Posted on 11/14/2012 3:45:40 PM PST by Oldeconomybuyer
The GOP is undergoing the type of re-examination that occurs whenever a party loses. That useful exercise should be guided by facts. Here is some of what we know.
The media's postelection narrative is that Democrats won because of a demographic shift. There is some truth to that, but a more accurate description is that Democrats won in a smaller turnout by getting out more of their vote.
Tactically, Republicans must rigorously re-examine their "72-hour" ground game and reverse-engineer the Democratic get-out-the-vote effort in order to copy what works.
Strategically, Republicans will need to frame economic issues to better resonate with middle-class families.
Republicans need not jettison their principles. But they must avoid appearing judgmental and callous on social issues. Offensive comments about rape by GOP Senate candidates in Missouri and Indiana gave the media an excuse to put social issues at the election's center in a way that badly hurt the entire party, as well as costing Republicans two Senate seats.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Yup. With demographic changes occurring at the present pace, in not long we will not be able to win a national election. Heck, in not very long we won't even be able to win statewide in places like Texas and Arizona.
Judging from some of the reaction it seems like many people on our side simply don't want to hear that though.
The problem is going to be tough nut to crack too. Caving on things like Immigration won't help us. These minority voters simply do not hold the same beliefs we do about government. Put simply, they want free stuff. Further, identity politics work and work well. The Democrats and media have done a good job selling minorities on the idea that we dislike them - and unfortunately, too many conservatives end up speaking in a way that reinforces that stereotype.
We are going to have to reach these people in a whole new way - particularly Asians and Hispanics. Blacks we can probably write off as there is little hope for them. We are going to need to run Hispanic and Asian candidates at every opportunity, get into the communities, network, host events for new Asian/Hispanic citizens, major outreach, etc. This is the stuff Democrats already do and Republicans don't bother with. We need to tailor our conservative messages to them as well.
Lesson 1: Stop listening to Karl Rove.
'Nuff Said.
How do you sell a conservative to voters that expect you to give them everything? After eight years of Obama that will be quite a feat!
Re: Lesson #1: Don’t listen to Karl Rove
Exactly! Well said.
don’t jettison your principles.
jettison Rove and his ilk.
Good comments.
The Asian one really blows me away because at least in the midwest, Asians are all about small businesses or well educated with technical jobs. Exactly the kind of folks I would think support free market principles.
Pretty good points, surprisingly.
Lesson #2 Don’t listen to anybody associated with Karl Rove or either one of the two Bush Administrations, INCLUDING JEB BUSH AND ANYBODY ELSE NAMED BUSH.
Amen. I didn’t read the article because I can’t stand this out of touch, elitist fatboy. Levin is right, “get off the stage, pal.”
When I see the 8 letters KARLROVE, I switch the channel immediately.
Anyone agree?
I guess this means I don’t even need to go the the polls next time. They will vote for me. The Chicago way...
Yep, Rove pretty well sums up the high points. Rove's strengths are in GOTV; I'd rather see him raise and spend money in this area.
I’m sure Rove is highly paid for his campaign work. He’s been quite successful in a great many campaigns.
This past election is not going to be helpful to this aspect of his career and likely will be reflected in his income.
Demanding he post his cash flow on line? That’s silly. His big donors and employers know what they paid him and that’s all that counts.
Rove needs to defenestrate himself.
Either that or start cheating too.
How about stop nominating RINOS.....PERIOD!
“Further, identity politics work and work well. The Democrats and media have done a good job selling minorities on the idea that we dislike them - and unfortunately, too many conservatives end up speaking in a way that reinforces that stereotype.”
As you said, identity politics work and they work well. I accept that — that “IP” has proven to be the most powerful arrow in the ‘rat’s quiver.
I also accept what you wrote about the perception of minorities that we (Euro-Americans) “dislike” them. And whether they (minorities) believe that or not, it is also clear that they dislike US.
But if that’s the case — that minorities believe we dislike them (and they dislike us), and identity politics work so well for them….. why can’t those same political tactics work for us, in return?
McCain won 55% of the Euro vote in 2008 (and lost).
Romney won 59% of that vote in 2012 (and lost, too).
If Romney had won about 63% of the Euro vote in a few states that are mostly populated by Euros (and have relatively small Hispanic/black/Asian demographics), he would have won.
Yes, Hispanic (and Asian) demographics are increasing, but they are largely concentrated in “blue states” where Republicans can’t win anyway. Nothing you or anyone else in this forum can do or dream, will make California, Illinois or New York vote Republican again.
The “votes that will make a difference” for at least 20 more years are found in Euro-dominant states, cast by Euro-Americans. The problem is, they do NOT currently vote by “group identity”, EXCEPT in one area of the country: the deep South. Some numbers to digest:
In Mississippi, 89% of Euros voted for Romney
In Alabama 84% of Euros voted for Romney.
Contrast this with:
Maine, where 40% of Euros voted for Romney, and in
Vermont, where 33% of Euros voted for Romney.
Can you see what works here, and what does not?
You also wrote:
“We are going to have to reach these people in a whole new way - particularly Asians and Hispanics. Blacks we can probably write off as there is little hope for them.”
Longbow, you’re one of the most realistic and pragmatic writers in this forum, but here you reveal that even you are blinded from the truth. You obviously realize that blacks are never going to come to our side (by the way, if anyone who IS a black conservative is reading this reply, know that you are welcome here — you could probably tell tales about your efforts to win other blacks to your way of thinking). Similarly, we may get the votes of SOME Hispanics and of SOME Asians, but we will probably never get a significant majority of their votes, regardless of whether our “message” is changed (or corrupted) or not.
Why not?
Because people do not “come to conservatism” lured by goodies, the way the ‘rats win their constituencies.
No — folks come to conservatism of their own volition, seeking a set of truths — truths which cannot be changed or “artificially sweetened” so that non-believers can be made to swallow the pill.
Conservatism is as much an individual choice as is religious salvation — one accepts the foundations of conservatism the way one “accepts Jesus as their personal saviour”.
You can’t sell conservatism in exchange for material goods. You might just as well win their votes with “cigarette money”, as do the dems.
And one thing is most certain — you can’t “change the truths” of conservatism in any way that might make it more attractive to non-Euros, without changing it into something it is not.
If that means we are doomed to lose in a war of demographic attrition, well, that’s what it means.
But we can’t deal with reality, unless we’re willing to face it squarely first.
Fortunately, we don't need "a significant majority" of the minority votes.
Instead, if we could peel off 10% more Hispanic, Asian and black votes, the Democrats would never win another election.
And I'd wager that such is doable -- without changing our principles.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.