Is the GOP greatly failing at properly exploiting discontent with Obama?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Here's the thing. Obviously discontent with Obama is nothing compared to that with Bush in his second term or Clinton in 1994. However with his disapprovals hovering around 50%, that is enough for some serious openings. No question.

However what has the GOP done? They haven't focused on an alternative health care reform plan, or explained how their policies is better at handling stuff like the oil spill, or how they have a better finance reform plan. The only thing I have heard from the other side is basically "OMG OBAMA = MUSLIM SOCIALIST FASCIST BORN IN KENYA OMG" That alone is obviously not going to cut it.

Anyone see what I'm saying? These Tea Party clowns should in theory appeal to the more affluent areas the GOP recently lost because of Bush that probably are concerned about health care reform and their taxes going up. But they aren't going to be won over by poorly made mispelled signs with the type of cheap shots listed abgove. Which is all they have given us.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

There are plenty of legitimate things to criticize Obama on, but the Republicans are just the lunatic party of no.

[fezzyfestoon]

Yes, they're taking the simplistic and painfully short-sighted approach to being an alternative to Obama and the Democrats.  They aren't attracting anyone new, they're just being temporarily not as wrong and resting on those laurels.  Instead of taking this opportunity to learn from the opposition's mistakes and propel themselves forward for a long-term change in power, they're setting themselves up for even worse backlash after a mediocre comeback.  What they should be doing is taking this time to focus on retooling themselves to come out with a bangin' new package that'll attract more than they lost in the last few years.  What they are doing is gloating and doing as much as they can to soil the Democrats.  We already dislike the Democrats, now make us like the Republicans.  Maybe because they've been doing it for so long with no luck that now that it's working they don't even remember what to do next.  A negative approach to everything is not going to work long-term, neither side seems to get that.  Obama did an ok job in 2008 attracting Republicans but in general both sides rely solely on the oscillating middle ground.  That's just my rambling thought on the matter.

[fezzyfestoon]

There are plenty of legitimate things to criticize Obama on, but the Republicans are just the lunatic party of no.

Exactly.  And that's what the Democrats were in the early 2000s and the Republicans in the late '90s.  Crazy how little they each learn from each other.

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

Here's the thing. Obviously discontent with Obama is nothing compared to that with Bush in his second term or Clinton in 1994. However with his disapprovals hovering around 50%, that is enough for some serious openings. No question.

However what has the GOP done? They haven't focused on an alternative health care reform plan, or explained how their policies is better at handling stuff like the oil spill, or how they have a better finance reform plan. The only thing I have heard from the other side is basically "OMG OBAMA = MUSLIM SOCIALIST FASCIST BORN IN KENYA OMG" That alone is obviously not going to cut it.

Anyone see what I'm saying? These Tea Party clowns should in theory appeal to the more affluent areas the GOP recently lost because of Bush that probably are concerned about health care reform and their taxes going up. But they aren't going to be won over by poorly made mispelled signs with the type of cheap shots listed abgove. Which is all they have given us.

well they do have an alternative healthcare plan, but conservatives rather rely on bumper sticker slogans, attack the other side, and use fear mongering to gain support.

I'll start respecting conservatives once they start respecting simple macroeconomic truths, and if they cant than screw em. Why should I wait for them to learn?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

There are plenty of legitimate things to criticize Obama on, but the Republicans are just the lunatic party of no.

Exactly.  And that's what the Democrats were in the early 2000s and the Republicans in the late '90s.  Crazy how little they each learn from each other.

Uh, a majority of Senate Democrats voted for the Iraq war.

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

I really do not understand how conservatives in this country disagree with everything obama has done. For example the stimulus is a common sense policy, and is not something that is unprecedented.

[fezzyfestoon]

There are plenty of legitimate things to criticize Obama on, but the Republicans are just the lunatic party of no.

Exactly.  And that's what the Democrats were in the early 2000s and the Republicans in the late '90s.  Crazy how little they each learn from each other.

Uh, a majority of Senate Democrats voted for the Iraq war.

Everyone supported that war, obviously they voted for it.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

There are plenty of legitimate things to criticize Obama on, but the Republicans are just the lunatic party of no.

Exactly.  And that's what the Democrats were in the early 2000s and the Republicans in the late '90s.  Crazy how little they each learn from each other.

Uh, a majority of Senate Democrats voted for the Iraq war.

Everyone supported that war, obviously they voted for it.

Yeah, it only had the largest protest in human history against it before it started.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

Yes, the GOP is still the party of Bush, i.e., the party of war, bailouts, reckless spending, police state, torture, etc. They will need to cease to be a clone of the Democrats in order to be seen as a serious alternative.

[Vepres]

Yes, they're taking the simplistic and painfully short-sighted approach to being an alternative to Obama and the Democrats.  They aren't attracting anyone new, they're just being temporarily not as wrong and resting on those laurels.  Instead of taking this opportunity to learn from the opposition's mistakes and propel themselves forward for a long-term change in power, they're setting themselves up for even worse backlash after a mediocre comeback.  What they should be doing is taking this time to focus on retooling themselves to come out with a bangin' new package that'll attract more than they lost in the last few years.  What they are doing is gloating and doing as much as they can to soil the Democrats.  We already dislike the Democrats, now make us like the Republicans.  Maybe because they've been doing it for so long with no luck that now that it's working they don't even remember what to do next.  A negative approach to everything is not going to work long-term, neither side seems to get that.  Obama did an ok job in 2008 attracting Republicans but in general both sides rely solely on the oscillating middle ground.  That's just my rambling thought on the matter.

The Democrats came into power the same way.

[fezzyfestoon]

There are plenty of legitimate things to criticize Obama on, but the Republicans are just the lunatic party of no.

Exactly.  And that's what the Democrats were in the early 2000s and the Republicans in the late '90s.  Crazy how little they each learn from each other.

Uh, a majority of Senate Democrats voted for the Iraq war.

Everyone supported that war, obviously they voted for it.

Yeah, it only had the largest protest in human history against it before it started.

Uh...I'm not sure what point you're trying to make with all this, that the Democrats have even weaker spines than the Republicans?  Regardless, US Senators don't represent the world...

The Democrats came into power the same way.

That's exactly what that entire thing says, thanks for reading it.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

There are plenty of legitimate things to criticize Obama on, but the Republicans are just the lunatic party of no.

Exactly.  And that's what the Democrats were in the early 2000s and the Republicans in the late '90s.  Crazy how little they each learn from each other.

Uh, a majority of Senate Democrats voted for the Iraq war.

Everyone supported that war, obviously they voted for it.

Yeah, it only had the largest protest in human history against it before it started.

Uh...I'm not sure what point you're trying to make with all this, that the Democrats have even weaker spines than the Republicans?  Regardless, US Senators don't represent the world...

The Democrats came into power the same way.

That's exactly what that entire thing says, thanks for reading it.

My point is that lots of people were against various Bush policies, such as the Iraq War, but the Democrats didn't do an effective job of standing up to Bush. Compare to the way that the Republicans have stood up to Obama and Clinton.

[Citizen (The) Doctor]

There are plenty of legitimate things to criticize Obama on, but the Republicans are just the lunatic party of no.

Exactly.  And that's what the Democrats were in the early 2000s and the Republicans in the late '90s.  Crazy how little they each learn from each other.

Uh, a majority of Senate Democrats voted for the Iraq war.

Everyone supported that war, obviously they voted for it.

Yeah, it only had the largest protest in human history against it before it started.

Uh...I'm not sure what point you're trying to make with all this, that the Democrats have even weaker spines than the Republicans?  Regardless, US Senators don't represent the world...

The Democrats came into power the same way.

That's exactly what that entire thing says, thanks for reading it.

My point is that lots of people were against various Bush policies, such as the Iraq War, but the Democrats didn't do an effective job of standing up to Bush. Compare to the way that the Republicans have stood up to Obama and Clinton.

That's because the role of moderate wimps and hardcore partisan switched when Reagan became president.  Dems became the moderate wimps, and the Republicans took a hard-right shift (as opposed to the Eisenhower - Nixon years, where the GOP was moderate and the Dems were New Deal hardcore liberals)

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

There are plenty of legitimate things to criticize Obama on, but the Republicans are just the lunatic party of no.

Exactly.  And that's what the Democrats were in the early 2000s and the Republicans in the late '90s.  Crazy how little they each learn from each other.

Uh, a majority of Senate Democrats voted for the Iraq war.

Everyone supported that war, obviously they voted for it.

Yeah, it only had the largest protest in human history against it before it started.

Uh...I'm not sure what point you're trying to make with all this, that the Democrats have even weaker spines than the Republicans?  Regardless, US Senators don't represent the world...

The Democrats came into power the same way.

That's exactly what that entire thing says, thanks for reading it.

My point is that lots of people were against various Bush policies, such as the Iraq War, but the Democrats didn't do an effective job of standing up to Bush. Compare to the way that the Republicans have stood up to Obama and Clinton.

That's because the role of moderate wimps and hardcore partisan switched when Reagan became president.  Dems became the moderate wimps, and the Republicans took a hard-right shift (as opposed to the Eisenhower - Nixon years, where the GOP was moderate and the Dems were New Deal hardcore liberals)

Yes, the Democrats have pretty much been epic fail since 1980.

[Torie]

The grand unified theory here, is that the GOP just doesn't understand the concept of  less is more. This demonization of Obama schtick (sp) will trim their vote haul, and it should.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Yes, they're taking the simplistic and painfully short-sighted approach to being an alternative to Obama and the Democrats.  They aren't attracting anyone new, they're just being temporarily not as wrong and resting on those laurels.  Instead of taking this opportunity to learn from the opposition's mistakes and propel themselves forward for a long-term change in power, they're setting themselves up for even worse backlash after a mediocre comeback.  What they should be doing is taking this time to focus on retooling themselves to come out with a bangin' new package that'll attract more than they lost in the last few years.  What they are doing is gloating and doing as much as they can to soil the Democrats.  We already dislike the Democrats, now make us like the Republicans.  Maybe because they've been doing it for so long with no luck that now that it's working they don't even remember what to do next.  A negative approach to everything is not going to work long-term, neither side seems to get that.  Obama did an ok job in 2008 attracting Republicans but in general both sides rely solely on the oscillating middle ground.  That's just my rambling thought on the matter.

The Democrats came into power the same way.

As stated above though, discontent with Obama is nowhere near comparable to discontent of Bush in his second term.

[Vepres]

Yes, they're taking the simplistic and painfully short-sighted approach to being an alternative to Obama and the Democrats.  They aren't attracting anyone new, they're just being temporarily not as wrong and resting on those laurels.  Instead of taking this opportunity to learn from the opposition's mistakes and propel themselves forward for a long-term change in power, they're setting themselves up for even worse backlash after a mediocre comeback.  What they should be doing is taking this time to focus on retooling themselves to come out with a bangin' new package that'll attract more than they lost in the last few years.  What they are doing is gloating and doing as much as they can to soil the Democrats.  We already dislike the Democrats, now make us like the Republicans.  Maybe because they've been doing it for so long with no luck that now that it's working they don't even remember what to do next.  A negative approach to everything is not going to work long-term, neither side seems to get that.  Obama did an ok job in 2008 attracting Republicans but in general both sides rely solely on the oscillating middle ground.  That's just my rambling thought on the matter.

The Democrats came into power the same way.

As stated above though, discontent with Obama is nowhere near comparable to discontent of Bush in his second term.

Of course, which is why Republicans taking back either house is becoming less likely as time goes on.

[The Vorlon]

There is no doubt that Obama is deeply unpopular, and we are at the point where ~~I think~~ we are going to start seeing his poll numbers begin to erode (they have been VERY stable for the past 6 months or so) - the gap between generic "approval" and issue specific approval is getting large enough that things are going to break pretty soon.

The key point is that, as Bill Clinton used to say "You can't beat something with nothing" and while I am sure the Dems will take a (richly deserved) beating in the 2010 midterms, the greater question for 2012 is "What is the alternative"

The GOP has traditionally been the sorta-kinda home of those with a libertarian bent.  The social conservatives are pretty scary to folks like me, while the economic liberals on the Dem side are also pretty scary.

The libertarian vote is always a tug of war between which party scares us the most.

In 2006 the neocons scared libertarians more than the Harry Reid liberals.

In 2010 the Obama socialism/deficits/stimulus look a lost scarier than than they have for al ot of years.

If the classic "liberals" in the GOP - Small government, respect for individual freedom, tolerance, and respect regain their voice, the GOP, the GOP could have a huge year.  Unfortunately there are far fewer of those voices in the GOP than their used to be.

[opebo]

It is somewhat difficult for them to exploit his negatives, as they are even more for destroying the environment and impoverishing the populace than he!

[cannonia]

Yes, they're taking the simplistic and painfully short-sighted approach to being an alternative to Obama and the Democrats.  They aren't attracting anyone new, they're just being temporarily not as wrong and resting on those laurels.  Instead of taking this opportunity to learn from the opposition's mistakes and propel themselves forward for a long-term change in power, they're setting themselves up for even worse backlash after a mediocre comeback.  What they should be doing is taking this time to focus on retooling themselves to come out with a bangin' new package that'll attract more than they lost in the last few years.  What they are doing is gloating and doing as much as they can to soil the Democrats.  We already dislike the Democrats, now make us like the Republicans.  Maybe because they've been doing it for so long with no luck that now that it's working they don't even remember what to do next.  A negative approach to everything is not going to work long-term, neither side seems to get that.  Obama did an ok job in 2008 attracting Republicans but in general both sides rely solely on the oscillating middle ground.  That's just my rambling thought on the matter.

The Democrats came into power the same way.

As stated above though, discontent with Obama is nowhere near comparable to discontent of Bush in his second term.

"Discontent of Bush" was fueled by an eight-year steady drumbeat of Democratic criticism.  A Dem politician could hardly utter a sentence without saying the words "failed Bush policy."

It stinks, but Republicans should absolutely keep up the attacks on Obama.

[Derek]

I'm discontent with him. It's not the president's job to find out whose ass to kick as if he's some bully on the streets. He sounded like a thug and a street talker, not a role model or a military leader.

[opebo]

He sounded like a thug and a street talker, not a role model or a military leader.

And Bush didn't when he grabbed his crotch and said 'bring it on'?  Oh that's right, he's a white.

[Smash255]

I'm discontent with him. It's not the president's job to find out whose ass to kick as if he's some bully on the streets. He sounded like a thug and a street talker, not a role model or a military leader.

Yes, instead he should what send flowers to BP??  I personally think Obama has been a bit too cautious not to try and come across as being too angry or too much of a bully, as you put it.  This is EXACTLY the situation he should "Go off" as Spike Lee put it.

[Хahar 🤔]

Obama socialism

Are we listing off things that don't exist?