Posted on 07/25/2009 9:47:09 AM PDT by Fizziks
Pollster John Zogby says the Republican Party could be "teetering on the brink" of extinction as it fails to appeal to the fastest-growing demographic groups in America.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
Zogby is nuts.
Obama approval is plunging and that translates to conservative empowerment. A wave is coming that conservative republicans can ride.
Zogby is nuts.
Obama approval is plunging and that translates to conservative empowerment. A wave is coming that conservative republicans can ride.
If presented properly, meaning that anyone, including the parents, can donate to your child's private or public education and get a dollar-for-dollar tax credit.
The more K-12 education delivered by the private sector the better.
Many Americans are stuck with horrid government education even though the gov’t spending per pupil has skyrocketed over the years.
A party that stands for everything doesn’t stand for anything. You stick to your principles. Pandering does no good, the other side will always pander better.
When umemployment reaches 10 plus percent, and if the GOP takes power in 2012, one way to counter demographics is put a freeze on immigration (legal and illegal), so jobs are more available for American grads and jobhunters. Second, as the US recovers slowly, we should accept immigrants with money and skills, not more poor people who will need government handouts. Finally we should not have a blanket free trade policy. Trade agreements should judged on a case by case, sector by sector basis. Free trade agreements do not affect each region of the US equally. It is no different from entering a contractual agreement with your neighbors on your street. Each person has something different to offer, and not all the agreements are beneficial. This is where the GOP blind faith in US corporations cost them power in 2006 and 2008. If the Dems had picked a moderate for POTUS and leaders in Congress, the GOP in the area of jobs and economic policy would be toast. Economic stabiity and jobs is the key for 2012.
People think that the Hispanic vote goes to democrats but in reality the 1/3rd of Hispanics that are Protestant Christians are about 50/50 with the parties, with 56% of them voting republican in 2004 and 52% of them voting democrat in 2008.
One demographic that is not going their way is the lower fertility rates among lib women.
I'll go you one better. All minorities are getting fleeced, not just middle class. It is not in any individuals best interest to sell out to government control in return for giving up his freedom. Those like Star Parker and others who are now eloquent conservative voices who once were welfare recepients, attest to the dehumanizing trap that is totalitarian control.
Urban poor Black males can attest to the trap that is the welfare system as they see themselves castrated by a government that provides for their women better than they can and as they become nothing more that house pets to their women empowered by the welfare state. We need to combat liberalism intellectually in the ghettos and barrios of this nation. Conservatism, and capitalism and freedom are universal answers to the Godless destruction of the individual soul and spirit of all mankind. this is equally true in Venezuela, Kenya, Saudi Arabia, China, and America. Every individual is capable of understanding that our rights come from God.
We all know those kind of numbers, what people aren’t aware of is that the numbers do not apply to minorities that become Protestants.
To keep repeating the same false mantra “minorities vote democrat” decade after decade is a misleading mantra that maintains the status quo and blocks analysis or constructive action.
Learning that the 1/3 of Hispanics that are Protestant voted 56% republican in 2004 and 48% republican in 2008 is a revelation to most conservatives and the information needs to get out there so that we can start pondering it’s meaning and how we can use it to help in our efforts to winning minority votes.
Well it was the Bush WH that used the term.
They also used the term sexist when it came to Harriet Meirs.
I’m not a useful idiot.
Guess how many media types were there? One, only our local NBC affiliate showed up.
Shadegg treated our Doctors with respect (They are the hardware of the medical system and do not require fixing.) What really needs to be “fixed” is the software (the process of managing the system).
Ironically, our medical system “fix” starts with repairing TORT law and a open and fair media.
I call them lazy *ss, blood sucking leeches.
“Well then he should stick to opinion polling and leave the political analysis to those who are qualified.”
“My opinion. 2010 will look like 1994 all over again and Zogby / democrats are scared to death. As they should be.”
This is exactly what is going on!
I am a member of the so-called ‘political class’. There is a difference between being a pollster and being an analyst. Zogby is speaking on a field he has no clue about and it shows. When he was asked questions about Obama’s declining popularity and all, he didn’t have an answer.
I am torn between two outcomes Zogby is doing here. The first is Zogby is attempting to de-moralize conservatives and all by trying to purport a ‘scientific polling’ as some ‘analysis’. However, I think it is more likely wishful thinking.
I do political analysis. Basically, Democrats like Carville and apparently Zogby are in the same spot Karl Rove was when, in 2002, he thought the Democratic Party was forever doomed.
Here is what they think:
They all believe that all the young people, all the Latinos, and what they call ‘demographic shifts’ will all push Democrats in power for forty years at least. Carville is even writing a book on that. They actually do believe the Republican Party can never ever come back. The only thing that it can do is to ‘lean to the left’ to become political viable again.
They see conservatives as just a bunch of ‘angry white guys’ like Rush Limbaugh and all. When Cheney was speaking out against Obama, they literally believed Cheney was upset because the country was becoming Democratic, that demographics would forever erase the Republicans so he was going out and ranting like an angry man. Democrats all believed this earlier this year.
Now, there is signals coming out that this vision of the future of American politics isn’t occurring as it should. Obama should not be falling in popularity. Voters should not be saying they are more conservative. What is going on?
What is going on is a massive failure of analysis on the Democrat aisle. They are so blinded by race and all that when they say ‘demographics’, they are using it incorrectly as ‘segmentation’. Demographics are about many things, the most important is the BIRTH RATE.
One of the reasons radical feminism failed is because radical feminists do not have children. Values tend to be passed on from parent to child for the most part. With no children, it is much more difficult to have your values grow.
STRIKE ONE: Due to abortion and intolerance toward having children, most of the birth rates are on the conservative side. Conservatives are reproducing faster than liberals. Abortion is, ironically, eliminating future liberal voters. The stereotypical Democratic analysis does not account for this.
Democrats believe the Latinos will swell their numbers and offset any losses from abortion. Is this true?
STRIKE TWO: Hispanic is not a race, it is an ethnicity. Anyone who does political analysis seriously or semi-seriously knows this. If Hispanic is a race, then being Irish is a race. Everyone knows the Spanish are the ‘white race’. And hispanics are descendants of Spanish. They speak Spanish. Sure, they are also descendants of Native Americans, but so is everyone else in America. Everyone has some Indian blood in them. Their brownish complexion doesn’t mean they are not ‘white’ as many members of the ‘white race’ in Europe have varying features and skin complexions. Italians have a darker color skin, but they are still considered the ‘white race’.
Democrats are wetting themselves believing that the growing number of Hispanics will mean that America will become less white, less ‘conservative’, and less ‘religious’. Alas for them, since Hispanics are an ethnicity and not a race, and are mostly Catholic, America will become more white, more religious, and also more ‘conservative’.
Latinos are culturally closer to conservatives than the San Francisco liberals ever will be. Latinos are also conservative toward foreign policy. The only real difference is that Latinos, due to their low finance status, tend to be like the Democrats of the first half of the twentieth century. Economically, they take the Democrat view. However, this will last only so long as they remain poor. And they will not remain poor for very long. I live in south Texas, and the hispanic entrepreneurs is something to behold.
So what does this mean? When George W. Bush ran for governor in Texas, which has many hispanics (and since liberals do not know history, they probably don’t realize that Texas used to belong to Mexico and Texas has always had Mexicans in it, and has always embraced Mexican culture, i.e. George W. Bush eating Tex Mex food), Bush won most of the hispanic vote.
In California of 2008, the vote went overwhelmingly to Obama. Yet, the Ban Gay Marriage amendment passed. How did this happen? It was more than just blacks voting for it. It was hispanics. Hispanics won’t tolerate gay marriage. The liberal view is that, “OK, we lost the vote, but if we wait, demographics will mean that there will be so many liberal voters that we can vote it down.” That ship has already sailed. As hispanics increase, the chances to vote Gay Marriage legal decreases. Liberals are so dumb they haven’t realized this yet.
What I love about hispanics is that they embrace ‘masculinity’. They have no patience for San Francisco limp wristed types. Hispanics are not a ‘race’ like blacks are. They don’t vote for ‘race’. Like other whites, they will be divided. They will not go 97% for a candidate like blacks do. I think as their position improves economically (their children all speak English), they drift more conservative or be mixed as much of the whites are.
Now, what about the young people? This, again, is bad analysis. Young people have, historically, been liberal. Yet, they do not stay that way. If they had, then Reagan should have been impossible due to all the hippies. Much of the problem is incorrect polling at colleges. Colleges are dominated by women these days, and women tend to be more liberal then men. So these college polls, today, are not really representing an accurate view.
Go back ten years ago to 2000s and all. All the political wizards acknowledged that the young were going to conservatives. Why is this? Perhaps it is because of young people being against whatever authority there is at the time. But a big part of it has to be with issues like Social Security. Bush ran on reforming Social Security for that reason.
Young people are going to hate paying higher taxes for the Baby Boomers and their Social Security. They will drift conservative. Want a prelude to all this? Check out Europe. The youth there know the retirement bomb in front of them and they don’t like it.
STRIKE THREE: The changes of the Internet revolution will drift conservative, not liberal. It was the silicon revolution that allowed alternative media to arise. Also, the financial rules of life are very different than our grandparents. Young people are going to be very financially astute because they have to be for survival. This, again, will make them drift toward conservative.
There IS a political re-alignment going on, but it is within the Republican Party. New England is the graveyard of political ideologies. The Rockefeller Republicans occupied New England. After 2008, they are all gone except for a couple of senators in Maine. Every political ideology goes to die in New England: Federalists, Whigs, on and on. The demise of the Rockefellers will be a temporary blip as conservatives fill the vacuum of the Republican Party. This might cause Republicans to lose a couple of elections until this alignment is complete. But it will happpen. Much of the incorrect analysis is to think of the fall of the Rockefellers as the fall of conservatives. The two are very different.
The intellectual power of the Democratic Party has collapsed quite a long time ago. When the Democratic ‘analysis’ of ‘forty years of Democratic rule’ comes about, it is clear they are not doing their homework. Presidential elections, if you look their history, tend to be more personality based especially since FDR. The Bush elections were close not because the country was at 50% 50%, but because it was Bush was a weak candidate facing even weaker candidates such as Gore and Kerry. Obama’s election was a typical election. Close presidential elections are a rare thing, not a typical thing.
Anyone saying Obama’s election was a ‘landslide’ clearly doesn’t know history. 1984 of Reagan winning 49 states was a ‘landslide’. When Nixon won 49 states, that, too, was a ‘landslide’. When LBJ beat Goldwater, that was a ‘landslide’. Hoover won by the biggest landslide in American history. Yet, next election, the ‘failed VP candidate’ named FDR won in a landslide against Hoover!
Long term, Obama could only be considered extremely weak. Does his history show political victory due to grassroots support? No. Obama made his political opponents *disappear* by having them thrown out of the race. Hillary Clinton and John McCain were also extremely weak candidates.
Even then, Obama was tied to McCain. What really pushed Obama over was the Holy Grail any presidential candidate could want: an economic collapse just months before the election. Many people looked to Obama to fix the economic problem. This is why his poll numbers head south today because he is clearly not fixing these numbers. The Democratic Machine erred greatly by analyzing that people liked Obama because of his *personality*. Sure, they might like his personality over McCain’s, but who doesn’t?
Palin has to absolutely be destroyed. She is the grassroots politician and she represents the Jacksonian ‘Common Man’. She is very articulate, which is why they are so hellbent on attacking her on that. Worse yet, she is a female candidate. There has been no excellent female candidates that have come this far. Hillary Clinton, whose negatives were higher than 50%, was never a good candidate. But Palin is different.
The big problem with Republicans is not Latinos and all. The big problem with Republicans is women. A female presidential candidate could electrify with women across the country.
SHE. MUST. BE. DESTROYED. Now, before it is too late to stop her.
They said it after Goldwater’s defeat.
They said it after watergate.
They said it after Bush.
Nixon, Reagan
Each time the party comes back. People get a taste of liberal policies and they say: “Now where did all the republicans go?” And wham: blowout election. Nixon won 49 states, Reagan won 49 states.
After 4 years of Obama: Palin or whoever might just shut the skeptics up.
We all know those kind of numbers, what people aren’t aware of is that the numbers do not apply to minorities that become Protestants.
To keep repeating the same false mantra “minorities vote democrat” decade after decade is a misleading mantra that maintains the status quo and blocks analysis or constructive action.
Learning that the 1/3 of Hispanics that are Protestant voted 56% republican in 2004 and 48% republican in 2008 is a revelation to most conservatives and the information needs to get out there so that we can start pondering it’s meaning and how we can use it to help in our efforts to winning minority votes.
Did you get the Zogby poll with the three questions about having chips placed in your brain? I forwarded that one to my mailing list.
Problem is we only win when people are mad or frightened. Then the good times return and the liberals start getting elected in droves to make another mess. Each time they get further and further entrenched.
Even Reagan got slaughtered in off year elections. He won big in 1984, as a kind of universal thank you from the voters, but his party didn’t have that great a night, and he had the yapping press against him the whole time.
The liberals and Democrats are the establishment, and too many of our own people are content to be fed with their crumbs.
Conservatism doesn’t stand for that.
None of which you hear anything out of the Republicans about. If you ask them, all you will hear is the sound of crickets.
McCain got 48% of the Protestant Hispanic vote and Bush got 56% of the Protestant Hispanic vote, meaning that Protestantism plays a role and we need to look at why and use it to learn how to deal with our future demographics.
Something tells me that your interest isn't in the politics and voting patterns but rather something to do with Protestantism.
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.