Posted on 11/13/2008 9:32:30 AM PST by goldstategop
I’m a lifelong Republican and I want to root for the home team. Problem is, I look out on the field of battle and I can’t tell which team is wearing the white uniform.
What do Republicans stand for anymore? The GOP leadership in Congress has virtually destroyed the Republican “brand” and turned it into something of value only to white, well-off conservatives. They have vastly expanded federal government spending and influence. They’ve turned earmarks into an art form. They’ve walked down Main Street throwing cash into the air – in the form of economic stimulus plans – hoping that people can be bought off with a check from the government. And they’ve spent untold billions bailing out mortgage companies who made disastrous business decisions that resulted in unimaginable wealth for corporate executives.
Meanwhile the Democratic standard bearer (now the President-elect) runs on a platform of middle class tax cuts.
Is it hard to see why Republicans have failed to connect with the electorate?
But despite the decade-long mismanagement of the Republican brand, the GOP still has an opportunity to reconnect with voters, if they are willing to devote the financial resources, manpower and energy necessary to do so. And assuming they have the commitment to develop a winning game plan, they will also need the discipline to implement the plan over a period of years.
So, what’s the game plan?
First and foremost, Republicans have to stand for things that matter at an emotional, gut level to average Californians and their families. We have to appeal to their hearts as much as their minds.
It’s time to go back to the drawing boards and start talking to voters. The California Republican Party should launch an intensive voter research program beginning with focus groups across the state. A large part of this focus group research should be aimed at ethnic voters so that the GOP can develop policies that appeal to this critical constituency.
It was my great honor to manage, along with my business partner Jeff Flint, the successful Yes on Proposition 8 campaign in California. This was not a partisan campaign – in fact we went out of our way to make sure it was not a partisan effort. Still, 84% of John McCain voters supported Proposition 8. More importantly, we got nearly one-third of Barack Obama voters on our side, including large numbers of minority voters the GOP hasn’t courted in years.
We learned a lot in the Prop. 8 campaign that can help Republicans reconnect with California families, especially in ethnic communities, because we spent considerable time and money talking with ethnic voters. We reached out to them in their churches and neighborhoods. We talked with them on the doorsteps and in their homes. And we took the time to communicate with them in their own languages. Our campaign produced campaign materials in fifteen different languages.
According to exit polls, Prop. 8 was supported by 70% of African American voters, 53% of Hispanic voters and nearly half of Asian voters. If it weren’t for the support we got among ethnic voters, we might very well have lost Proposition 8.
What we learned from these ethnic voters when we talked with them is that family, especially children, is the center of their universe. They are people of faith with conservative family values. They believe in God. They crave economic opportunity. They care deeply about how their children are educated. They are involved in their communities, and they want government policies that address the things they care about.
These are people who are largely ignored and taken for granted by the Democratic Party, who can be wooed by the GOP. There are also vast numbers of unregistered voters among these ethnic constituencies.
The focus groups I recommend should aim like a laser beam on identifying policies that appeal to ethnic voters. They might include obvious GOP themes like providing economic opportunity by making it easier to start a small business. But it may be less obvious, like tax policies that make it easier for families to afford day care, policies that encourage elder care, after school programs, or detailed reform of the school curriculum.
I’m not suggesting that Republicans become like Democrats and start proposing new government programs to appeal to certain constituencies. Rather, I am suggesting that the GOP align the party’s core values with the values of these ethnic voters in ways that will connect with them in real and emotional ways. An example: ethnic parents want their schools to emphasize real educational excellence and achievement, they don’t want kindergartners asked to literally sign cards pledging themselves to be allies of gay rights when they are not even old enough to write their name in cursive. Think I am making this up? It was part of “Coming Out Week” in the Hayward Unified School District and who knows how many other districts in California.
Once the issues have been identified and a game plan crafted, then the truly hard work begins. It is not easy to reach ethnic voters. It requires an extensive, concerted and continuous outreach program. It will cost real money to do this. Leaders in these communities have to be identified and recruited. Volunteers and staff must be deployed to community events, neighborhoods, churches and gathering places. Materials must be developed in native languages and distributed.
It won’t be easy and it won’t happen overnight. But it can and should be done. It’s time for a new game plan that helps California voters know for which team to root.
“the Republican Party can connect with minority voters. It has no future as a party made up only of white conservatives. It must reach out to people who are not Republicans and that game plan must start today. The old model of winning elections by relying heavily on white voters no longer works. Conservatives must expand their support without giving up their principles.”
The problem is not with conservatives, but with conservatism itself. It is not a political philosophy that can be “expanded without giving up its principles”.
And the “principles” espoused by conservatives largely determine just who IS a conservative. These principles seem to be inherent to one demographic group, and at the same time, not present in others.
The problem is that the principles of conservatism speak mainly, and mostly, to Euro-Americans. I don’t believe this will change. What WILL change is demographics, and NOT in conservatives’ favor.
Further prognostications here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2131348/posts?page=87#87
- John
The RockyFellers screwed over Republicans by pushing amnesty for illegals, which pissed off the middle class, and after the push back against it, the Hispanics!
We need to let the east-coast RockyFellers go try to form their own party and concentrate on winning back the vast middle class voters.
Reagan won by using the social issues and cutting taxes to the middle class. Yes, the upper class got some tax cuts too, but it wasn't stressed as the main issue.
We need to put the RATS back in their box with the welfare leeches, queer agenda, illegals, Gang-Green and their stupid drilling bans, the gun grabbers, and the teachers union.
The issues we win on...
Welfare reform
Pro- gun
School vouchers
pro-family anti-queer agenda
law and order
Strong defense
domestic oil drilling
Why don't the Republicans offshore another ten million jobs, bring in another ten million H1B and L-1 tech workers to displace American workers, and open the borders to another 20 million illegal aliens to displace American construction and manufacturing workers?
You can offset the job losses by offering to tax the health benefits of the few remaining employed citizens.
Then you can bail out all the corporations who are suffering so greatly because the consumers in our 70% consumer-driven economy are tapped-out of disposable income and credit.
That should bring out the voters in record numbers.
NO!! You stupid RINO jerks. You mention "Free Trade" or "Globalization" in any campaign speech for at least another generation, and that candidate will lose, regardless of the other issues being discussed.
As many have clearly said, EDUCATE - don’t PANDER!
One of the things I love about being conservative is that no one cares about my ethnicity or racial makeup. It’s about shared truth, ideals and values - THAT IS WHERE PROP 8 connected with voters. Don’t overlook that fact that although many of blacks supported the proposition, they still voted democrat.
That’s where shared ideas and facts come into play. Getting out the truth about conservativism, Republicans, and small government is the easy part. The people we need to reach have to be receptive to REAL hope and REAL change - not the messianic crap that’s kept them on the dem plantation for generations. These people have to truly understand and be willing to change a long-held mindset.
And dems have been playing ‘Moses on the rock at the Red Sea’ for too long.
We can only do so much and a true ideological change is going to take a commitment on THEIR part. But we can be there with facts and info to help. For too long, they’ve been a part of an ideology that condescended to them that they were not responsible for their plight.
Through the surge in talk radio, the internet, and the options to educate themselves, Dems knew they would eventually lose their hold on the sheep and Obama was their lullaby to pacify the growing questions.
Maybe I’m wrong but I talk to libs one-on-one (even got my siblings to vote McCain) but there is no guarantee that they will stay on this path - unless they make a conscious choice to do so.
Uggg. The last line should have been 2 sentences. sorry
There are all kinds of things conservatives could do to win elections. First, is actually give a damn about human beings. Then, support raises in minimum wages to where they are livable. Pass a law outlawing excessive bank fees for hot checks. It takes less than $1.00 to process but banks charge as much as $30.00. End bank fees for cahinga check drawn on that particular bank. Lower court fines. These kinds of thing fall harder onthe poor folks.
Grant amnesty to aliens already here but stop the inflow. Period. Fine the crap out of the businesses who hire illegal aliens. Begin large scale public works projects. Put people back to work and if someone is on unemployment, provide day work for them 3 or 4 days per week at a dedent paying public works job. Put limits on corporate bonuses.
parsy, who has to get back to work.
As I put it to some friends of mine, the GOP seems to care about Wall Street and K Street, but not Main Street (exceptions are good conservatives like Palin, Jindal, etc.). The Dem Party left me back in the days of Carter, the Pubs left me more gradually from Bush I to Bush II/McCain/country club RINOs. Connecting with the Joe the Plumber/Tito the Builder and what I call “regular people” should be the focus of the conservatives. Quite a number of my African-American colleagues at work voted for Obama and despised Bush, yet when you hear them talk about non-politics, they sound quite conservative when it comes to ensuring their kids behave, get a good education, learn that there is no free lunch, marriage is between one man and one woman, etc. What was called in 2004 the “values voters”.
It will take a major shake up of the RNC/GOP to get this to happen. The blue-blood-Wall-Steet-K-Street RINOs have to go. Most people I run into that voted GOP voted for Sarah and due to her, not to McCain. The Jindals, Palins, Cantors have to take the helm. They understand the very points you make, and the article makes. I will gladly vote for a true conservative candidate that relates to people like me and respects my values (i.e., Palin), and genuinely remembers and appreciates Main Street. Forget the Vichyite W.D.C. elite blue bloods that buddy-buddy with Teddy K and Co and sneeringly look down on people like me....untl they want my vote (McCain, Grahamnesty, Specter, etc.).
He's wrong right from the start. The Republican "brand" has no value to any conservative, well-off or not.
My worry is that with minorities, even those with some conservative social policy leanings, the “gimme” mentality will always outweigh abstract “principles”, to them. It is very ironic to me that the Republican party and conservatives (not the same thing anymore) has successfully been labeled as “selfish”, when at the same time we are derided by the left for “stupidly” “voting against our own best interests” (putting principle over pocket-book). It’s actually those who vote ‘rat who will vote for their own material self-interest over any shallowly-held “principles” everytime. Lots of conservatives, even, or especially, on the lower end of the socio-economic scale, will vote their principles, even when those principles oppose their economic interests.
LLS
According to exit polls, Prop. 8 was supported by 70% of African American voters, 53% of Hispanic voters and nearly half of Asian voters. If it weren’t for the support we got among ethnic voters, we might very well have lost Proposition 8.
but they voted for Obama...so your argument is flawed...
you are an idiot.
LLS
Disagree. Heavy turnout among white voters works - but you have to give them a reason to turn out for us. As the article correctly states, the GOP has turned into a "me too" version of Democrat lite, complete with the pork, earmarks, bailouts, etc. etc. But guess what? Those are the things that drive away white middle class and working class voters. There are some good arguments being made to the effect that McCain lost (or at least as badly as he did) because millions of these white conservatives simply sat out the election. That's why, despite all the hooplah about massive black turnout, and massive youth turnout, and massive Hispanic turnout, there were only about 4.2 million more votes cast in this election compared to the extremely high turnout 2004 election. Pre-election prognostications, as well as simply historical trending, suggested that there "should" have been about 135 million votes cast - roughly 10 million more than actually WERE cast. Now, if we had record numbers of blacks and Hispanics voting, as well as record numbers of typically liberal youth voters, then who makes up the disappearing voter demographic? If you guessed "white people over 30", then you're right. I seriously believe that many white working class and middle class voters, sick of it all, sat this election out, just like they did in 2006, because the Republicans offered nothing to them beyond more spending, more debt, more amnesties, more RINOism, more platitutdes.
The author seems to be suggesting that one of the ways to reach out to minorities is to cut the spending and taxing. I'm all for cutting taxes and spending, but let's face it, THAT'S not the way to reach out to blacks and Hispanics, most of whom feel compelled to dip their buckets in the public trough one way or another. Cutting taxes and spending would solidify the disaffected white conservatives, and would probably bring them back in if its backed up with serious, Reaganesque conservatism, but economic libertarianism is not going to much appeal to blacks or Hispanics.
It's also arguable that McCain's decrease in % of white vote (55%, vs. 58% for Bush in 2004) was simply due to the bad economy and a lot of white working class types voting with their pocketbooks for a guy making promises of middle class tax cuts. The way to regain those voters is to regain and retain your reputation as the fiscally responsible party that doesn't like to tax people and spend their hard earned dough. If McCain had pulled Bush's numbers among whites, he'd have added ~2.8 million voters to own total, while removing ~2.8 million from Obama's numbers, which would still mean Obama won, but only by ~2.2 million votes, and would probably have handed IN, FL, NC, and VA back to the Republican column. In comparison, to make up those kind of numbers with minority voters, McCain would have had to have taken 21% of the black vote (vs. the 4% he actually got), or 56% of the Hispanic vote (vs. the 31% he actually got), or 25% of the total of these two minority groups (vs. the 15% he actually got). Meanwhile, if McCain had taken just 59.5% of the white vote (or a mere 4.5% more than he actually got), he'd have won in the popular vote, and likely have creamed Obama in the electoral college. Simply put, there are greater dividends for the Republican Party in appealing to conservative, working and middle class white voters who are more naturally sympathetic to what we (used to) stand for, then there is in trying to appeal to minority voters, most of who actively dislike the idea of not having the government handout available upon call.
So, if the GOP gets serious about reforming itself into the conservative party once again, and puts into place the positions and programs which originally won us the white working and middle class Reagan voters in the first place, we could see that 3% (or more) share of the white vote come back, as well as the millions who sat out this election because they disliked McCain enough that even Palin couldn't bring them back on board.
I think it's a mistake to assume that social conservatism is going to win major inroads with minority voters, for the simple reason that it hasn't done so for the last 30 years, so why think it's going to magically start now? All we see with minority voters is that they'll vote the right way on ballot propositions, but still give the rest of their votes to any brain-dead tree stump with a "D" after his name, even if he is diametrically opposed to the socially conservative ballot initiative that they just voted for.
I'm not saying the Republican Party should actively exclude minority voters by any means. We should embrace any one of any colour or ethnic background, so long as those voters agree with the core "liberty ideology" which hopefully our party will embody again soon. If anything, however, our outreach programmes to minorities should largely consist of education - explain to blacks and hispanics why enslavement to the government check is detrimental to them in the long run.
Disagree. Heavy turnout among white voters works - but you have to give them a reason to turn out for us. As the article correctly states, the GOP has turned into a "me too" version of Democrat lite, complete with the pork, earmarks, bailouts, etc. etc. But guess what? Those are the things that drive away white middle class and working class voters. There are some good arguments being made to the effect that McCain lost (or at least as badly as he did) because millions of these white conservatives simply sat out the election. That's why, despite all the hooplah about massive black turnout, and massive youth turnout, and massive Hispanic turnout, there were only about 4.2 million more votes cast in this election compared to the extremely high turnout 2004 election. Pre-election prognostications, as well as simply historical trending, suggested that there "should" have been about 135 million votes cast - roughly 10 million more than actually WERE cast. Now, if we had record numbers of blacks and Hispanics voting, as well as record numbers of typically liberal youth voters, then who makes up the disappearing voter demographic? If you guessed "white people over 30", then you're right. I seriously believe that many white working class and middle class voters, sick of it all, sat this election out, just like they did in 2006, because the Republicans offered nothing to them beyond more spending, more debt, more amnesties, more RINOism, more platitutdes.
The author seems to be suggesting that one of the ways to reach out to minorities is to cut the spending and taxing. I'm all for cutting taxes and spending, but let's face it, THAT'S not the way to reach out to blacks and Hispanics, most of whom feel compelled to dip their buckets in the public trough one way or another. Cutting taxes and spending would solidify the disaffected white conservatives, and would probably bring them back in if its backed up with serious, Reaganesque conservatism, but economic libertarianism is not going to much appeal to blacks or Hispanics.
It's also arguable that McCain's decrease in % of white vote (55%, vs. 58% for Bush in 2004) was simply due to the bad economy and a lot of white working class types voting with their pocketbooks for a guy making promises of middle class tax cuts. The way to regain those voters is to regain and retain your reputation as the fiscally responsible party that doesn't like to tax people and spend their hard earned dough. If McCain had pulled Bush's numbers among whites, he'd have added ~2.8 million voters to own total, while removing ~2.8 million from Obama's numbers, which would still mean Obama won, but only by ~2.2 million votes, and would probably have handed IN, FL, NC, and VA back to the Republican column. In comparison, to make up those kind of numbers with minority voters, McCain would have had to have taken 21% of the black vote (vs. the 4% he actually got), or 56% of the Hispanic vote (vs. the 31% he actually got), or 25% of the total of these two minority groups (vs. the 15% he actually got). Meanwhile, if McCain had taken just 59.5% of the white vote (or a mere 4.5% more than he actually got), he'd have won in the popular vote, and likely have creamed Obama in the electoral college. Simply put, there are greater dividends for the Republican Party in appealing to conservative, working and middle class white voters who are more naturally sympathetic to what we (used to) stand for, then there is in trying to appeal to minority voters, most of who actively dislike the idea of not having the government handout available upon call.
So, if the GOP gets serious about reforming itself into the conservative party once again, and puts into place the positions and programs which originally won us the white working and middle class Reagan voters in the first place, we could see that 3% (or more) share of the white vote come back, as well as the millions who sat out this election because they disliked McCain enough that even Palin couldn't bring them back on board.
I think it's a mistake to assume that social conservatism is going to win major inroads with minority voters, for the simple reason that it hasn't done so for the last 30 years, so why think it's going to magically start now? All we see with minority voters is that they'll vote the right way on ballot propositions, but still give the rest of their votes to any brain-dead tree stump with a "D" after his name, even if he is diametrically opposed to the socially conservative ballot initiative that they just voted for.
I'm not saying the Republican Party should actively exclude minority voters by any means. We should embrace any one of any colour or ethnic background, so long as those voters agree with the core "liberty ideology" which hopefully our party will embody again soon. If anything, however, our outreach programmes to minorities should largely consist of education - explain to blacks and hispanics why enslavement to the government check is detrimental to them in the long run.
Disagree. Heavy turnout among white voters works - but you have to give them a reason to turn out for us. As the article correctly states, the GOP has turned into a "me too" version of Democrat lite, complete with the pork, earmarks, bailouts, etc. etc. But guess what? Those are the things that drive away white middle class and working class voters. There are some good arguments being made to the effect that McCain lost (or at least as badly as he did) because millions of these white conservatives simply sat out the election. That's why, despite all the hooplah about massive black turnout, and massive youth turnout, and massive Hispanic turnout, there were only about 4.2 million more votes cast in this election compared to the extremely high turnout 2004 election. Pre-election prognostications, as well as simply historical trending, suggested that there "should" have been about 135 million votes cast - roughly 10 million more than actually WERE cast. Now, if we had record numbers of blacks and Hispanics voting, as well as record numbers of typically liberal youth voters, then who makes up the disappearing voter demographic? If you guessed "white people over 30", then you're right. I seriously believe that many white working class and middle class voters, sick of it all, sat this election out, just like they did in 2006, because the Republicans offered nothing to them beyond more spending, more debt, more amnesties, more RINOism, more platitutdes.
The author seems to be suggesting that one of the ways to reach out to minorities is to cut the spending and taxing. I'm all for cutting taxes and spending, but let's face it, THAT'S not the way to reach out to blacks and Hispanics, most of whom feel compelled to dip their buckets in the public trough one way or another. Cutting taxes and spending would solidify the disaffected white conservatives, and would probably bring them back in if its backed up with serious, Reaganesque conservatism, but economic libertarianism is not going to much appeal to blacks or Hispanics.
It's also arguable that McCain's decrease in % of white vote (55%, vs. 58% for Bush in 2004) was simply due to the bad economy and a lot of white working class types voting with their pocketbooks for a guy making promises of middle class tax cuts. The way to regain those voters is to regain and retain your reputation as the fiscally responsible party that doesn't like to tax people and spend their hard earned dough. If McCain had pulled Bush's numbers among whites, he'd have added ~2.8 million voters to own total, while removing ~2.8 million from Obama's numbers, which would still mean Obama won, but only by ~2.2 million votes, and would probably have handed IN, FL, NC, and VA back to the Republican column. In comparison, to make up those kind of numbers with minority voters, McCain would have had to have taken 21% of the black vote (vs. the 4% he actually got), or 56% of the Hispanic vote (vs. the 31% he actually got), or 25% of the total of these two minority groups (vs. the 15% he actually got). Meanwhile, if McCain had taken just 59.5% of the white vote (or a mere 4.5% more than he actually got), he'd have won in the popular vote, and likely have creamed Obama in the electoral college. Simply put, there are greater dividends for the Republican Party in appealing to conservative, working and middle class white voters who are more naturally sympathetic to what we (used to) stand for, then there is in trying to appeal to minority voters, most of who actively dislike the idea of not having the government handout available upon call.
So, if the GOP gets serious about reforming itself into the conservative party once again, and puts into place the positions and programs which originally won us the white working and middle class Reagan voters in the first place, we could see that 3% (or more) share of the white vote come back, as well as the millions who sat out this election because they disliked McCain enough that even Palin couldn't bring them back on board.
I think it's a mistake to assume that social conservatism is going to win major inroads with minority voters, for the simple reason that it hasn't done so for the last 30 years, so why think it's going to magically start now? All we see with minority voters is that they'll vote the right way on ballot propositions, but still give the rest of their votes to any brain-dead tree stump with a "D" after his name, even if he is diametrically opposed to the socially conservative ballot initiative that they just voted for.
I'm not saying the Republican Party should actively exclude minority voters by any means. We should embrace any one of any colour or ethnic background, so long as those voters agree with the core "liberty ideology" which hopefully our party will embody again soon. If anything, however, our outreach programmes to minorities should largely consist of education - explain to blacks and hispanics why enslavement to the government check is detrimental to them in the long run.
There are all kinds of things conservatives could do to win elections. First, is actually give a damn about human beings. Then, support raises in minimum wages to where they are livable. Pass a law outlawing excessive bank fees for hot checks. It takes less than $1.00 to process but banks charge as much as $30.00. End bank fees for cahinga check drawn on that particular bank. Lower court fines. These kinds of thing fall harder onthe poor folks.
Grant amnesty to aliens already here but stop the inflow. Period. Fine the crap out of the businesses who hire illegal aliens. Begin large scale public works projects. Put people back to work and if someone is on unemployment, provide day work for them 3 or 4 days per week at a dedent paying public works job. Put limits on corporate bonuses.
IOW be liberal-lite. Got it. Tried it this year with McNutts.....didn’t work, the folks, given that choice, go for the real McCoy every time.
Disagree. Heavy turnout among white voters works - but you have to give them a reason to turn out for us. As the article correctly states, the GOP has turned into a "me too" version of Democrat lite, complete with the pork, earmarks, bailouts, etc. etc. But guess what? Those are the things that drive away white middle class and working class voters. There are some good arguments being made to the effect that McCain lost (or at least as badly as he did) because millions of these white conservatives simply sat out the election. That's why, despite all the hooplah about massive black turnout, and massive youth turnout, and massive Hispanic turnout, there were only about 4.2 million more votes cast in this election compared to the extremely high turnout 2004 election. Pre-election prognostications, as well as simply historical trending, suggested that there "should" have been about 135 million votes cast - roughly 10 million more than actually WERE cast. Now, if we had record numbers of blacks and Hispanics voting, as well as record numbers of typically liberal youth voters, then who makes up the disappearing voter demographic? If you guessed "white people over 30", then you're right. I seriously believe that many white working class and middle class voters, sick of it all, sat this election out, just like they did in 2006, because the Republicans offered nothing to them beyond more spending, more debt, more amnesties, more RINOism, more platitutdes.
The author seems to be suggesting that one of the ways to reach out to minorities is to cut the spending and taxing. I'm all for cutting taxes and spending, but let's face it, THAT'S not the way to reach out to blacks and Hispanics, most of whom feel compelled to dip their buckets in the public trough one way or another. Cutting taxes and spending would solidify the disaffected white conservatives, and would probably bring them back in if its backed up with serious, Reaganesque conservatism, but economic libertarianism is not going to much appeal to blacks or Hispanics.
It's also arguable that McCain's decrease in % of white vote (55%, vs. 58% for Bush in 2004) was simply due to the bad economy and a lot of white working class types voting with their pocketbooks for a guy making promises of middle class tax cuts. The way to regain those voters is to regain and retain your reputation as the fiscally responsible party that doesn't like to tax people and spend their hard earned dough. If McCain had pulled Bush's numbers among whites, he'd have added ~2.8 million voters to own total, while removing ~2.8 million from Obama's numbers, which would still mean Obama won, but only by ~2.2 million votes, and would probably have handed IN, FL, NC, and VA back to the Republican column. In comparison, to make up those kind of numbers with minority voters, McCain would have had to have taken 21% of the black vote (vs. the 4% he actually got), or 56% of the Hispanic vote (vs. the 31% he actually got), or 25% of the total of these two minority groups (vs. the 15% he actually got). Meanwhile, if McCain had taken just 59.5% of the white vote (or a mere 4.5% more than he actually got), he'd have won in the popular vote, and likely have creamed Obama in the electoral college. Simply put, there are greater dividends for the Republican Party in appealing to conservative, working and middle class white voters who are more naturally sympathetic to what we (used to) stand for, then there is in trying to appeal to minority voters, most of who actively dislike the idea of not having the government handout available upon call.
So, if the GOP gets serious about reforming itself into the conservative party once again, and puts into place the positions and programs which originally won us the white working and middle class Reagan voters in the first place, we could see that 3% (or more) share of the white vote come back, as well as the millions who sat out this election because they disliked McCain enough that even Palin couldn't bring them back on board.
I think it's a mistake to assume that social conservatism is going to win major inroads with minority voters, for the simple reason that it hasn't done so for the last 30 years, so why think it's going to magically start now? All we see with minority voters is that they'll vote the right way on ballot propositions, but still give the rest of their votes to any brain-dead tree stump with a "D" after his name, even if he is diametrically opposed to the socially conservative ballot initiative that they just voted for.
I'm not saying the Republican Party should actively exclude minority voters by any means. We should embrace any one of any colour or ethnic background, so long as those voters agree with the core "liberty ideology" which hopefully our party will embody again soon. If anything, however, our outreach programmes to minorities should largely consist of education - explain to blacks and hispanics why enslavement to the government check is detrimental to them in the long run.
Demography really is destiny. The only question left for conservatives is what sort of accommodation you're going to reach with the new reality. Leave? Go John Galt? (Whatever that really means.) Continue to soldier on, knowing the cause is doomed? All are valid, none are all that appealing.
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.