Americans now rate the Republican party at an all-time low

Furthermore, America strongly backs every single gun control measure Obama has put out there...

No buying that one.

But, on the rest of it, sure brainwashing works. My only question is why it took so many decades for the constant brainwashing it get to this point. Media and entertainment control is a powerful tool, thought we would have seen these kinds of numbers about 25 years ago frankly.
 
Don't know why you think we could have had numbers we don't have know decades ago, but then again you are rather ignorant.
 
No buying that one.

But, on the rest of it, sure brainwashing works. My only question is why it took so many decades for the constant brainwashing it get to this point. Media and entertainment control is a powerful tool, thought we would have seen these kinds of numbers about 25 years ago frankly.

Renard - I disagree with you on your claim of "brainwashing". If I share with you the idea, over and over and over again, that 6+2=8, it isn't brainwashing that takes place when you finally see the light of day and say "my god, you are right, it really is 8" but rather the facts of the matter that dictate the correct answer is 8 and it just took you a little longer to realize it.
 
The lower they go, the closer they get to re-birth.

Something different is going on here though. Instead of the usual ebb and flow of political parties, what we have is the minority party just diminishing further. I'm sure there will be a rebirth but it will require a significant transformation from the Republican Party. And for a group of people that fears change it will be a monumental task.
 
No buying that one.

But, on the rest of it, sure brainwashing works. My only question is why it took so many decades for the constant brainwashing it get to this point. Media and entertainment control is a powerful tool, thought we would have seen these kinds of numbers about 25 years ago frankly.

Actually he's 100% correct.

The only people that get brainwashed are the simple-minded. Specifically, someone like you.
 
No buying that one.

But, on the rest of it, sure brainwashing works. My only question is why it took so many decades for the constant brainwashing it get to this point. Media and entertainment control is a powerful tool, thought we would have seen these kinds of numbers about 25 years ago frankly.

Of course you're "no buying that one" (sic).

It doesn't fit The Narrative, so you summarily reject it.
 
Yeah and it's less than pennies on the dollar for them. And since its unlikely you are one of those 1%'ers, what are you bitching about?
Please read my post more carefully. Doesn't sound like I'm bitching at all. Don't you think it's great most of us get a free ride on the coattails of the greedy rich entertainers and athletes? They got that money from us anyway. Now we get some of it back!
 
No, seriously, America backs every single one of Obama's gun potential control measures without exception. Most even have support of Republicans. There aren't even any items that are close to a 50-50 split, just wide support for gun control.

http://www.people-press.org/files/2013/01/1-14-13-12.png

A ban an semi-automatic weapons? Seriously? That would include almost all firearms in production today. So how is that not a de facto ban on guns in general?
 
Please read my post more carefully. Doesn't sound like I'm bitching at all. Don't you think it's great most of us get a free ride on the coattails of the greedy rich entertainers and athletes? They got that money from us anyway. Now we get some of it back!

Why would someone try to read between the lines of your bitching? The first proof that you're bitching is you use the term greedy and if not greedy then evil. Very few people think that of the rich in general or of entertainers (athletes are entertainers you tool) in general. Maybe of those who are simply born rich and their greatest accomplishment was being the fast sperm their father had but even that isn't particularly prevalent in American culture.
 
She's spot on.

She does have a point:

Landrieu said it isn't discretionary spending that is causing huge deficits, but mandatory spending, which includes funding for Social Security and Medicare.

"It is mandatory spending that is rising rapidly because the 'greatest generation,' which gave us the greatest Nation the world has ever heard of, is aging, and they need hospice care, Social Security, and hospitals," Landrieu said. "If they want to cut them, go right ahead. I am going to be a little more gentle."

<snip>

Landrieu does have a point, though her initial comments drew some criticism on the Fox News website.

According to the conservative Heritage Foundation, federal entitlements are driving most of the federal spending growth, having increased from less than half of total federal outlays just 20 years ago to nearly 62 percent in 2012. Three major programs -- Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security -- dominate in size and growth, soaking up about 44 percent of the budget.

But spending on non defense discretionary spending has also increased by 29 percent since 2002, according to the Heritage Foundation.

Still, according to the Congressional Budget Office, federal outlays over the last three years grew at the slowest pace since Dwight Eisenhower was president.

But here's the kicker:

"As I have consistently stated based on the evidence readily available, neither our annual deficit or national debt can be eliminated by spending cuts alone," Landrieu said. "It will require a balanced approach that combines strategic reductions with increased revenues. Discretionary spending is not the culprit."

"And the record shows that over the last two years we reduced the discretionary budget by $1.5 trillion over 10 years. Before this cut, all revenues into the federal government as a percentage of the GDP were at the lowest level since before the Eisenhower Administration - 15.1 percent. In addition, of the deficit reduction that has already occurred, 72 percent has come from spending cuts, and only 28 percent from increased revenues. Is this a balanced approach? I don't think so."
 
- The Republican Party's approval rating drops to an all-time low of just 26% while 49% view them negatively.

- In contrast the Democratic party has a 44% approval rating with 35% disapproving.

- Furthermore, America strongly backs every single gun control measure Obama has put out there.

- Obama's approval rating is 53% positive 43% negative

- A laughable 6% of Americans have a "very favorable" view of the Republican party compared to 17% viewing Democrats that way

- Just 19% of Americans approve of how the Republican Party handled the fiscal negotiations.

- Hillary's approval rating is at 58% with only 25% disapproving. Her approval in her current job is at a staggering 69%.

- John Boehner has an 18% approval rating and a 37% disapproval rating.

- Harry Reid has a 16% approval rating but only 28% disapproval. Apparently America has no idea who he is.

- Pelosi has a 26% approval, 37% disapproval

- McConnel has a 12% approval rating, 22% disapproval

- The Tea Party has a 23% approval rating, 47% disapproval. That's is lowest rating ever.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/17/republican-party-approval-rating_n_2499934.html



So what does the Republican Party do? Re-elect Rience Priebus for RNC chair and give Boehner another two years... While also shitting on their most electable potential candidate Chris Christie. You guys have some dark times ahead. Very, very dark.

don't ever count them out. They are so good at propaganda.
 
The Republican Party is already dead to me. Not because its "too far right" but because its obviously going to try to do the Stephen Harper, David Cameron thing and get rid of any actual conservative or rightist policies, particularly on social issues. That's clear from what is coming from the party leaders.

The thing is, you don't win elections in the US with a third of the vote. Harper and Cameron operate in multi-party systems where they can win with little over 30% of the vote. The GOP thinks pushing away its base will be made up for by converts from the elusive fallen away "former Republican social liberal-fiscal conservatives"? Sorry, there is just not that many of them and they are a dwindling demographic despite the perception the media gives of them as some massive and growing group. The exit polling and election analysis simply doesn't show this group as more than a curiosity, and its shriking. Most social liberals are also fiscal liberals, and there are probably as many or more social conservative-fiscal liberals.

So, then try to get Hispanics and Asian-Americans? This presumes that the main reason they are going for the Democrats is because of immigration. Perhaps for Asian-Americans there is some truth to this, maybe. The recent surge of Asian-Americans to the Democrats simply hasn't been studied that much (to my knowledge) and it has many observers a bit surprise (a higher % of AA's voted for Obama in both 08 and 12 than Hispanics did according to exit polls). As far as Hispanics, however, unlike AA's this group has ALWAYS been about 2 to 1 Democratic and the recent swing is really not that great than what its always been. There is no reason to believe that these voters, who are often working class or lower income, would vote for Republicans simply because they come out for open borders or because they have candidates giving speeches in Spanish. Perhaps they actually support the Democrats on economic issues? Just a thought.

In short, the Republican Party cannot re-invent itself as Democrat light and expect to maintain enough of its base and peel off enough Democrat voters to win as Harper and Cameron do in their countries because we don't have a multi-party system. It won't work and will be the death knell of the Republican Party. If its not going to be a conservative party, especially on the social issues I and millions of others care about, I say "good riddence." Who cares.
 
Back
Top