The Republican Ruins (Congenital loser Bob Shrum's take)

The Week ^ | April 14, 2009 | Bob Shrum

[St. Louis Conservative]

Having rendered themselves irrelevant on every major issue, Republicans consoled themselves last week with a delusional round robin. First, the Drudge Report, linking to a Pew Poll, featured a headline denying what most of us observe in the real world: “President Polarize: Poll Shows Historic Divide…Partisan Gap in Obama Job Approval Widest in Modern Era.”

Perhaps demonstrating that Drudge, not Limbaugh, is the maestro of the GOP chorus, the point was quickly picked up by Karl Rove on the house network, Fox News. Then the Washington Post’s Michael Gerson, one of the few Bush aides to emerge from that administration with a reputation worth having, vigorously banged the same tin drum, arraigning Obama as “the most polarizing new President.”

The charge is based on what could only be a conscious misreading of the Pew report. Analyzed honestly, the poll suggests that it is Republicans who are polarized, not the country. In their first months in office, according to Pew, both Obama and Ronald Reagan rolled up high, nearly identical approval ratings among voters—about five points higher than George W. Bush’s and ten points higher than Bill Clinton’s. However, contemporary Republicans disdain Obama; their faithful gather in a shrunken and angry corner of the electorate while the party’s moderates have defected to become independents who support this President with near-record enthusiasm. What the Pew Poll really shows is that Obama is on his way to redrawing the political demography of America.

In politics, the smaller a party gets, the more small-minded it becomes. With only 24 percent of voters identifying themselves as Republicans, the GOP is being miniaturized. The pettiness plays out on every conceivable stage—from the do-nothing, denounce-everything Republican minority in Congress, to the do-anything Republican attempt to overturn the Senate election in Minnesota, and the say-anything attacks of right-wing...

[tgusa]

Shrum. Nothing to see or learn here ....move along.

[Da Coyote]

May Schrum can marry Meghan McCain and complete the cycle of idiocy. (This would be one time that I would be pro-choice.....)

[msg-84]

Somewhere in those two weeks that Shrum mentions, I remember seeing a Pew poll showing the Republicans beating the Democrats on the generic congressional ballot. I wonder why Shrum left that one out?

Shurm will be working for George Soros at Media Mutters before long - then who will be irrelevant?

[dblshot]

Schrum's argument against Obama being polarizing seems to be that people that don't see things his way are wrong and that his side is right. Can't see how a polar argument like that refutes his leader being polar. It all to much to bear.

[Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus]

IIRC, Rove’s won a lot more elections for his clients than Bob Shrum has.

[sbMKE]

My favorite part is the assertion that Obama is not polarizing because it’s only people who oppose him (Republicans, taxpayers) that disapprove.

He seems to be saying that the guy can’t be polarizing if the Democrats (”Americans” in his assertion) like him.

[bill1952]

What the Pew Poll really shows is that Obama is on his way to redrawing the political demography of America.

If affairs continue on as they have in the first part of this year, then by year's end every single hot button socialist/leftist issue is going to be the law of the law, including, but not limited to, Amnesty and the multi trillion dollar budget that will both forever alter the political and economic landscape of America itself.

I see nothing to reasonably counter his statement.

[bill1952]

Law of the land

[alloysteel]

Law of the land

But WHICH land. There is a very real possibility that what is now the "Untied States of America" could fracture into two or more separate entities.

We did not leave America. Rather, parts of America were hijacked and those parts left us. The words of the Declaration of Independence still ring true today.

[St. Louis Conservative]

That's if people keep voting them in after taxes are increased substantially, along with spending, and the accompanying inflation.

But, amnesty will prevent any Democrat from losing!

No. Illegal immigrants are concentrated mostly in urban areas and in select districts of select states. While it will be a factor in certain areas, blanket amnesty complete with voting rights (faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar from a done deal, BTW....personally, I don't see it happening) will only cement Democrats in districts that are already largely Democrat.

[msg-84]

Obama is on his way to altering the political landscape, but the Pew poll tells us nothing about that. Obama will never have more political capitol or congressional support than he had when he entered office. From there it will all go down hill for him.

Shrum: "Analyzed honestly, the poll suggests that it is Republicans who are polarized, not the country".

polarize |ˈpōləˌrīz| verb
divide or cause to divide into two sharply contrasting groups or sets of opinions or beliefs :

He thinks it is the Republicans who are divided? 48% of the country did not vote for Obama, and since he has taken office, Obama's approval numbers have dropped. There are two sharply contrasting groups, and they are not both on the Republican side of the aisle.

I'm not sure who is signing Shrum's paychecks these days, but it is pretty clear he is simply an intellectual prostitute - it's just business, writing to satisfy his John's needs.

[Star Traveler]

You said — hrum. Nothing to see or learn here ....move along.

—

The last paragraph of the article...

---

The Republicans aren’t dead—just comatose. If Obama fails, they will be back. But that outcome appears increasingly chimerical. Meantime, amid the Republican ruins, delusion provides a temporary shelter and psychic self-satisfaction. How many defeats will it take for Republicans to rebuild a credible party of ideas? It’s bound to happen some day, but who knows how or when?

---

Well, from what I’ve read here on Free Republic, there are conservatives who are saying the same thing. And they are talking about creating another party, separate and different from the Republican Party.

So, it would appear to not necessarily be “off” entirely.

If a sizable number here do break off for another party, because they think the Republican Party is beyond hope or help — then — it will take a decade or more to have such a separate and different party eventually grow to gain enough power to be a national party who might be able to win a few elections. In the meantime, the Republican Party will be “split” and it will be impossible for the Republicans to win anything (just “think” H. Ross Perot for an example of that...).

AND..., it also *pays* to read up on what your opponents are saying and how they think and to analyze things and see if there is anything that is relevant. There appears (at least to me...) to be serious problems with the Republicans, and there are a bunch of other FReepers who are saying the same thing.

[Nonstatist]

Has Shrum ever managed a winning race? If there is a bigger loser than him, can someone please point that person out?

[Nonstatist]

Has Shrum ever managed a winning race? If there is a bigger loser than him, can someone please point that person out?

[matginzac]

Bob Shrum is a perfect example of why America is great - where else in the world could a LOSER get fame, fortune and a gig at Harvard?

[bill1952]

> Illegal immigrants are concentrated mostly in urban areas and in select districts of select states..

Maybe, but you cannot know that.
Even if it was fact then look towards a coalescing around a movement to move from the electoral college to straight up voting majority rule.

[Cyber Liberty]

Watching the Dems trying to pin a face on the GOP is like watching them trying to play “Pin the Tail on the Donkey”. All this so they can apply Alinski’s methods, it’s pretty obvious.

[LeonardFMason]

Forever remembered for uttering: “May I be the first to congratulate you President-Elect John F. Kerry.” OOOOOOps! That’s right you LOST AGAIN. A thoroughly dis-credited LOSER.

[St. Louis Conservative]

Libs are always talking about eliminating the electoral college because it empowers big city Democrat machines and diminishes the importance of smaller states. Eliminating the electorial college would require a Constitutional Amendment, and thus, not likely to happen anytime soon, if ever.