Posted on Dec 19, 2015
Does The GOP Have A Winning Formula for 2016?
5.15K
28
27
6
6
0
http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/263742-mcconnell-warns-gop-voters-we-need-candidates-who-can-win
I was reading this article and honestly it was something I didn't expect to hear from the GOP at all, especially one of the leaders.
As I read though this, McConnell made mention of 2014 Congressional candidates Christine O’Donnell, Sharron Angles, Richard Mourdocks, and Todd Akins, people who saw their political aspirations go up in smoke after making severe political missteps.
My question is honest and not rhetorical. What does the GOP have to do to win when it counts? Even in the upcoming presidential campaign, their are far too many people that are long on rhetoric and finger-pointing and short on plans of execution or how to get our country back on track.
So, does the GOP have a winning formula or are they all sizzle and no steak?
I was reading this article and honestly it was something I didn't expect to hear from the GOP at all, especially one of the leaders.
As I read though this, McConnell made mention of 2014 Congressional candidates Christine O’Donnell, Sharron Angles, Richard Mourdocks, and Todd Akins, people who saw their political aspirations go up in smoke after making severe political missteps.
My question is honest and not rhetorical. What does the GOP have to do to win when it counts? Even in the upcoming presidential campaign, their are far too many people that are long on rhetoric and finger-pointing and short on plans of execution or how to get our country back on track.
So, does the GOP have a winning formula or are they all sizzle and no steak?
Politics
Republicans
Election 2016
Posted 10 y ago
Responses: 10
6
6
0
In my opinion, the GOP has to decide what the GOP is. Currently, you have the traditional Conservatives, the Tea Party, the New Conservatives, the Libertarians, and numerous individual small sects, all of which are calling themselves Republicans. Chaos in the party will create a continuous cycle of chaos. They need to clean their house and stand as one if they expect to beat the Democrats. Get ready for another four years of Democratic President if they can't.
(6)
(0)
3
3
0
Which GOP are we talking about: The one that purports to represent conservatism or the one caves to the whims of the progressive Democrats? I fully expect the GOP to fail in its bid to take the White House next year and may even lose one or both chambers of Congress in the bargain. The Omnibus Budget Bill just passed was not the final nail in the GOP coffin, it was a vault lid and several tons of dirt being dumped on it all at once.
(3)
(0)
CPT Jack Durish
SSG Michael Hartsfield - That's a very good question and I suspect that you would receive as many different answers as Republicans who responded to it. However, if you dug down you'd find a (small-L) libertarian at the heart of all of them. Republicans are traditional liberals - bound to support individual liberty. Their focus may be on different liberties (speech, religion, assembly, bear arms, due process) depending on their life experiences. Republicans are conservatives - wanting to conserve/preserve individual liberties. Interestingly, you find the same diversity of opinion if you ask Democrats what their core principles are, however, you won't find that same common thread among them that you find among Republicans. Keep in mind (before you give me a knee-jerk response to that last statement) that the Democratic Party intentionally created this oleo of opinions when it set out to create the Rainbow Coalition (their words, not mine). They have successfully formed an alliance of many diverse groups including some that have opposing views, to build a voting block of substantial size.
(0)
(0)
SSG Michael Hartsfield
CPT Jack Durish Isn't that what the GOP is attempting to do now? Aren't they attempting to bring together those same diverse groups to counter the Democratic voting block? Also, couldn't it be that Democrats succeeded in this because they turned away from being a party of exclusion (Democrats by and large were Segregationists, especially in the South) into a party of inclusion?
(0)
(0)
CPT Jack Durish
SSG Michael Hartsfield - Oh, you're talking about the "other" GOP. The Establishment GOP. I don't have a clue as to what principles they avow. Sadly, it appears that the Left has inculcated themselves into the leadership of both parties. Both want to spend tax revenues with all the restraint of drunken sailors on shore leave in a bawdy port. Both want to treat Americans as irresponsible children in need of parental control. Yes, the Democrats were by and large Segregationists, even worse, slave masters, while Republicans were the party formed to end slavery and it was the GOP that was primarily responsible for passage of the Civil Rights Act while leading Democrats such as John Kennedy fought it. But, that was then, this is now...)
(0)
(0)
SSG Michael Hartsfield
Ummm... JFK didn't fight against the Civil Rights Act. In fact, "the bill was called for by President John F. Kennedy in his civil rights speech of June 11, 1963, in which he asked for legislation "giving all Americans the right to be served in facilities which are open to the public—hotels, restaurants, theaters, retail stores, and similar establishments", as well as "greater protection for the right to vote"."
Where and how did he fight against that?
Also how, if the GOP is following in the footsteps of William F. Buckley, are all of the current factions of fighting so hard against each other? Shouldn't the one principle Buckley used to stimulate the Conservative movement be a rallying point for all Republicans to build upon?
Where and how did he fight against that?
Also how, if the GOP is following in the footsteps of William F. Buckley, are all of the current factions of fighting so hard against each other? Shouldn't the one principle Buckley used to stimulate the Conservative movement be a rallying point for all Republicans to build upon?
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
I don't think they have a winning formula when Trump is the front-runner and all the debates seem to center around who is more afraid of Muslims.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
No.I'm voting Dem.With that said I would like to see Honor brought back to our election process,and the Presidency,that the current Republican Candidates have made us all a laughing stock in the world.Which I personally think is a National Security Threat.There is one combination that could fix that and bring Honor back plus, give the Democrats a run.Why am I saying this,am I helping Republicans,No.But Nation Security is at risk when we don't produce Capable leaders on both sides,we show weakness at the highest levels.
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
They have yet to clearly communicate what they are going to do if elected. When they have, they have not done what they said they'd do - that is a losing formula if there ever was one.
When they have clearly communicated, such as the "contract with America", they didn't just win, they won handily.
When they have clearly communicated, such as the "contract with America", they didn't just win, they won handily.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
The GOP does not have a winning formula. In fact, the GOP had made itself irrelevant by making themselves, in many ways, indistinguishable from the Democrats. People mad as well just vote for the Democrats and avoid all the Phony Republican drama.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Find and offer up some candidates who are "real people" - successful business and military leaders - as candidates, not another collection of recycled "career politicians." I do not wish to vote for anybody whose resume includes "Senator," "Representative," "Governor" or "Secretary." Those people have proven themselves UNSUCCESSFUL already - it would be like sending people who failed basic training to do special operations work!
(1)
(0)
That's a winning formula for both parties. Nominate someone too extreme, and you'll lose. Nominate someone more mainstream, and you'll win. It's the extremists on either side who doom their own party by pushing for strict adherence to ideology.
(1)
(0)
Cpl (Join to see)
LTC Kevin B. I agree with your romney assessment, but mccain, he has a history of compromising with the democrats. mccain's anti-torture stance aped the Ds, mccain feingold, mccain lieberman, gang of 14. Lest we forget, it was mccain who cut a deal with the Ds on the filibuster rules when reid was the minority leader. Compromise for the sake of compromise is not leadership, it's weakness.
(0)
(0)
LTC Kevin B.
Cpl (Join to see) - I don't disagree with your assessments of what McCain has done along the way, as well as whether or not those things make him a moderate. My point was just that the circumstances of the 2008 election meant that anyone more conservative probably would have lost by an even larger margin. The country, at that time, was ready for a significant shift away from the conservative policies. Remember, the WH, House, and Senate were all controlled by Democrats after that election. Do you really think a more conservative candidate would have bucked that trend? I don't.
(0)
(0)
Cpl (Join to see)
Personally, LTC Kevin B. I didn't vote for mccain, i voted against bo, and i felt used by the gop. It was the rnc who changed the delegate rules during the primary convention ensuring a true conservative wasn't nominated. Since then I've read Washington's farewell address several times, realizing that party is the problem we face today.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
In my opinion, GOP is gearing for loosing. They will rather lose the election if a candidate that will turn their table over win the primary .... They can accept a true conservative candidate, if and only if such candidate will play ball with them. If they believe such candidate will not ... they will plan for letting Hillary win, because Hillary will at least play ball with them.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google