If the GOP keeps losing, when would a viable replacement party emerge? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 29, 2024, 06:12:33 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Presidential Election Trends (Moderator: 100% pro-life no matter what)
  If the GOP keeps losing, when would a viable replacement party emerge? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: At which presidential election?
#1
2020
 
#2
2024
 
#3
2028
 
#4
2032
 
#5
2036
 
#6
2040
 
#7
2044
 
#8
After 2044
 
#9
Never would happen
 
#10
The Dems. would be challenged from the left
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 58

Author Topic: If the GOP keeps losing, when would a viable replacement party emerge?  (Read 5620 times)
bobloblaw
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,018
« on: April 26, 2015, 09:26:47 PM »

What a stupid post.

In case you havent noticed the GOP has MORE elected officials at federal, state and local than anytime since the 1920s. It is the Dem party that is deep in minority status. The Dem party is like the GOP during the Ford Administration. They control the WH and nothing else.
Logged
bobloblaw
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,018
« Reply #1 on: May 03, 2015, 09:29:59 PM »

The reason for the GOP loss in 2008, was 3 fold. Scandals involving Cheney; Waterboarding and Abu Gharib, Outing CIA agent, and Palin ethics.  Also, the Iraq War; in addition to the economic collapse

Even if there was an economic crisis, all three colamaties of the Bush administration wont be there, and Dems will hold off the GOP. 

But, let the Dems win in 2016 first, and let 2018 and 2020 take care of itself.

Rubbish, scandals involving Cheney??? Outing a CIA agent??? Youre living in a leftwing bubble.

McCain lost because the economy and war in Iraq. Also you cant spell. In an economic CALAMITY, the GOP would not only win but the so called BLUE WALL would come crashing down.
Logged
bobloblaw
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,018
« Reply #2 on: May 06, 2015, 04:03:54 PM »

They don't need the Presidency when they have the House, Senate, Supreme Court, media, and the Presidents are spineless like Clinton and Obama.

As long as you realize just how far out of the mainstream you are, especially calling the media conservative, God bless you for your posts!  They're great, LOL.


The media is conservative, except for Salon.com. The rest of the media didn't dare criticize Bush for over a year after he failed to prevent 9/11. Salon.com had the balls to have this article the next day. Crickets from the NY Times, Washington Post, NPR, and the rest of the supposedly liberal media. Gary Hart is of course a FF.

http://web.archive.org/web/20010917041617/http://www.salon.com/politics/feature/2001/09/12/bush/index.html

Except he didnt fail to prevent a plot that was hatched in 1995. The PDB of 8/6/2001 make no specific  threats.
Logged
bobloblaw
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,018
« Reply #3 on: May 07, 2015, 11:15:08 PM »

2016, is gonna be a close; competetive campaign. The economy is growing at 0.2 percent.  I wouldnt be so confident if I were the Dems. They can risk playing it safe like the did in 2014; and Jeb Bush can sneak up, like they did before. In either case, whoever wins the prez, will still have a slow economy to deal with.

Jeb isnt going to be the nominee and he certainly wont be President
Logged
bobloblaw
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,018
« Reply #4 on: May 08, 2015, 03:52:16 PM »

2016, is gonna be a close; competetive campaign. The economy is growing at 0.2 percent.  I wouldnt be so confident if I were the Dems. They can risk playing it safe like the did in 2014; and Jeb Bush can sneak up, like they did before. In either case, whoever wins the prez, will still have a slow economy to deal with.

Jeb isnt going to be the nominee and he certainly wont be President

First assertion: untrue.
Second assertion: true.

History (liberals seem to love historical inevitability), says that 2016 will not only be close, but closer than 2012 (which was the 3rd closest re-election in US history). You have to go back t0 1904, to see where a party running for its third term won by a larger margin than in the previous election.
Logged
bobloblaw
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,018
« Reply #5 on: May 13, 2015, 11:34:06 AM »

What would happen to the majority of elected legislators? (You know, the Republican ones who outnumber Democrats in most States.)

Not to mention governors, local officials, House members etc.

The GOP is in far better shape than the Dems were in 1972. The Dems controlled everything except the WH which they lost by 22 points. In 2014, the GOP controls everything having lost the WH by 4 points. We are much closer to a large GOP majority today than the Dems were in the 1970s and 80s.
Logged
bobloblaw
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,018
« Reply #6 on: May 13, 2015, 12:42:44 PM »

What happens in 2018; when the bulk of GOP govs are term limited.  Dems are poised to pick up: IL, MI, NM, ME, MD and keep CO.

Then, in 2020; reapportionment starts all over again.

New Dem govs will include Emily Cain; ME, Lisa Madigan or Bill Daley in IL; and Stephanie Rawlings or Kathline Kennedy-Townsend of MD.

Not to mention; should Kennedy step down from SCoTUS; Loretta Lynch will be named by Hilary to that seat. Kennedy and Ginnsberg should give Clinton 2 more Appointments.

Dream on pal. If Hillary is president 2018 will be another 2014 disaster for the Dems. MI??? Seriously??? They have no bench in MI or OH. Maybe PA will go GOP and give two one term govs the boot in a row. Lisa Madigan cant leave her AG post so long as DADDY in in the General Assembly or else he'll get indicted. ME??? You cant even beat the most right wing gov in America.

Nope, GOP is looking at 35 or more govs by 2018. Ill even place say Rauner is 50/50 and Hogan better than 50/50.
Logged
bobloblaw
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,018
« Reply #7 on: May 13, 2015, 08:04:48 PM »

Bill Daley said he wants to run for gov and as for Larry Hogan; Kathlene Kennedy Townsend says she wants to run.  As for ME; Emily Cain will definately win.

If Wolf approvals are low enough; Bob Casey JR will run.

Pa; IL; MD; ME will go Democratic.

I am an optimist, but 2018; I assure you wont be 2014. Obama's approvals were 43 percent. At worst Clinton approvals will be 47-49 percent.

KKT is a loser. Obama has a much higher floor than Hillary does. Id love Bob Casey to run, because it will tear the Dem party apart in PA. There will be a recession by 2018, Clinton will be sub 40%, something that didnt happen to Obama for more than a week or two at RCP.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.026 seconds with 15 queries.