noon on the first day of June before the election in which the Party wishes to participate. In addition, at least 200 signatures must come from at least four separate US Congressional Districts each within the state. To qualify for the 2010 or 2012 election ballot a new political party must gather at least 85,379 signatures within approximately a 3.5 year time span, averaging at least 67 signatures every day for three and half years straight counting weekdays and holidays.[19]

Political Party Retention Requirement: According to N.C.G.S. §163-96(a)(1)[20] in order for a political party to remain certified for the election ballot after obtaining access to the ballot, or to remain recognized by the State of North Carolina, that party must successfully garner at least 2% of the total vote cast for Governor for its candidate. If a party's candidate for Governor fails to receive at least 2% of the vote, that party loses ballot access (N.C.G.S. §163-97[21]) and must begin the petitioning process over again, and the voter affiliation of all registered voters affiliated with that party is changed to unaffiliated (N.C.G.S. §163-97.1[22]).

Statewide Unaffiliated Requirements: According to N.C.G.S. §163-122(a)(1)[23] in order for an unaffiliated candidate to qualify for the election ballot for a statewide office, the candidate must obtain signatures on a petition equal to at least 2% of the total number of votes caste for Governor in the most recent election by 12:00 noon on the last Friday in June before the election in which the candidate wishes to participate. In addition, at least 200 signatures must come from at least four separate US Congressional Districts each within the state. To qualify for the 2010 or 2012 election ballot unaffiliated statewide candidates must obtain at least 85,379 signatures.

District Unaffiliated Requirements: According to N.C.G.S. §163-122(a)(2-3)[23] in order for an unaffiliated candidate to qualify for the election ballot for a district office, the candidate must obtain signatures on a petition equal to at least 4% of the total number of registered voters within the district that the candidate is running for election in as of January 1 of the election year in which the candidate desires to appear on the election ballot. Signatures must be turned in by 12:00 noon on the last Friday in June before the election in which the candidate wishes to participate. District candidates effectively cannot start petitioning for ballot access until after January 1 of the election year they are running for election, giving them just under half a year to obtain signatures for ballot access. To qualify for the 2010 election ballot unaffiliated US Congressional candidates are required to obtain as many as 22,544 signatures and an average of 18,719 signatures required for access to the 2010 election ballot.[24]

North Dakota: Seven thousand petition signatures to create a new political party and nominate a slate of candidates for office. Independent candidates need a thousand for a statewide office or 300 for a state legislative office. The independent nominating petition process does not allow for candidates to appear on the ballot with a political party designation, in lieu of independent, except for presidential elections.[25]

Ohio: Late in 2006, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals invalidated Ohio's law for ballot access for new political parties in a suit brought by the Libertarian Party of Ohio.[26] After the November elections, the outgoing Secretary of State and Attorney General requested an extension to file an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court so that the decision whether or not to appeal could be made by the newly elected Secretary of State and Attorney General. The new Secretary of State did not appeal, but instead asserted her authority as Chief Election Officer of Ohio to issue new ballot access rules. In July 2008, a U.S. District Court invalidated the Secretary of State's rules and placed the Libertarian Party on the ballot.[27] Three other parties subsequently sued and were placed on the ballot by the Court or by the Secretary of State.

Oklahoma: A party is defined either as a group that polled 10% for the office at the top of the ticket in the last election (i.e., president or governor), or that submits a petition signed by voters equal to 5% of the last vote cast for the office at the top of the ticket. An independent presidential candidate, or the presidential candidate of an unqualified party, may get on the ballot with a petition of 3% of the last presidential vote. Oklahoma is the only state in the nation in which an independent presidential candidate, or the presidential candidate of a new or previously unqualified party, needs support from more than 2% of the last vote cast to get on the ballot. An initiative is being circulated during the period September 14, 2007-December 13, 2007 to lower the ballot access rules for political parties.

Pennsylvania: A new party or independent candidate may gain ballot access for one election as a "political body" by collecting petition signatures equal to 2 percent of the vote for the highest vote-getter in the most recent election in the jurisdiction. A political body that wins two percent of the vote obtained by the highest vote-getter statewide in the same election is recognized statewide as a "political party" for two years. A political party with a voter enrollment equal to less than 15 percent of the state's total partisan enrollment is classified as a "minor political party," which has automatic ballot access in special elections but must otherwise collect the same number of signatures as political bodies. Political parties not relegated to "minor" status qualify to participate in primary elections. Candidates may gain access to primary election ballots by collecting a set number of petition signatures for each office, generally significantly fewer than required for political bodies and minor political parties.

South Dakota: For a registered political party in a statewide election they must collect petition signatures equal to one percent of the vote for that political party in the preceding election for state governor. An independent candidate must collect petition signatures equal to one percent of the total votes for state governor, and a new political party must collect two-hundred and fifty petition signatures. In state legislative elections a registered political party needs to collect fifty signatures and an independent candidate must collect one percent of the total votes cast for state governor in the preceding election in their respective district.[28]

Tennessee: A candidate seeking a House or Senate seat at the state or national level must gather 25 signatures from registered voters to be put on the ballot for any elected office.[29][30][31][32] Presidential candidates seeking to represent an officially recognized party must either be named as candidates by the Tennessee Secretary of State or gather 2,500 signatures from registered voters, and an independent candidate for President must gather 275 signatures and put forward a full slate of eleven candidates who have agreed to serve as electors.[33] To be recognized as a party and have its candidates listed on the ballot under that party's name, a political party must gather signatures equal to or in excess of 2.5% of the total number of votes cast in the last gubernatorial election (about 45,000 signatures based on the election held in 2006).[34] A third party to be officially recognized was the American Party in 1968; none of its candidates received five percent of the statewide vote in 1970 or 1972 and it was then subject to decertification as an official party after the 1972 election. In 2012, a state court ruled that the Green Party of Tennessee and the Constitution Party of Tennessee would join the Republican and Democratic Parties on the ballot beginning with the election on November 6, 2012. As a result, a record number of Green Party candidates are running in statewide and national elections in the state.[citation needed]

Texas: For a registered political party in a statewide election to gain ballot access, they must either 1) obtain five percent of the vote in any statewide election or 2) collect petition signatures equal to one percent of the total votes cast in the preceding election for governor, and must do so by January 2 of the year in which such statewide election is held. An independent candidate for any statewide office must collect petition signatures equal to one percent of the total votes cast for governor, and must do so beginning the day after primary elections are held and complete collection within 60 days thereafter (if runoff elections are held, the window is shortened to beginning the day after runoff elections are held and completed within 30 days thereafter). The petition signature cannot be from anyone who voted in either primary (including runoff), and voters cannot sign multiple petitions (they must sign a petition for one party or candidate only).[35]

Virginia: A candidate for any statewide or local office must be qualified to vote for as well as hold the office they are running for, must have been "a resident of the county, city or town which he offers at the time of filing", a resident of the district, if it is an election for a specific district, and a resident of Virginia for one year before the election. For any office the candidate must obtain signatures of at least 125 registered voters for the area where they are running for office (except in communities of fewer than 3,500 people, where the number is lower), and if they are running as a candidate from a political party where partisan elections are permitted, must pay a fee of 2% of their yearly salary (no fee is required for persons not running as a candidate for a primary of a political party). Petitions, along with additional paperwork, must be filed between about four and five months before the election, subject to additional requirements for candidates for a primary election.[36] 1,000 signatures are required for a U.S. House race and 10,000 for a statewide race (i.e. U.S. President, U.S. Senate, Governor, Lieutenant Governor, or Attorney General), including 400 from each Congressional district.[37] Nominees of a political party that "at either of the two preceding statewide general elections, received at least 10 percent of the total vote cast for any statewide office filled in that election" are exempt from needing to gather signatures.[38]"

 

and...

 

"The growth of any third political party in the United States faces extremely challenging obstacles, among them restrictive ballot access. Other obstacles often cited[by whom?] as barriers to third-party growth include:

Campaign funding reimbursement for any political party that gets at least 5% of the vote—implemented in many states "to help smaller parties"—typically helps the two biggest parties

Laws intended to fight corporate donations, with loopholes that require teams of lawyers to navigate the laws

The role of corporate money in propping up the two established parties

The allegedly related general reluctance of news organizations to cover minor political party campaigns

Moderate voters being divided between the major parties, or registered independent, so that both major primaries are hostile to moderate or independent candidates

Politically motivated gerrymandering of election districts by those already in power, in order to reduce or eliminate political competition (two-party proponents would argue that the minority party in that district should just nominate a more centrist candidate relative to that district);

Plurality voting scaring voters from voting for any candidate other than the lesser of evils, who is reported to have a chance of winning

The absence of proportional representation

The public view that third parties have no chance of beating the worse of evils, and are therefore a wasted vote

Campaign costs of convincing interested voters that the party nominee has a chance of winning, and regaining that trust after an election where the third party got the third-most votes (not a problem with instant-runoff voting or condorcet voting)"

[Magox]

I think there are ALOT of people who support equal treatment and right under law, than don't support a Welfare State.... Its probably more clear than we think.... heck, I'm there

Oh please. Stop saying that you're one of these folks. You strongly support Obamacare, which massively expands Medicaid and benefits for couples making $60K a year, funded through higher taxation by the wealthy.

Edited January 3, 2013 by Magox

[IDBillzFan]

LoL... Riding high in the saddle two years (after midterm elections) ago while you spouted the demise of the progressives, liberals, and democrats...

 

Find and post any time two years ago I spouted off about the demise of the progressives, liberals and democrats.

 

Go ahead. We'll wait.

[ExiledInIllinois]

 

 

I think there are ALOT of people who support equal treatment and right under law, than don't support a Welfare State.... Its probably more clear than we think.... heck, I'm there

 

I hear you. With recognition, comes power. We don't have to be a total welfare state for the numbers to be steep and staggering.

 

Honestly... What are the issues that conservative republicans can loosen up on socially? The LGBT, abortion, and immigration. That's dreaming if one says there won't be steep bills to be paid there.

[B-Large]

Oh please. Stop saying that you're one of these folks. You strongly support Obamacare, which massively expands Medicaid and benefits for couples making $60K a year, funded through higher taxation by the wealthy.

 

If I could buy personal health insurance prior to the Affordable Care Act, I would not have support another layer of Government regulation in healthcare... I have always been clear I voted for it based on specific personal health issues for myself and my wife.

 

I've been in accident and gotten tickets from Driving my care, my insurance has gone up and I paid more... I got that.... why is it that I get sick, am willing to pay more because I am a bigger health risk, and I could never get any insurance coverage? Should I just be ruined is this country if I got sick again? I wasn't asking for a handout, only a way to manage risk... the ACA was the only action on Helthcare in the forseeable future, I jumped on board and supported it.. I am not denying it... maybe you will call me a hypocite for it, again, so be it.

 

Other than healthcare, where I have I even indicated I am for Big Government?

 

I hear you. With recognition, comes power. We don't have to be a total welfare state for the numbers to be steep and staggering.

 

Honestly... What are the issues that conservative republicans can loosen up on socially? The LGBT, abortion, and immigration. That's dreaming if one says there won't be steep bills to be paid there.

 

On LGBT issues, why does anybody care what two consenting adult wish to do with and to each other? I get their stance on abortion, in fact I agree with it- I'd prefer adoption, but it also seems logical to support bith control initiatives for kids.... abstinance only seems to work for ****ty NFL QBs that shoud be playing fullback... lol.... immigration, I don't think our borders and the rules that govern them should be "optional" for immigrants... my family came here, paid their dues, worked the process and became Americans... why should anyone be exempt from that?

 

Side Note: I found out a few weeks ago my great grandparents were bootleggers, and my Grandmother used to answer the doors and deliver the products to customers from the basement.. she never mentioned that to anyone until she was about to pass... I guess she was always scared, and her brother blew all the money their made drinking.... what irony

 

Oh please. Stop saying that you're one of these folks. You strongly support Obamacare, which massively expands Medicaid and benefits for couples making $60K a year, funded through higher taxation by the wealthy.

 

and through taxation on all properties we own, I am not expempt form the grit of the law either.

[Magox]

If I could buy personal health insurance prior to the Affordable Care Act, I would not have support another layer of Government regulation in healthcare... I have always been clear I voted for it based on specific personal health issues for myself and my wife.

 

I've been in accident and gotten tickets from Driving my care, my insurance has gone up and I paid more... I got that.... why is it that I get sick, am willing to pay more because I am a bigger health risk, and I could never get any insurance coverage? Should I just be ruined is this country if I got sick again? I wasn't asking for a handout, only a way to manage risk... the ACA was the only action on Helthcare in the forseeable future, I jumped on board and supported it.. I am not denying it... maybe you will call me a hypocite for it, again, so be it.

 

 

 

 

 

and through taxation on all properties we own, I am not expempt form the grit of the law either.

 

I never implied that you were a leach

[ExiledInIllinois]

 

 

I never implied that you were a leach

 

Then what do you think should happen w/B-Large's situation?

[Magox]

Then what do you think should happen w/B-Large's situation?

What kind of question is that? What are you exactly asking?

[RkFast]

I hear you. With recognition, comes power. We don't have to be a total welfare state for the numbers to be steep and staggering.

 

Honestly... What are the issues that conservative republicans can loosen up on socially? The LGBT, abortion, and immigration. That's dreaming if one says there won't be steep bills to be paid there.

 

Im sorry, I dont see liberals chaning their social views. In fact they have gotten more extreme, if anything.

[TakeYouToTasker]

I hear you. With recognition, comes power. We don't have to be a total welfare state for the numbers to be steep and staggering.

 

Honestly... What are the issues that conservative republicans can loosen up on socially? The LGBT, abortion, and immigration. That's dreaming if one says there won't be steep bills to be paid there.

The baseline for what a socially liberal, fiscal conservative would embody is essentially: I respect your authority and desire to pursue any peaceful undertaking you might wish, however you must respect my desire and authority to not pay for it.

Edited January 3, 2013 by TakeYouToTasker

[UConn James]

Im sorry, I dont see liberals chaning their social views. In fact they have gotten more extreme, if anything.

 

Everyone said that in 2004... in order to win the presidency after they couldn't even beat GWB at the height of unpopularity, the Democrats would have to become more centrist, more conservative on economic matters.

 

In 2008, they nominated someone who was even FURTHER to the left than Kerry.

 

All the bluster from one side commenting about what the other needs to do in order to win is typical BS. It means nothing. It's a cadre of pols saying that you need to sell out what you believe in and become them.

 

Obama won because incumbency is powerful. He didn't have to face a primary and getting belted in the face by numerous people in his own party up until about 5 months before the general election. Are there problems in the GOP, sure. They DO need to stop talking about abortion as anything other than being settled by the highest court and now it's about changing hearts and minds of individuals - women - who are making their choice, as most Republicans that I know actually do, rather than being pigeon-holed by a few pols who sound off like crazy Baptist ministers.

 

I can tell you that Christie here has done himself no favors within the party in his Storm Sandy actions, both cozying up with Obama just before the election and now decrying Congress because some members and leadership might think they can get a better bill. It's stevestojanny that it came to this, because if it had been confined to recovery money for Sandy rather than becomi the pork-fest omnibus that it did including tens of millions for Alaska fisheries, etc. (read the dedicated thread for detailed discussion), it would have passed right away unanimously.

 

Anyway, getting back to Christie, he has no chance in 2016. The GOP is not going to nominate another northeastern management-type Republican. Not for a long time, I'd say. Nominees will be coming from the South and the West. (I'd actually like to see one from the southwest with Gov. Susana Martinez, who got an Obama-in-2004 style keynote at the RNC that introduced her on the national stage and raised a lot of eyebrows in the party.)

[Magox]

You can't deny the changing demographics. Or can you?

[3rdnlng]

The baseline for what a socially liberal, fiscally conservative would embody is essentially: I respect your authority and desire to pursue any peaceful undertaking you might wish, however you must respect my desire and authority to not pay for it.

 

Sort of like a Libertarian or Tea Party person believes.

[TakeYouToTasker]

You can't deny the changing demographics. Or can you?

Meh. This president had a lower turnout than he did in 2008. Hell, he had a lower turnout than McCain had in 2008. The Republicans need to focus on broad base, socially liberal, fiscally conservative policy that attracts new young voters and brings back the older, now apathetic voters who refuse to vote for a hawkish, cardboard liberal like Mitt Romney; and they need to market the hell out of it.

 

Sort of like a Libertarian or Tea Party person believes.

 

No, not as a "big L" Libertarian believes, nor as a now co-opted Tea Partier believes.

 

The Libertarian party is a party of socialist programs with libertarian reforms. The Tea Party, as it exists today, is comprised largely of a mishmash of entrenched Washington interests and social conservatives, with those following a largely libertarian path being pushed to the fringes.

[Magox]

Meh. This president had a lower turnout than he did in 2008. Hell, he had a lower turnout than McCain had in 2008. The Republicans need to focus on broad base, socially liberal, fiscally conservative policy that attracts new young voters and brings back the older, now apathetic voters who refuse to vote for a hawkish, cardboard liberal like Mitt Romney; and they need to market the hell out of it.

Ok, so you deny math.

[TakeYouToTasker]

Ok, so you deny math.

No, I simply understand the difference between likely voters, registered voters, and eligible voters. Denying math would be the refusal to acknowledge that "Obama 2012 vote total" < "McCain 2008 vote total". As an incumbent. Who wasn't primaried. In a down economy.

 

Mitt Romney didn't lose on math, he lost on message and substance.

[Magox]

Obviously you haven't been keeping up with the recent trends. Bush won 43% of the latino vote, at that time, the latino vote made up less than 10% of the total electorate. 2008 McCain won 33% of the total latino vote, which made up close to 13% of the total electorate, and Romney won around 28% of the latino vote, which made up over 15% of the total electorate.

 

That's an increase of 50% for latino turnout relative to the rest of the electorate, and when you look at the sharp drop off in % of Latinos voting for R's, then that is a huge red flag. I spoke about this at length, well before you ever came to this board. I warned the immigration hardliners on this board well before the election, and they didn't want to accept that reality. Well, it happened.

 

Reality is that latinos are going to make up close to a quarter of the electorate within 15 years. Considering not just the growing latino electorate, but the trends for who they've been voting for (The D's), and you couple that with blacks who uniformly vote for D's, you better look to adopt policies, or at the very least become a more inclusive party or the math will catch up, which it already has begun.

 

So yes, demographics do matter and anyone who denies this is denying reality.

Edited January 3, 2013 by Magox