The GOP Apparently Learns Nothing At All From the 2012 Election.

Is it possible to be simultaneously "surprised" and "not surprised" at the same time?

After losing more or less ALL of the "swing" states and/or districts that could have gone either way last election...it seems the GOP's strategy is to go double-down on the same ideologies that cost them dearly at the polls. Since the election, the right-wing political/media establishment has:

1. Decided that Jim DeMint ought to be in control of the conservative "think" tank The Heritage Foundation.

2. Figured it was a good idea to pass the most draconian anti-union laws the country has ever seen in Michigan...and going back on campaign promises only weeks after re-election in the process.

3. Continue to consider science a "taboo" subject as even Marco Rubio, (whom I consider one of the more sane Republicans these days) going on record as saying he's not sure whether or not the "young earth" concept from the bible is scientifically sound or not.

4. Was caught red-handed misrepresenting what was rumored to be an unprovoked "attack by a union thug" in MI by inadvertently playing the UNEDITED version of the video on Hannity which shows that the union member in MI was attacked FIRST and responded by defending himself....despite Mitt Romney being awarded "Lie of the Year" just two days earlier.

5. Slathers the front page of Drudge with the "N-word".

6. At least one judge in CA felt that Todd Akin wasn't being "tough" enough on rape victims.

7. John Boehner comes out and blatantly states that he will intentionally sabotage the legislative process if the Senate follows all rules, procedures, and the US Constitution to change some of procedural rules on the first day the Senate reconvenes....apparently unaware of the great deal of respect which Chris Christie garnered from the right AND the left for not being completely obnoxious and just learning how to work with other people just like a big boy does.

It's....somehow both mind-boggling and what I completely expected at the same time.

Are they just suicidal? What gives?

Links below if anyone is still unfamiliar w/ these stories.

www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...
jezebel.com...'-johnson/
www.youtube.com...

Figured it was a good idea to pass the most draconian anti-union laws the country has ever seen in Michigan...and going back on campaign promises only weeks after re-election in the process.

Yes Yes people having a choice to join a union or not is truly "draconian".

Apparently some people haven't figured out they won even tho this country is sure as hell lost to anti liberalism.

Originally posted by neo96

Figured it was a good idea to pass the most draconian anti-union laws the country has ever seen in Michigan...and going back on campaign promises only weeks after re-election in the process.

Yes Yes people having a choice to join a union or not is truly "draconian".

Apparently some people haven't figured out they won even tho this country is sure as hell lost to anti liberalism.

Indeed.... I never thought of the Right to Work laws as draconian. Quite the opposite. I would think being FORCED to join a Union just to get or keep a job was a bit draconian. I wonder, if a hard right leaning Union (if there was such a bird) were telling folk 'You WILL join our Union and you WILL pay us dues to support our right leaning politics or you WILL NOT work here' ......would it be seen quite the same way? I imagine it may not be. Of course, I don't suppose we'll know. I can't come up with an example that could be used.

reply to post by milominderbinder

Democrats insult, degrade, and condem republicans, and expect them to listen to democrats? Oh and it seems you missed the part where that union member was tearing down a tent with people inside. I think that reporter was quite restrained. Personally I would have done a lot of damage to that union member or anyone else who was attacking women. Of course though I am not a democrat and I do not pick on people who can not fight back.

Since you brought it up lets hear it. You ARE FOR attacking women inside tents right? By a group of men hiding on the outside? That is OK right? RIGHT? To me they are scum. For defending men who cowardly attack people in a tent who can not defend themselves, what does that make you? I am tired of being polite to cowards who pick on people who can not defend themselves.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


10 years in a union Teamster local 89 never was I given the choice if i wanted the job I had to be union.

No choice in the matter of paying dues, if a person gets sick or hurt they pay those dues until they are caught up every single paycheck until current.

Next up is the class warfare within from which the best jobs go to high seniority, the worse jobs go to the new hires.

If a person did not have senority they were less than nothing.

I wish I would have had the choice, today I am glad in 25 states a person now has that choice.

Republicans just need to fall in line with the Democrat party, the MSM and Hollywood! Whatever they say, must be the right course of action! One party/propaganda media rule! Woooo!

It all comes down to who they anoint in 2016. If it's some big government douchebag RINO like Christie or something, it'll be clear they learned nothing from the Romney fiasco.

Although some may believe it to be a little early in his career, I honestly hope Rand runs. He could seriously pull it off given how much more support he has in the mainstream than his dad.

Originally posted by neo96

Figured it was a good idea to pass the most draconian anti-union laws the country has ever seen in Michigan...and going back on campaign promises only weeks after re-election in the process.

Yes Yes people having a choice to join a union or not is truly "draconian".

Apparently some people haven't figured out they won even tho this country is sure as hell lost to anti liberalism.

Good job missing the entire point...kind of like the Republicans did last election cycle.

You chose to fixate on one word, of one item in the post...and ignored the fact that the Republicans just keep alienating and ticking off every possible demographic except who isn't a white, rural, evangelical christian baby boomer male who doesn't work in a skilled trade or the majority of government positions.

Mighty small pool of voters...wouldn't you say?

By the way...if unions are so bad and "forcing" people to do these things they don't want to...how come you never see a couple of hundred thousand union workers protesting to DEMAND that they STOP paying their union dues?

I have a Master's degree in History...and I cannot recall a single event of that sort in all of human history in ANY country. But feel free to cite one if you happen to know of one....maybe I missed something.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000

Originally posted by neo96

Figured it was a good idea to pass the most draconian anti-union laws the country has ever seen in Michigan...and going back on campaign promises only weeks after re-election in the process.

Yes Yes people having a choice to join a union or not is truly "draconian".

Apparently some people haven't figured out they won even tho this country is sure as hell lost to anti liberalism.

Indeed.... I never thought of the Right to Work laws as draconian. Quite the opposite. I would think being FORCED to join a Union just to get or keep a job was a bit draconian. I wonder, if a hard right leaning Union (if there was such a bird) were telling folk 'You WILL join our Union and you WILL pay us dues to support our right leaning politics or you WILL NOT work here' ......would it be seen quite the same way? I imagine it may not be. Of course, I don't suppose we'll know. I can't come up with an example that could be used.

Once again....missing the whole message of the message of the post.

In a strictly electoral sense...can the GOP afford to tick off even 1 more person in the whole country? They seem to be a bit short of friends these days...and the one's they DO HAVE sure do tend to have a whole lot of gray hair.

By the way...if unions are sooo "evil" for "forcing" people to pay them money...how come you never see a bunch of union members protesting their union dues? The protests ONLY seem to come when legislative efforts are taken to undermine or weaken the unions in one manner or another.

It's just weird...I keep hearing all these right-wingers talk about how "oppressive" it is to pay their union dues...but I never, EVER hear anybody who is ACTUALLY IN A UNION complain or whine about them. What's up with that?

reply to post by milominderbinder


The GOP is mired in the past where women are supposed to be subservient to men, minorities should know their place and if you don't bow down to their leader Rush Limbaugh, then you must be liberal scum.

The GOP also thinks that an agenda of opposing the left at everyturn, even if it is good for the country, is an appropriate strategy.

Moderates, women and minorities will just refuse to vote for conservative control freaks. The GOP has pretty much made itself into a party of losers and they refuse to change. Maybe that's a good thing.....

Originally posted by Jerk_Idiot
reply to post by milominderbinder

 

Democrats insult, degrade, and condem republicans, and expect them to listen to democrats?

How would I know? I'm not a democrat. But the point is kind of irrelevant isn't it? Every state or district that was destined to be a deciding factor in the last election went to the Dems because the GOP pissed off too many people. Doesn't common sense just kinda dictate now would be a good time to not push through your oppositions most hated legislative efforts? You NEED people who voted Democrat last time to vote Republican next time to get your guy in...how does all the negative PR of having your state capital building taken over by infuriated people further that goal?

It's just dumb.

Oh and it seems you missed the part where that union member was tearing down a tent with people inside. I think that reporter was quite restrained.

What does that have to do with the GOP political strategy? You are trying to excuse the extremely poor political strategy of alienating the majority of the population by pointing to the actions of a single nobody individual. That would be the material equivalent of blaming John Boehner for the kid that went nuts in Connecticut today. The two have nothing to do with one another.

Personally I would have done a lot of damage to that union member or anyone else who was attacking women. Of course though I am not a democrat and I do not pick on people who can not fight back.

Go get 'em, cowboy. My personal experience is that people who shoot their mouth off about how tough they think they are usually wind up needing dental work.

Since you brought it up lets hear it. You ARE FOR attacking women inside tents right?

I didn't bring it up. You're off-topic. You are doing the same thing the other guys did. The question posed is regarding whether or not the GOP is INTENTIONALLY trying to render themselves irrelevant...or if they honestly don't realize that they are doing it. By the way all of the respondents thus far have ignored the main message of the GOP seemingly intent on making sure they alienate the majority of the country....I'm guessing the answer is that it's not so much a suicidal behavior as much as it is as simply not being aware that people have to actually like you in order to win elections.

By a group of men hiding on the outside? That is OK right? RIGHT? To me they are scum. For defending men who cowardly attack people in a tent who can not defend themselves, what does that make you?

Huh? Are you off your meds? How do you turn a thread about political strategy into woman-beating?

I am tired of being polite to cowards who pick on people who can not defend themselves.

Well...be sure to let Bush & Cheney know that. The 1,000,000-ish innocent civilians that died in those two pointless wars they started never stood a chance.

Originally posted by PvtHudson
Republicans just need to fall in line with the Democrat party, the MSM and Hollywood! Whatever they say, must be the right course of action! One party/propaganda media rule! Woooo!

edit on 14-12-2012 by PvtHudson because: (no reason given)

Actually...they need to win elections, don't they? Isn't that the central goal of a political party...to win elections?

Originally posted by olaru12
reply to post by milominderbinder

 

The GOP is mired in the past where women are supposed to be subservient to men, minorities should know their place and if you don't bow down to their leader Rush Limbaugh, then you must be liberal scum.

The GOP also thinks that an agenda of opposing the left at everyturn, even if it is good for the country, is an appropriate strategy.

Moderates, women and minorities will just refuse to vote for conservative control freaks. The GOP has pretty much made itself into a party of losers and they refuse to change. Maybe that's a good thing.....

I agree 100%.

I find it amusing that thus far so many right-wingers have tried changing the subject instead of answering the question or contributing in a meaningful way.

Originally posted by SilentKoala
It all comes down to who they anoint in 2016. If it's some big government douchebag RINO like Christie or something, it'll be clear they learned nothing from the Romney fiasco.

Although some may believe it to be a little early in his career, I honestly hope Rand runs. He could seriously pull it off given how much more support he has in the mainstream than his dad.

You think? I voted for Ron Paul in the primary...but I personally consider Rand to be largely clown-like. Sort of a parody of his father.

I could see myself supporting Rubio...but not if he keeps pandering to the lowest common denominator in his party. I lost a lot of respect for him with "Gee...maybe the earth WAS created in only 7 days" comment. Everybody gets the occasional free pass in my book for saying something dumb once in awhile...but 2 or 3 more comments like that I'll write him off for dead too.

Time will tell...it WILL ge amusing though..