View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Wed Apr 23, 2014 11:28 pm



Reply to topic  [ 34 posts ] 
 What is the post-election Republican strategy? 
Author Message
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:59 am
Posts: 20220
Location: Miami, FL
Post What is the post-election Republican strategy?
Quote:
In an interview with National Journal out this week, Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell was asked what his party's main political job will be after next week's election. He gave a surprisingly stark answer: "The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president."


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... NewsSecond

If the endgame here is to simply get Obama replaced in 2012, the Republicans won't get the job done.

I hope this is just redmeat rhetoric and not the actual strategy. While we have near 10% unemployment and record deficits, I would hope the party that is about to be handed the gavel of the House understands they are being handed that gavel to:

1. Put the brakes on the direction Obama and congressional Democrats have taken the country

2. Propose serious solutions that will help create private sector jobs and streamline the government

3. Have achievements to run on as a national party other than "let's get rid of Obama"

The fact of the matter is that while voters are angry at Washington and unhappy with Obama's performance, they still for the most part personally like the President. And I am sure people want to see both parties work toward improving the economy and balancing our budget.

Getting the gavel with the end result in mind of getting rid of Obama would show the Republican Party is not all that different from the Democrat Party, a mechanism trying to consume power rather then serve the people.

_________________
Image


Fri Oct 29, 2010 4:41 am
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 2:05 pm
Posts: 2426
Location: NSW, Australia
Post Re: What is the post-election Republican strategy?
Getting rid of Obama would obviously mean that the Republicans get back in power and can attempt to move forward with their agenda. But I agree with you Rich, the agenda should be the main goal. Your #2 point is what I would REALLY like to see.


Fri Oct 29, 2010 5:31 am
Profile
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:10 pm
Posts: 5286
Location: Topsfield, MA
Post Re: What is the post-election Republican strategy?
The problem is that Obama is the road block to the solutions. To overcome his veto would be nearly impossible unless there is some sort of landslide on Tuesday.

But its true, you can't just run an anti-Obama agenda and point fingers. The Democrats spent their first few years in power blaming Bush. It only resonated with their base and left independents feeling dissatisfied.

Republicans need to outline what they want, try to push it through, and if Obama vetoes it they have a clear message of what the solution is and why it is not being implemented. Then Obama is voted out.

The Republicans need to start searching for someone with enough intelligence/charisma/solid resume to challenge Obama in 2012 because Palin, Gingrich and probably Romney just aren't going to cut it.


Fri Oct 29, 2010 6:33 am
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 2:05 pm
Posts: 2426
Location: NSW, Australia
Post Re: What is the post-election Republican strategy?
jammer wrote:
The Republicans need to start searching for someone with enough intelligence/charisma/solid resume to challenge Obama in 2012 because Palin, Gingrich and probably Romney just aren't going to cut it.


Having Palin as the candidate in 2012 will ensure Obama gets re-elected.


Fri Oct 29, 2010 7:03 am
Profile
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:10 pm
Posts: 5286
Location: Topsfield, MA
Post Re: What is the post-election Republican strategy?
degs wrote:
jammer wrote:
The Republicans need to start searching for someone with enough intelligence/charisma/solid resume to challenge Obama in 2012 because Palin, Gingrich and probably Romney just aren't going to cut it.


Having Palin as the candidate in 2012 will ensure Obama gets re-elected.


Having Palin as the candidate might get Michael Moore elected if he chose to run.


Fri Oct 29, 2010 10:15 am
Profile
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:59 am
Posts: 20220
Location: Miami, FL
Post Re: What is the post-election Republican strategy?
jammer wrote:
The Republicans need to start searching for someone with enough intelligence/charisma/solid resume to challenge Obama in 2012 because Palin, Gingrich and probably Romney just aren't going to cut it.

Then I hope Christine O'Donnell steps up.

Why don't you think Romney or Gingrich won't cut it?

From an ideas and debate perspective, I think Gingrich could run circles around Obama.

And Romney has the business background to instill confidence in his economic ideas.

Not that I support either guy, but just curious why those two are in the same sentence as Palin? I'm not seeing it.

_________________
Image


Fri Oct 29, 2010 1:09 pm
Profile
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:59 am
Posts: 20220
Location: Miami, FL
Post Re: What is the post-election Republican strategy?
degs wrote:
Getting rid of Obama would obviously mean that the Republicans get back in power and can attempt to move forward with their agenda.

Yup, but they can't put the cart before the horse.

Besides, I just read the Democrat Party is already vetting 9 potential challengers to Obama in the presidential primaries.

My how fast he has sunken.

_________________
Image


Fri Oct 29, 2010 1:10 pm
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 2:05 pm
Posts: 2426
Location: NSW, Australia
Post Re: What is the post-election Republican strategy?
Rich wrote:
Yup, but they can't put the cart before the horse.


Which is why I said "But I agree with you Rich, the agenda should be the main goal...."

He has sunk fast. Not a huge surprise. He promised the impossible. 21 months isn't a long time for him to do a lot, but people are starting to realize that in the end, he's nothing more than just another politician.


Fri Oct 29, 2010 1:42 pm
Profile
Phinfever Owner/Admin
Phinfever Owner/Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:41 am
Posts: 8032
Location: Raleigh, NC
Post Re: What is the post-election Republican strategy?
Rich wrote:
"The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president."


That doesn't inspire me.

As far as Palin, I like her. As president? Not sure about that, but she isn't as dumb as the media likes to make her out to be.

_________________
Phinfever Facebook

Image


Download the Free Phinfever Browser Toolbar

Image


Fri Oct 29, 2010 2:15 pm
Profile WWW
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:10 pm
Posts: 5286
Location: Topsfield, MA
Post Re: What is the post-election Republican strategy?
Rich wrote:
jammer wrote:
The Republicans need to start searching for someone with enough intelligence/charisma/solid resume to challenge Obama in 2012 because Palin, Gingrich and probably Romney just aren't going to cut it.

Then I hope Christine O'Donnell steps up.

Why don't you think Romney or Gingrich won't cut it?

From an ideas and debate perspective, I think Gingrich could run circles around Obama.

And Romney has the business background to instill confidence in his economic ideas.

Not that I support either guy, but just curious why those two are in the same sentence as Palin? I'm not seeing it.


Just the three names you hear in polling because they seem to be putting out feelers for the possibility of running. I'm not saying they are similar in any other regard. I agree that Gingrich is a very bright political figure, but I think his hard right social views could hurt him and I'm not sure he could inspire the independent vote. I think Mitt Romney presents himself as presidential and has a good private sector background but his tenure as governor in Massachusetts leaves some things to be desired. Couple that with the Mormon factor (which will be a huge issue because the Dems will make it one) and that he has flip flopped on some issues and it makes for a big time smear campaign against him.

I think either guy could win this year as the issues play to their favor with people focusing on fiscal conservatism. If the economy is still in shambles come 2012 then their chances are better. If it improves and the Democrats focus on social issues then I don't like their chances. I hate the role religion plays in it, but both Romney and Gingrich will have their religious influences used against them.


Fri Oct 29, 2010 3:34 pm
Profile
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:10 pm
Posts: 5286
Location: Topsfield, MA
Post Re: What is the post-election Republican strategy?
One guy I really liked but admit I don't know enough about is Bobby Jindal.


Fri Oct 29, 2010 3:39 pm
Profile
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:59 am
Posts: 20220
Location: Miami, FL
Post Re: What is the post-election Republican strategy?
Bobby Jindal is a Rhodes scholar. He's very popular in LA and was very hands on with the BP spill.

I would hate for the Democrats to make Romney's religion a factor as they are supposed to be the party of tolerance... but they always find a way to make race an issue, so why not religion as well?

_________________
Image


Fri Oct 29, 2010 4:41 pm
Profile
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:10 pm
Posts: 5286
Location: Topsfield, MA
Post Re: What is the post-election Republican strategy?
Rich wrote:
Bobby Jindal is a Rhodes scholar. He's very popular in LA and was very hands on with the BP spill.

I would hate for the Democrats to make Romney's religion a factor as they are supposed to be the party of tolerance... but they always find a way to make race an issue, so why not religion as well?


Jindal's response to the oil spill earned my respect. He seems like a strong leader who doesn't back down.

Don't get me wrong, I would vote for Romney. But he'll have to overcome a few things. The Mormon issue is stupid, but you know the Dems will publicize all of its elements that don't play well with the PC crowd. His other problem is health care. MA has a system similar to Obamacare that he put into place, and is now admitting it was a huge mistake. He has publicly flip flopped on the issue of abortion...again insignificant but will be tied to his religion and he'll be labeled an extremist. His popularity as governor in MA was never great.

Just not sure he can really energize the people to vote for him. Thats why I'm hoping a Jindal, Thune, Pawlenty or someone that is a bit under the radar right now will emerge and really motivate people to vote for them.


Fri Oct 29, 2010 5:47 pm
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 2:05 pm
Posts: 2426
Location: NSW, Australia
Post Re: What is the post-election Republican strategy?
Big Dave wrote:
As far as Palin, I like her. As president? Not sure about that, but she isn't as dumb as the media likes to make her out to be.


She makes it real easy to portray her as a moron when she does things like write crib notes on her hand.

As a president: The Dems would write her tagline for her: "Would you vote for a quitter to be the President of the United States?" She would guarantee Obama a 2nd term.


Sat Oct 30, 2010 8:29 pm
Profile
2014 Phinfever VIP!
2014 Phinfever VIP!

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 6:41 pm
Posts: 463
Post Re: What is the post-election Republican strategy?
Quote:
In an interview with National Journal out this week, Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell was asked what his party's main political job will be after next week's election. He gave a surprisingly stark answer: "The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president."


This is what really ticks me off about the right... for the last two years, we have heard scant an idea about how they would improve the country. All you ever hear is "Obama needs to be stopped" and "Obama is a socialist." Give me something. Give me ideas.

I am as ardent a Democrat as there is and if the presidential election were held tomorrow, I would vote for Obama again. But I am not incapable of hearing viewpoints from the other side. Yet time after time, it's always this Karl Rove style fear-mongering hyperbole... GIVE ME SOMETHING!


Mon Nov 01, 2010 11:50 pm
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 2:05 pm
Posts: 2426
Location: NSW, Australia
Post Re: What is the post-election Republican strategy?
MNDolfan wrote:
This is what really ticks me off about the right... for the last two years, we have heard scant an idea about how they would improve the country. All you ever hear is "Obama needs to be stopped" and "Obama is a socialist." Give me something. Give me ideas.

I am as ardent a Democrat as there is and if the presidential election were held tomorrow, I would vote for Obama again. But I am not incapable of hearing viewpoints from the other side. Yet time after time, it's always this Karl Rove style fear-mongering hyperbole... GIVE ME SOMETHING!


Cut taxes to the rich.
Start another war or two.
Probably require that people go to church 3 or 4 days a week.

That seems to be the Republican mantra. And I'm sure it'll fix the economy.


Tue Nov 02, 2010 4:55 am
Profile
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:59 am
Posts: 20220
Location: Miami, FL
Post Re: What is the post-election Republican strategy?
And what new ideas do the Democrats bring?

Socialized healthcare.
Keynesian economics.
More dependancy on the government.

It's the same story every time they are elected as well.

_________________
Image


Tue Nov 02, 2010 7:31 am
Profile
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:59 am
Posts: 20220
Location: Miami, FL
Post Re: What is the post-election Republican strategy?
degs wrote:
Cut taxes to the rich.


Weren't the Bush tax cuts across the board? Saying they are tax cuts for the rich is misleading.

Quote:
Start another war or two.


I'll give you Iraq, but wasn't the first war started on us? Also, how many wars did we fight when Reagan was president? And didn't Clinton get us involved in the Balkans? Who was in power when Vietnam started? World War II?

That's right. A Democrat.

Quote:
Probably require that people go to church 3 or 4 days a week.


Social issues is where Republicans lose me.

_________________
Image


Tue Nov 02, 2010 7:38 am
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 2:05 pm
Posts: 2426
Location: NSW, Australia
Post Re: What is the post-election Republican strategy?
Rich wrote:
Weren't the Bush tax cuts across the board? Saying they are tax cuts for the rich is misleading.


Isn't the Repubican mantra always cut taxes for the rich? If they get stuck cutting taxes across the board, then they'll do it, but their priority is the rich. Look up Reaganomics.

Quote:
I'll give you Iraq, but wasn't the first war started on us? Also, how many wars did we fight when Reagan was president? And didn't Clinton get us involved in the Balkans? Who was in power when Vietnam started? World War II?

That's right. A Democrat.


Yes, the first war was started on us. And long before it was finished our good ol' Texan was itching for another fight, so we jumped into another war. This time completely unjustly.

It's funny I mentioned Reagan before because I really belive that the best thing that could happen to this country would be that the California Republicans take back the Republican party from the Southern/Texan Republicans. However, going back as far as Reagan or FDR is a weak comparison as both parties have changed drastically in the past 10-15 years.


Tue Nov 02, 2010 8:03 am
Profile
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:59 am
Posts: 20220
Location: Miami, FL
Post Re: What is the post-election Republican strategy?
degs wrote:
Isn't the Repubican mantra always cut taxes for the rich? If they get stuck cutting taxes across the board, then they'll do it, but their priority is the rich. Look up Reaganomics.


It worked and had biparisan support (Bill Bradley co-sponsored the bill). Reagan lowered the top tax bracket from a ridiculous 70% to 50% for those making over $85,000 (does that constitute "the rich"?). He then lowered it to 38.5% for those making over $90,000.

http://www.truthandpolitics.org/top-rates.php

Quote:
However, going back as far as Reagan or FDR is a weak comparison as both parties have changed drastically in the past 10-15 years.


And categorizing an entire Party due to one president is weak as well.

_________________
Image


Tue Nov 02, 2010 8:31 am
Profile
2014 Phinfever VIP!
2014 Phinfever VIP!

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 6:41 pm
Posts: 463
Post Re: What is the post-election Republican strategy?
Rich wrote:
degs wrote:
Cut taxes to the rich.


Weren't the Bush tax cuts across the board? Saying they are tax cuts for the rich is misleading.

Quote:
Start another war or two.


I'll give you Iraq, but wasn't the first war started on us? Also, how many wars did we fight when Reagan was president? And didn't Clinton get us involved in the Balkans? Who was in power when Vietnam started? World War II?

That's right. A Democrat.

Quote:
Probably require that people go to church 3 or 4 days a week.


Social issues is where Republicans lose me.


For the record, Roosevelt didn't start World War II, he simply entered us after Japan bombed Pearl Harbor.

And to say a Democrat entered us into Vietnam may or may not be true... Presidents going all the way back to Eisenhower increased our presence in Vietnam, and since war was never declared, deciding when "Vietnam started" is just a matter of degrees. I'd say that was a team effort.

Let me clarify my original post. I am sick of the Republican fear mongering. I have no issue with people that oppose Obama and the Democratic agenda. That's the great thing about this country -- everyone is entitled to an opinion and is allowed to exercise that opinion every two years on Election Day.

Where Republicans piss me off is with all the hate speech, calling Obama a socialist or saying Obama is anti-America and Obama hates America and Obama is out to destroy America. Lets get real here... Obama is doing what he feels is right. You may disagree with it, but the guy does not hate America.

Despite the left's hate for Bush, I don't remember any logical Democrat saying Bush hated America or was anti-America. Most just thought the guy was an idiot. I'm a Democrat, and I know Bush isn't dumb. You don't become President and serve eight years as president if you're dumb. But his reputation as "not smart" was perpetuated by his own quotes.

Just a few thoughts on this Election Day.


Tue Nov 02, 2010 10:09 am
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 2:05 pm
Posts: 2426
Location: NSW, Australia
Post Re: What is the post-election Republican strategy?
Rich wrote:
It worked and had biparisan support (Bill Bradley co-sponsored the bill).


It worked for awhile. About 6-8 years. Just in time for him to hand it over to Bush Sr. and watch the economy fall into recession. The bipartisan support came only because it also lowered taxes for others.

Quote:
And categorizing an entire Party due to one president is weak as well.


Wasn't basing it on the President. Was basing it on the what has happened in the Republican party since about the time Bush Sr was in office. Again, I'd love to see the California Republicans take back that party.


Tue Nov 02, 2010 10:31 am
Profile
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:10 pm
Posts: 5286
Location: Topsfield, MA
Post Re: What is the post-election Republican strategy?
MNDolfan wrote:
For the record, Roosevelt didn't start World War II, he simply entered us after Japan bombed Pearl Harbor.

And to say a Democrat entered us into Vietnam may or may not be true... Presidents going all the way back to Eisenhower increased our presence in Vietnam, and since war was never declared, deciding when "Vietnam started" is just a matter of degrees. I'd say that was a team effort.

Let me clarify my original post. I am sick of the Republican fear mongering. I have no issue with people that oppose Obama and the Democratic agenda. That's the great thing about this country -- everyone is entitled to an opinion and is allowed to exercise that opinion every two years on Election Day.

Where Republicans piss me off is with all the hate speech, calling Obama a socialist or saying Obama is anti-America and Obama hates America and Obama is out to destroy America. Lets get real here... Obama is doing what he feels is right. You may disagree with it, but the guy does not hate America.

Despite the left's hate for Bush, I don't remember any logical Democrat saying Bush hated America or was anti-America. Most just thought the guy was an idiot. I'm a Democrat, and I know Bush isn't dumb. You don't become President and serve eight years as president if you're dumb. But his reputation as "not smart" was perpetuated by his own quotes.

Just a few thoughts on this Election Day.


Some misleading stuff there. For the record, Roosevelt began swapping munitions and weaponry with Great Britain to gain naval bases and had tense relations with Japan prior to the war. It didn't just fall on to his lap, he participated in actions that drove Japan and Germany to declare war on us. Not saying he was wrong as they were embracing aggressive territorial acquisition, but he didn't exactly follow his preaching of neutrality.

John F. Kennedy escalated the conflict in Vietnam. Lyndon Johnson took it to full blown military activity. And Harry Truman, a democrat, was president for the Korean war. WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam...all under democratic administrations. Spanish American War, Desert Storm, Afghanistan, and Iraq under Republican. No gray area, just documented truth. And if you want to use the stretch/team effort approach then I guess you start with the first progressive, liberal democrat Woodrow Wilson who encouraged western European powers to begin staking claims in the Middle East and expanding American interest there. He also argued for American interest in global policing actions.

So are Democrats saying Republicans are facist, cold hearted, racist, homophobic...every other ism, saying they want to steal social security, stuff the pockets of wall street fat cats, "punish your enemies" comment from Obama, overturn Roe v Wade, send all jobs overseas, etc. not practicing non-factual hate speech? Works both ways and Democrats are notorious for character assassination as a campaigning tactic. Republicans have told you what they will do. It just happens to include undoing the socialist-like actions of Obama. Less government, lower taxes, tougher immigration laws, reduced business regulation. It just gets lost in mainstream media resorting to "oh the Republicans are just Obama bashing again."


Tue Nov 02, 2010 2:43 pm
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 2:05 pm
Posts: 2426
Location: NSW, Australia
Post Re: What is the post-election Republican strategy?
jammer wrote:
So are Democrats saying Republicans are facist, cold hearted, racist, homophobic...every other ism, saying they want to steal social security, stuff the pockets of wall street fat cats, "punish your enemies" comment from Obama, overturn Roe v Wade, send all jobs overseas, etc. not practicing non-factual hate speech? Works both ways and Democrats are notorious for character assassination as a campaigning tactic. Republicans have told you what they will do. It just happens to include undoing the socialist-like actions of Obama. Less government, lower taxes, tougher immigration laws, reduced business regulation. It just gets lost in mainstream media resorting to "oh the Republicans are just Obama bashing again."


Not sure where this entire paragraph came from. One thing to point out is that it was the Republicans who were engaged in massive character assassination against a decorated war hero 6 years ago. That's an area I thought was completely repulsive. And to try and say the Dems are bad on that.... have your own house in order before throwing stones.


Tue Nov 02, 2010 6:34 pm
Profile
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:59 am
Posts: 20220
Location: Miami, FL
Post Re: What is the post-election Republican strategy?
MNDolfan wrote:
For the record, Roosevelt didn't start World War II, he simply entered us after Japan bombed Pearl Harbor.


I didn't say he did. I said he was in power when it started, i.e. when we got involved.

Quote:
And to say a Democrat entered us into Vietnam may or may not be true... Presidents going all the way back to Eisenhower increased our presence in Vietnam, and since war was never declared, deciding when "Vietnam started" is just a matter of degrees. I'd say that was a team effort.


It is one thing to provide support, it is another to get directly involved. We got directly involved under JFK, a Democrat who also believed in supply-side economics by the way...

Quote:
Where Republicans piss me off is with all the hate speech, calling Obama a socialist or saying Obama is anti-America and Obama hates America and Obama is out to destroy America. Lets get real here... Obama is doing what he feels is right. You may disagree with it, but the guy does not hate America.


Show me these quotes by Republican politicians.

Quote:
Despite the left's hate for Bush, I don't remember any logical Democrat saying Bush hated America or was anti-America. Most just thought the guy was an idiot. I'm a Democrat, and I know Bush isn't dumb. You don't become President and serve eight years as president if you're dumb. But his reputation as "not smart" was perpetuated by his own quotes.


I really don't see much of a difference between the left's hate for Bush and the right's hate for Obama. Both sides are deranged.

_________________
Image


Wed Nov 03, 2010 4:50 am
Profile
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:59 am
Posts: 20220
Location: Miami, FL
Post Re: What is the post-election Republican strategy?
degs wrote:
It worked for awhile. About 6-8 years. Just in time for him to hand it over to Bush Sr. and watch the economy fall into recession. The bipartisan support came only because it also lowered taxes for others.


The economy falls into a recession every 6-12 years.

So if you can downplay whether Reagan's economic policies worked, one can do the same with Clinton as W. inherited a recession when he got into power.

_________________
Image


Wed Nov 03, 2010 4:51 am
Profile
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:59 am
Posts: 20220
Location: Miami, FL
Post Re: What is the post-election Republican strategy?
degs wrote:
One thing to point out is that it was the Republicans who were engaged in massive character assassination against a decorated war hero 6 years ago.


You mean the guy that met with the enemy in Paris while the war was still going on, without approval with his chain of command, which constitutes a violation of U.S. code 18 U.S.C. 953 and is defined as a treasonous act?

_________________
Image


Wed Nov 03, 2010 4:55 am
Profile
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:10 pm
Posts: 5286
Location: Topsfield, MA
Post Re: What is the post-election Republican strategy?
degs wrote:
jammer wrote:
So are Democrats saying Republicans are facist, cold hearted, racist, homophobic...every other ism, saying they want to steal social security, stuff the pockets of wall street fat cats, "punish your enemies" comment from Obama, overturn Roe v Wade, send all jobs overseas, etc. not practicing non-factual hate speech? Works both ways and Democrats are notorious for character assassination as a campaigning tactic. Republicans have told you what they will do. It just happens to include undoing the socialist-like actions of Obama. Less government, lower taxes, tougher immigration laws, reduced business regulation. It just gets lost in mainstream media resorting to "oh the Republicans are just Obama bashing again."


Not sure where this entire paragraph came from. One thing to point out is that it was the Republicans who were engaged in massive character assassination against a decorated war hero 6 years ago. That's an area I thought was completely repulsive. And to try and say the Dems are bad on that.... have your own house in order before throwing stones.


That was a response to the "where Repubs piss me off is with their hate speech."

That was sort of the point. It comes from both sides. If you hate Republicans for hate speech and characterize it as their approach then it is misleading because Democrats are just as bad if not worse in many situations. John Kerry's character assassination came from him being aloof and elitist while trying to portray himself as a man of the people. See his recent adventure in yacht purchasing. Questioning his service record came from guys who served with him who said that he tries to take more credit than due. If that is the case I find it to be about the most disgusting form of factual misrepresentation for one's own benefit.


Wed Nov 03, 2010 6:21 am
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 2:05 pm
Posts: 2426
Location: NSW, Australia
Post Re: What is the post-election Republican strategy?
jammer wrote:
That was sort of the point. It comes from both sides. If you hate Republicans for hate speech and characterize it as their approach then it is misleading because Democrats are just as bad if not worse in many situations. John Kerry's character assassination came from him being aloof and elitist while trying to portray himself as a man of the people. See his recent adventure in yacht purchasing. Questioning his service record came from guys who served with him who said that he tries to take more credit than due. If that is the case I find it to be about the most disgusting form of factual misrepresentation for one's own benefit.


I'm with you that both parties are equally as bad. I brought up the Kerry thing because it was nothing but partisan lies and in some cases half truths. It was financed by the Republican party for character assassination. It truly represented the lowest of lows I have ever seen politics sink to.


Wed Nov 03, 2010 7:05 am
Profile
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:10 pm
Posts: 5286
Location: Topsfield, MA
Post Re: What is the post-election Republican strategy?
degs wrote:
jammer wrote:
That was sort of the point. It comes from both sides. If you hate Republicans for hate speech and characterize it as their approach then it is misleading because Democrats are just as bad if not worse in many situations. John Kerry's character assassination came from him being aloof and elitist while trying to portray himself as a man of the people. See his recent adventure in yacht purchasing. Questioning his service record came from guys who served with him who said that he tries to take more credit than due. If that is the case I find it to be about the most disgusting form of factual misrepresentation for one's own benefit.


I'm with you that both parties are equally as bad. I brought up the Kerry thing because it was nothing but partisan lies and in some cases half truths. It was financed by the Republican party for character assassination. It truly represented the lowest of lows I have ever seen politics sink to.


I thought it was financed by an outside group, the Swift Boat Veterans, and that even Bush told them to take down the ads. Not sure the Republican Party financed the group. Some of the statements Kerry made about his service were a little dubious. He claimed he didn't want to be part of the war, yet requested swift boat duty which would put him in the thick of things. When he uses anti-war sentiment to get elected in MA and then turn around and use the proud veteran approach to gain the pro-military vote you open yourself up to questioning and criticism. But he did see combat and was awarded decorations, that can't be taken from him or dismissed.


Wed Nov 03, 2010 7:58 am
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 2:05 pm
Posts: 2426
Location: NSW, Australia
Post Re: What is the post-election Republican strategy?
jammer wrote:
I thought it was financed by an outside group, the Swift Boat Veterans, and that even Bush told them to take down the ads. Not sure the Republican Party financed the group. Some of the statements Kerry made about his service were a little dubious. He claimed he didn't want to be part of the war, yet requested swift boat duty which would put him in the thick of things. When he uses anti-war sentiment to get elected in MA and then turn around and use the proud veteran approach to gain the pro-military vote you open yourself up to questioning and criticism. But he did see combat and was awarded decorations, that can't be taken from him or dismissed.


Bush did not a word about it. Even when Kerry called to him to denounce it.
The money trail for Swift Boat Veterans ended with big sources in the Republican party.

Where I got sick to my stomach was that they called into question his Silver Star and Purple Hearts. It was an obvious smear campaign trying to discredit a decorated vet. How low can you go?


Wed Nov 03, 2010 12:42 pm
Profile
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:10 pm
Posts: 5286
Location: Topsfield, MA
Post Re: What is the post-election Republican strategy?
Bush actually did offer a word on it, and this is from MSNBC. Too little too late, well perhaps. But he didn't ignore it. It just sounds like a he said she said. Just because the Dems said it doesn't mean it was Bush sanctioned.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5797164/

Big sources in the Republican Party is a little vague. I mean should I blame the Democratic Party of denying freedom of speech because George Soros, a big source, donated a ton of money to NPR and helped facilitate the firing of Juan Williams?

I get where you're going, but a lot of smear ads come from associations with both parties and it doesn't mean the party itself is behind it.


Wed Nov 03, 2010 2:37 pm
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 2:05 pm
Posts: 2426
Location: NSW, Australia
Post Re: What is the post-election Republican strategy?
jammer wrote:
Bush actually did offer a word on it, and this is from MSNBC. Too little too late, well perhaps. But he didn't ignore it. It just sounds like a he said she said. Just because the Dems said it doesn't mean it was Bush sanctioned.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5797164/

Big sources in the Republican Party is a little vague. I mean should I blame the Democratic Party of denying freedom of speech because George Soros, a big source, donated a ton of money to NPR and helped facilitate the firing of Juan Williams?

I get where you're going, but a lot of smear ads come from associations with both parties and it doesn't mean the party itself is behind it.


Correct me if I'm wrong, didn't Bush fire someone from his staff over their involvement?


Wed Nov 03, 2010 3:58 pm
Profile
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:10 pm
Posts: 5286
Location: Topsfield, MA
Post Re: What is the post-election Republican strategy?
I can't correct you because I have no idea.


Wed Nov 03, 2010 4:49 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 34 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007, 2010 phpBB Group.
Designed by Coots & IamPZ - Phinfever.com.