What Happened To The GOP in 2012

[Fuzzy Stands With His Friend, Chairman Sanchez]

Obama was picked again not because he was the best candidate but he was the safest candidate. People still don't like what he did on Wallstreet and tax reform package that tilted too much for the capital gains tax, but voters felt comfortable with him. Scared to put a Bain banker back in power. When economy wasn't benefitting GOP, the same mistake they are gonna make in 14 and 16 gonna rely on HCR to get elected.

On a personal level, this was why I voted for Obama in 2012.  I was a McCain voter in 2008, and I am a pro-life moderate if you wish to classify me.  I remember when the GOP presented itself as the party of responsible governace.  It's anti-government stance of today, coupled with their being OK with tax cuts in wartime have caused them to lose that particular mantle over time.

[barfbag]

We can ask what happened to the losing party in every election year. What happened to the GOP in 2012? They won the House again.

[Badger]

We can ask what happened to the losing party in every election year. What happened to the GOP in 2012? They won the House again.

Well, we maintained house control through the redistricting process despite losing the overall congressional popular vote, but who's counting?

[barfbag]

We can ask what happened to the losing party in every election year. What happened to the GOP in 2012? They won the House again.

Well, we maintained house control through the redistricting process despite losing the overall congressional popular vote, but who's counting?

Both parties have won the house without the popular vote. It's not like there was a big difference in the popular vote anyways. I expect 2014 to be interesting. We might see some Democrats running away from Obama and back towards the Clintons. I expect Pryor, Begich, Hagan, and Landrieu to have difficulties once people start paying attention around October.

[BobBaker]

In my opinion, 2012 was the first presidential campaign in a long time where the Republicans did not try to use divisive social issues to win, and instead focused on their economic plan (cut spending/cut taxes for rich people). The problem is that their economic plan is unpopular, but in large part Republicans have been able to hold power and pass that agenda because they were able to divide people with those hot button issues. With America moving toward the other end of those issues, Republicans are either going to have to find some new things to scare people about, or change their policies to be more palatable.

[barfbag]

In my opinion, 2012 was the first presidential campaign in a long time where the Republicans did not try to use divisive social issues to win, and instead focused on their economic plan (cut spending/cut taxes for rich people). The problem is that their economic plan is unpopular, but in large part Republicans have been able to hold power and pass that agenda because they were able to divide people with those hot button issues. With America moving toward the other end of those issues, Republicans are either going to have to find some new things to scare people about, or change their policies to be more palatable.

What makes you think people are moving to the left?

[Mordecai]

In my opinion, 2012 was the first presidential campaign in a long time where the Republicans did not try to use divisive social issues to win, and instead focused on their economic plan (cut spending/cut taxes for rich people). The problem is that their economic plan is unpopular, but in large part Republicans have been able to hold power and pass that agenda because they were able to divide people with those hot button issues. With America moving toward the other end of those issues, Republicans are either going to have to find some new things to scare people about, or change their policies to be more palatable.

What makes you think people are moving to the left?

It's not really "moving to the left" so much as it is the fog clearing and people having a more clear view for economic issues.

Things like same-sex marriage becoming more socially acceptable is part of that. It's no longer going to be a wedge issue for Republicans to capitalize on, as seen when Ted Cruz just said that he believes it's up to the states to decide.

[barfbag]

In my opinion, 2012 was the first presidential campaign in a long time where the Republicans did not try to use divisive social issues to win, and instead focused on their economic plan (cut spending/cut taxes for rich people). The problem is that their economic plan is unpopular, but in large part Republicans have been able to hold power and pass that agenda because they were able to divide people with those hot button issues. With America moving toward the other end of those issues, Republicans are either going to have to find some new things to scare people about, or change their policies to be more palatable.

What makes you think people are moving to the left?

It's not really "moving to the left" so much as it is the fog clearing and people having a more clear view for economic issues.

Things like same-sex marriage becoming more socially acceptable is part of that. It's no longer going to be a wedge issue for Republicans to capitalize on, as seen when Ted Cruz just said that he believes it's up to the states to decide.

I just wanted him to answer. This country is moving a little to the left on social issues. Conservatives seem to have the upper hand on issues they don't talk about as much as they could. School vouchers, school prayer, privatization of social security, the death penalty, the fairness of affirmative action, and guns seem to be things they could win on. I'm not in agreement with them on all of these, but it could help them in trending states.

[pbrower2a]

2012 was arguably the weakest Republican field in decades. Why is that. Why did the Republican A-Team decide to sit 2012 out. Obama was at his weakest in 2011, when the Primary race began. It was the perfect storm. Why did Jindal, Christie, Thune, Daniels and others decide against running?

Barack Obama is still one of the canniest campaigners out there. He won a Senate seat despite youth and comparative inexperience. He ran a masterful campaign in 2008, and one could expect much the same in 2012. He had done nothing to get himself defeated. The financial industry abandoned him once they had used him to do what was necessary to prevent the 2007-2009 meltdown from becoming like the 1929-1932 meltdown -- but that did not swing a state.

Jindal, Daniels, and Thune have always been B-team material. Christie did not become A-team material until Hurricane Sandy, and then paradoxically by cooperating with President Obama. 

[Fuzzy Stands With His Friend, Chairman Sanchez]

2012 was arguably the weakest Republican field in decades. Why is that. Why did the Republican A-Team decide to sit 2012 out. Obama was at his weakest in 2011, when the Primary race began. It was the perfect storm. Why did Jindal, Christie, Thune, Daniels and others decide against running?

Barack Obama is still one of the canniest campaigners out there. He won a Senate seat despite youth and comparative inexperience. He ran a masterful campaign in 2008, and one could expect much the same in 2012. He had done nothing to get himself defeated. The financial industry abandoned him once they had used him to do what was necessary to prevent the 2007-2009 meltdown from becoming like the 1929-1932 meltdown -- but that did not swing a state.

Jindal, Daniels, and Thune have always been B-team material. Christie did not become A-team material until Hurricane Sandy, and then paradoxically by cooperating with President Obama. 

Had Dick Cheney been healthy and run in 2008 and had he chosen a running mate of substance, the GOP 2012 bench would have looked more formidable.  Cheney, of course, did not run (and was unelectable in 2008 anyway), and McCain's running mate, who would have ordinarily been viewed as an A-teamer was the horrid Sarah Palin, a complete joke.  If Cheney had been the 2008 candidate and picked, say, John Thune as his running mate, then Thune would have been an A-teamer, and would have run in 2012.  The same could be said of Mitch Daniels. (Indeed, if Romney had been the 2008 VP nominee, he'd have looked more like an A-teamer.

The obvious A-teamer was Condoleeza Rice, but the GOP wasn't going to have a pro-choice Presidential nominee any more than the Democrats would put Bob Casey on the ticket.  That's kind of silly, given that the President has very little to do with abortion given Roe v. Wade, and even Bush's Judicial appointees are unlikely to vote to overturn Roe v. Wade.

[SingingAnalyst]

The electorate is changing. Those under 35 were not taught history the same way as 35+ Americans were. They are shocked by different things, and found nothing about Obama to be concerned about, while being terrified by Dem ads that a Romney Presidency would take us back to the dark, unknown, mysterious, repressive Fifties.