If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Townhall)   When the country looks like California demographically, it will look like California politically. Republicans are not whistling past the graveyard. They are right at the entrance   (townhall.com) divider line 67
    More: Obvious, GOP, California, Bush I, Strom Thurmond, William Howard Taft, People's Republic of China, Prescott Bush, WTO  
•       •       •

1709 clicks; posted to Politics » on 09 Nov 2012 at 10:28 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



67 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-09 09:33:29 AM
Yep, it's going to get bad. If you guys want to leave now we won't stop you.
 
2012-11-09 09:36:34 AM
I was gonna say this is a surprisingly racist thing, even for Townhall, but then I saw who wrote it.
 
2012-11-09 09:42:39 AM
i1151.photobucket.com
You'd think they would have tired out by now.
 
2012-11-09 09:44:39 AM
Meh. I thought the Democratic party was in similar dire straits in 2004 and they recovered quite nicely. The GOP isn't going to go away, they are just going to have to come to terms with reality and change some things.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-11-09 09:48:18 AM

nekom: Meh. I thought the Democratic party was in similar dire straits in 2004 and they recovered quite nicely. The GOP isn't going to go away, they are just going to have to come to terms with reality and change some things.


Sure, they will do that eventually. The problem is that the realists are going to have to battle the tea-tards for control of the party.
 
2012-11-09 09:55:53 AM

vpb: The problem is that the realists are going to have to battle the tea-tards for control of the party.


Don't forget the Bible-Thumpers. They won't go quietly, either.
 
2012-11-09 09:59:22 AM
For a second, I thought he was making a good point, but then, in the second half, Pat Buchanan veered off the rails and went back to "THOSE DAMN BROWN FOLKS!" argument that he loves to make.
 
2012-11-09 10:29:30 AM
Pat Buchanan continues to be a racist. More at 11.
 
2012-11-09 10:32:15 AM
Unless the country makes it easier to engage in the direct democracy experiment California and other states have with their initiative process, we are not in danger of doing that.

Although in some respects we've looked like Cali for a while. Citizens want all the benefits and services, but no one wants to pay for them.
 
2012-11-09 10:33:45 AM

nekom: Meh. I thought the Democratic party was in similar dire straits in 2004 and they recovered quite nicely. The GOP isn't going to go away, they are just going to have to come to terms with reality and change some things.


In a party ran by pragmatic people that should be easy enough to do. So.... uhhhh... good luck, Republicans.
 
2012-11-09 10:34:44 AM

nekom: Meh. I thought the Democratic party was in similar dire straits in 2004 and they recovered quite nicely. The GOP isn't going to go away, they are just going to have to come to terms with reality and change some things.


I agree with you somewhat, but I will point out that both the 2000 and 2004 elections were decided by one state each time, whereas the last two elections were overwhelming electoral victories for the Dems. Of course they could still screw it up by picking a shiatty candidate in 2016 against a more centrist and popular Republican like Chris Christie, but it seems like the Dems have a lot more room to work with than the GOP.
 
2012-11-09 10:35:13 AM

St_Francis_P: vpb: The problem is that the realists are going to have to battle the tea-tards for control of the party.

Don't forget the Bible-Thumpers. They won't go quietly, either.


There may have been a difference in the beginning, but the Tea Party and Bible Thumpers overlap quite a bit.
 
2012-11-09 10:35:41 AM
Does he blame the Jews or the Browns? Or has he finally proven their nefarious nexus?
 
2012-11-09 10:35:46 AM
Screw America! I'll make my own country! With blackjack! And hookers! You know what? Forget the country.
 
2012-11-09 10:36:00 AM
California is now on its way to paying its bills (Prop 30 passed and Dems won a supermajority) because a greater proportion of brown people are voting.

Methinks this is not the argument Buchanan wants to delve into.
 
2012-11-09 10:37:29 AM
So they'll be obstructionist for decades, driving the country to bankruptcy, until America finally wises up and throws them into the dustbin of history?

/At least it won't take a supermajority to raise taxes here
 
2012-11-09 10:40:23 AM

nekom: Meh. I thought the Democratic party was in similar dire straits in 2004 and they recovered quite nicely. The GOP isn't going to go away, they are just going to have to come to terms with reality and change some things.


The GOP is finished either ideologically (if they do change) or politically (if they don't).

Here's why:

1) the GOP has no leadership or even a center anymore (other than Fox and Rush that is)
2) they are at least 4 years behind the DNC on how to run a modern election
3) there base is shrinking and the DNC base is growing (rapidly)
4) the lost two cohorts of the youth vote which to large extent will become lifelong Liberal voters now.

They are really farked. Latching the bad economy on Obama was their last Hail Mary pass and they knew it. If the economy takes off now, they are screwed. If they appear obstructionist now and the economy stagnates they are stills screwed because Obama isn't running again.
 
2012-11-09 10:41:08 AM
GOP's Hispanic problem

GOP's Hispanic problem

GOP's Hispanic problem


What is a synonym for problem? "Question." Yeah, I went there.
 
2012-11-09 10:41:55 AM
i1010.photobucket.com

The day after the election, I thought that Republican butthurt would start getting old quickly, but it hasn't. Each and every tantrum of impotent rage is more glorious than the last.
 
2012-11-09 10:44:38 AM
The nation has rejected your pathetic ideology. You were wrong about everything. And it's hilarious.
 
2012-11-09 10:45:10 AM

nekom: Meh. I thought the Democratic party was in similar dire straits in 2004 and they recovered quite nicely. The GOP isn't going to go away, they are just going to have to come to terms with reality and change some things.


2004 was a fark up for the Dems. Kerry (and the democratic establishment) ran on the "I'd do exactly the same thing Bush did, but we'd get different results."
As the old saying goes, when the choice is between a Republican and a guy who acts like a Republican, they'll choose the Republican every time.

When Mitt moved to the center during the first debate, he started gaining in the polls, and took the lead. If the GOP had any common sense they would realize that Mitts rejection of his previous 18 months of pandering to the base was the only thing keeping this election "close."
 
2012-11-09 10:45:11 AM

nekom: Meh. I thought the Democratic party was in similar dire straits in 2004 and they recovered quite nicely. The GOP isn't going to go away, they are just going to have to come to terms with reality and change some things.


By definition, the socially progressive party is going to adapt to changing times because part of their platform is that America needs to adapt to changing times. The conservative party's position is to deny or retard any adaptation and try to convince us that the change is for the worse and we should not adapt to it. So... don't be surprised when they're recalcitrant to accept change. There will be a lot of infighting.
 
2012-11-09 10:48:15 AM
Socially, go for it. Fiscally, California has an ugly habit of voting for "stuff," and against the means to pay for it.
 
2012-11-09 10:48:25 AM

flux: nekom: Meh. I thought the Democratic party was in similar dire straits in 2004 and they recovered quite nicely. The GOP isn't going to go away, they are just going to have to come to terms with reality and change some things.

By definition, the socially progressive party is going to adapt to changing times because part of their platform is that America needs to adapt to changing times. The conservative party's position is to deny or retard any adaptation and try to convince us that the change is for the worse and we should not adapt to it. So... don't be surprised when they're recalcitrant to accept change. There will be a lot of infighting.


This is basically right. Conservatism is, almost definitionally, an ideology of a fighting retreat. Conservatives are the Germans AFTER Stalingrad. It's been their perpetual state of being for a few centuries now. Fight, eventually lose, fall back, retrench, fight again, etc.
 
2012-11-09 10:53:29 AM

GoldSpider: Socially, go for it. Fiscally, California has an ugly habit of voting for "stuff," and against the means to pay for it.


Yeah, when they were mostly WASP. Not fair to blame Hispanics or Asians for that.
 
2012-11-09 10:53:42 AM
The real problem with the GOP in its current state, is they can now officially blame any occurrence on any one or any thing and the educationally desperate will run with the specious relationship.

This immunizes them from accountability and reality. So they'll go down dragging their heels, not looking for new answers.
 
2012-11-09 10:54:03 AM

HotWingConspiracy: nefarious nexus


Is he a drummer or a bass player?
 
2012-11-09 10:56:53 AM

GoldSpider: Socially, go for it. Fiscally, California has an ugly habit of voting for "stuff," and against the means to pay for it.


That may have ended. California's Republicans insisted on a tyranny-of-the-minority, gridlock-for-all form of governance. Now the Democrats have a supermajority.
 
2012-11-09 11:02:01 AM
WE GET IT. HE'S BLACK.
 
2012-11-09 11:02:29 AM

Notabunny: GoldSpider: Socially, go for it. Fiscally, California has an ugly habit of voting for "stuff," and against the means to pay for it.

That may have ended. California's Republicans insisted on a tyranny-of-the-minority, gridlock-for-all form of governance. Now the Democrats have a supermajority.


so it will now take twice as many democrats to roll over in the face of opposition? not a problem.
 
2012-11-09 11:02:33 AM
When the rest of the country looks like California, places like South Carolina will have become the white version of Bangladesh. I encourage all those hyper-white states to secede and regress to the 18th century, and allow the rest of us to get on with things.
 
2012-11-09 11:03:03 AM

Arkanaut: nekom: Meh. I thought the Democratic party was in similar dire straits in 2004 and they recovered quite nicely. The GOP isn't going to go away, they are just going to have to come to terms with reality and change some things.

I agree with you somewhat, but I will point out that both the 2000 and 2004 elections were decided by one state each time, whereas the last two elections were overwhelming electoral victories for the Dems. Of course they could still screw it up by picking a shiatty candidate in 2016 against a more centrist and popular Republican like Chris Christie, but it seems like the Dems have a lot more room to work with than the GOP.


Well, I have a hard time imagining Joe Biden not making a run for the White House in 2016, and I'm not really sure how that would work out for the Democrats.
 
2012-11-09 11:07:06 AM
The messed up thing is the self styled social conservative Christians are really social extremist. Even the Catholic Church is now tolerating condoms for some purposes, and the Evangelical aren't even close to say the Unitarians. The dirty secret at the end of the day is Christianity has gotten more liberal. Odds are you can still build a party with some Christian rhetoric and do well, the deal it is needs to be mainstream Christian rhetoric.

As an atheist, I for example am not going to be scared by a Unitarian talking about Christian values or how racism is wrong because Jesus wouldn't like that. I have no issues with that kind of talk coming from my party camp. However once legitimate rape starts being argued over, I leave for another party.
 
2012-11-09 11:07:16 AM
They still don't get it.
 
2012-11-09 11:07:38 AM
Anybody who thinks California is the nightmare future while Mississippi or some other GOP-dominated shiathole is being run the right way is not worth listening to.

And anyway, most of California's fiscal problems can be traced to Proposition 13, which Republicans LOVE.
 
2012-11-09 11:07:47 AM

GoldSpider: Socially, go for it. Fiscally, California has an ugly habit of voting for "stuff," and against the means to pay for it.


Yup. Does the country have this problem? Do we keep voting for things nationally without a means to pay for it? I mean, besides the GOP obstructing Obama so he can't do what we want, like closing Gitmo. But that's different from the actual voters voting yes on a new project and voting no on new taxes to pay for it.

/We're kinda stupid out here in California.
//I blame the hillbillies.
 
2012-11-09 11:12:02 AM

DamnYankees: This is basically right. Conservatism is, almost definitionally, an ideology of a fighting retreat. Conservatives are the Germans AFTER Stalingrad. It's been their perpetual state of being for a few centuries now. Fight, eventually lose, fall back, retrench, fight again, etc.


Exactly. Which is why, ideally, I'd like to see a left-of-center progressive party and a right-of-center conservative party, working together to achieve a balance. You know, instead of one party doing all the grown-up work in the political center while trying to convince economic and religious fundamentalists not to kill any hostages.
 
2012-11-09 11:15:10 AM

dumbobruni: Notabunny: GoldSpider: Socially, go for it. Fiscally, California has an ugly habit of voting for "stuff," and against the means to pay for it.

That may have ended. California's Republicans insisted on a tyranny-of-the-minority, gridlock-for-all form of governance. Now the Democrats have a supermajority.

so it will now take twice as many democrats to roll over in the face of opposition? not a problem.


Well, yeah, essentially
 
2012-11-09 11:20:39 AM

Arkanaut: nekom: Meh. I thought the Democratic party was in similar dire straits in 2004 and they recovered quite nicely. The GOP isn't going to go away, they are just going to have to come to terms with reality and change some things.

I agree with you somewhat, but I will point out that both the 2000 and 2004 elections were decided by one state each time, whereas the last two elections were overwhelming electoral victories for the Dems. Of course they could still screw it up by picking a shiatty candidate in 2016 against a more centrist and popular Republican like Chris Christie, but it seems like the Dems have a lot more room to work with than the GOP.


The Republican Party would have to change significantly between now and 2016 for a more centrist candidate like Christie to win the nomination. I'd be pleased if that happened, but I'm not holding my breath. There's at least an equal chamce they'll nominate one of true believers like Bachmann, Santorum, Ryan or Cantor.
 
2012-11-09 11:21:37 AM

nekom: Meh. I thought the Democratic party was in similar dire straits in 2004 and they recovered quite nicely. The GOP isn't going to go away, they are just going to have to come to terms with reality and change some things.


I agree, but it's not going to be easy for them.

The Democrats had a hard time jettisoning the radical elements out of their party, but they have the advantage that their entire ethos is based on the notion that change can be positive. The Republicans have the same task, but their core principles insist that tradition and opposing changes are important values.

I think that it's going to be intrinsically harder for Republicans to became pragmatists, especially after they've already purged their roles of moderates. I think that it's going to be a long, hard walk through the wilderness before they find their way again.

I (sincerely) can't wait. A healthy democracy needs more than one voice, but you can't have outright crazy as an option, either.
 
2012-11-09 11:25:08 AM
Where are the Fark Independents? Seriously, it's been, what, two days?.
 
2012-11-09 11:31:02 AM

nekom: Meh. I thought the Democratic party was in similar dire straits in 2004 and they recovered quite nicely. The GOP isn't going to go away, they are just going to have to come to terms with reality and change some things.


Nah, in 2004, the primary voters picked the dumbass out of touch rich guy who voted for the Iraq war (Kerry) over a guy who happened to yell in the mic one time, shouting over the crowd although his mic was aimed at just himself (Dean). Dean probably would have won that election if he was the nominee, and he probably would have been the nominee if it wasn't for that stupid incident.

In 2012, the primary voters picked the dumbass out of touch rich guy who had his own version of "Obamacare"...over ten guys who were worse. Of course, Huntsman might have won (so I guess he's Dean in this sceneraio), but Perry, Cain, Gingrich, Santorum, Bachmann, and the other idiots I'm forgetting would have done much worse than Romney.

Plus, the long term demographic trends favor the Democrats, as good old racist Buchanan pointed out. And, as he also pointed out, they aren't going to come to touch with reality and tone down the anti-immigration stuff, because people like Buchanan won't let them. They won't go away; they will simply shrink to irrelavence.

Now, it might take awhile in the House, due to gerrymandering, the power of incumbency, and the fact that there will always be lots of rural areas with few minorities, although the Dems held the House from 2006 through 2010 so they can take it back (although they were doing better with white people when that happened). But it seems clear that the majority of state-wide races (including the Presidency) will go Democratic probably from now on.
 
2012-11-09 11:31:52 AM

Some 'Splainin' To Do: I (sincerely) can't wait. A healthy democracy needs more than one voice, but you can't have outright crazy as an option, either.


Indeed. I look forward to the day when deciding which party sucks less will require some actual thought. From the very moment Romney took the stage, I never once had a notion that I was going to vote for him. I hope in the future, I'll see a Republican run and at least be able to say "Well, maybe. Let's hear him out."
 
2012-11-09 11:33:56 AM
Pat Buchanan making sense? Holy shiat. I think my head just exploded.

highfivetothat.files.wordpress.com
 
2012-11-09 11:36:23 AM

Komplex: nekom: Meh. I thought the Democratic party was in similar dire straits in 2004 and they recovered quite nicely. The GOP isn't going to go away, they are just going to have to come to terms with reality and change some things.

2004 was a fark up for the Dems. Kerry (and the democratic establishment) ran on the "I'd do exactly the same thing Bush did, but we'd get different results."
As the old saying goes, when the choice is between a Republican and a guy who acts like a Republican, they'll choose the Republican every time.

When Mitt moved to the center during the first debate, he started gaining in the polls, and took the lead. If the GOP had any common sense they would realize that Mitts rejection of his previous 18 months of pandering to the base was the only thing keeping this election "close."


I dunno. In all of the debates, Romney made that same argument-"I'd do exactly the same thing Obama did, but we'd get different results"-especially in the third debate. When the choice is between a Democrat and a guy who acts like a Democrat, they'll choose the Democrat every time.

That's not saying that moving to the right will help them either, although they will try to convince themselves of that. Basically, the demographics of fewer white people in the country means the Republicans are farked no matter what they do.
 
2012-11-09 11:41:35 AM

PeppaJack: Arkanaut: nekom: Meh. I thought the Democratic party was in similar dire straits in 2004 and they recovered quite nicely. The GOP isn't going to go away, they are just going to have to come to terms with reality and change some things.

I agree with you somewhat, but I will point out that both the 2000 and 2004 elections were decided by one state each time, whereas the last two elections were overwhelming electoral victories for the Dems. Of course they could still screw it up by picking a shiatty candidate in 2016 against a more centrist and popular Republican like Chris Christie, but it seems like the Dems have a lot more room to work with than the GOP.

Well, I have a hard time imagining Joe Biden not making a run for the White House in 2016, and I'm not really sure how that would work out for the Democrats.


Yeah, but he turns 70 this year (in just 11 days, in fact), so he'll be 74 in 2016.
 
2012-11-09 11:45:07 AM

mksmith: When the rest of the country looks like California, places like South Carolina will have become the white version of Bangladesh. I encourage all those hyper-white states to secede and regress to the 18th century, and allow the rest of us to get on with things.


Interestingly, if you take the data from the election, Obama did better in the South than he did in the Midwest-because the South is less white than the Midwest.

Here are the states that Obama lost by the least (in order of closest vote totals to farther): North Carolina, Georgia, Missouri, Indiana, South Carolina, Arizona, Mississippi. Many of these states have a large black population and a small but growing Hispanic population.

Here are the states that Obama lost by the most (in order of farest vote total to closest): Utah, Wyoming, Oklahoma, Idaho, West Virginia, Arkansas, Nebraska, Kentucky.
 
2012-11-09 11:47:51 AM
Much/all of the social changes people push for always happens, so to me those points are kind of moot. Dems are relentless, and Cons can only hold back water for so long until their levees break away.

Fiscally, what are we supposed to do? What part of Prop 30 addresses spending in California? You can only raise taxes so far--how much are we going to shrink deficit spending? Even allowing that tax increases are inevitable, increases alone won't fix the national debt and future deficits.
 
2012-11-09 11:50:37 AM
 
2012-11-09 11:52:47 AM

GoldSpider: Socially, go for it. Fiscally, California has an ugly habit of voting for "stuff," and against the means to pay for it.


In the past, this was true, but we voted to pay for it in this election. Specifically, Propositions 30 and 39 both passed, both which raise taxes (30 by 6 billion a year and 39 by 1 billion, IIRC). Proposition 36 also passed, which weakens the Three Strikes law, saving the state money (a hundred million or so each year).

Oddly, Proposition 34 failed, which would have eliminated the death penalty and saved the state more money, which seems contradictory to Proposition 36 passing.
 
Displayed 50 of 67 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report