Is the Republican party done?

[Ben Kenobi]

I'll leave it to the woman who got pregnant from a rape, to decide for herself, whether her pregnancy is a good or not for her.

Yes or no, Mr. Fun. Is the life of the woman conceived in rape a good thing?

[Felch]

I think the rape exception speaks to our inhumanity. We don't execute rapists, but we do happily kill their children. Honor killings in Pakistan disgust us, but women can kill their innocent children because they shouldn't have to live with the shame and humiliation. If rape makes you want to kill somebody, kill a rapist. Anything else is misdirected hatred.

[Al B. Sure!]

I hate to say it but Romney-Ryan was the best possible balance for the GOP. A CEO/technocrat and a Chicago School-style economic policy wonk, both having been elected in Democratic states. It could have worked. It should have worked. It's the heart and soul of a return to the GOP of Goldwater, Nixon, Eisenhower, and Nelson Rockefeller.

I fear the nuts will take over the party and marginalize it.

[Felch]

The spineless have run the party, and failed to come up with any inspiring ideas. Better off without them.

[Alexander's Horse]

yes, never under-estimate the ability of political parties to draw the wrong lessons from defeats.

[Boris Godunov]

I hate to say it but Romney-Ryan was the best possible balance for the GOP. A CEO/technocrat and a Chicago School-style economic policy wonk, both having been elected in Democratic states. It could have worked. It should have worked. It's the heart and soul of a return to the GOP of Goldwater, Nixon, Eisenhower, and Nelson Rockefeller.

I fear the nuts will take over the party and marginalize it.

Goldwater was the guy who said "extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice" quote. I think Eisenhower and Rockefeller would shudder to be lumped with him.

[giblets]

Saying this election was the GOP's to lose does not respect the advantage that an incumbent has merely by being an incumbent. Barack Obama was never a pushover opponent and the fact that he won by a smaller margin the second time around is noteworthy.

As much as the Republicans are focusing on the South and Midwest, the Democrats are throwing away their hopes for them. The amount of ground lost in Florida, Virginia, and North Carolina are important to consider, as well as in several midwestern states. I think we're going to see in the future the Republicans winning a lot of the Midwestern states that are now firmly in the hands of the Democrats. Midwestern states have the least racial diversity of anywhere in the country and some of the oldest populations. Their cities are smaller and more suburban, and they have a lot of populated rural areas.

The social war issues are not killing Republicans. Independents in this election were not concerned with that. People already in the Democratic column might have been energized by that. But social issues were never a focus of the presidential campaign. They were used as a distraction by Obama to fearmonger his base.

You're just in damage control mode right now. "But Obama won by a smaller margin this time!!!!!!"

[giblets]

I think the rape exception speaks to our inhumanity. We don't execute rapists, but we do happily kill their children. Honor killings in Pakistan disgust us, but women can kill their innocent children because they shouldn't have to live with the shame and humiliation. If rape makes you want to kill somebody, kill a rapist. Anything else is misdirected hatred.

I get it, you want to enslave women and make them harbor a parasite against their will. Does this really need to be brought up in every single thread?

[DaShi]

Please don't put Felch in my camp.

[Al B. Sure!]

Ben, I'm going to be as polite as possible and tell you something I told someone else:

The problem is, the Republican party will not survive as a national party if it becomes solely a coalition of the Southern Bible Belt and the Tea Party. It needs the leadership of Northern moderates, the so-called RINO's. Look, Nixon was a Californian, Reagan was a Californian by way of Illinois, H. W. Bush was a Massachusetts man like Romney. The GOP was at its zenith led by such men who captured national appeal. Nixon, Reagan, and H. W. Bush won elections by incredible margins, never before seen in American politics. Only Massachusetts didn't reelect Nixon; only Minnesota didn't reelect Reagan. 49 states going for Republicans! This was not ancient history!

The population is not there for the Southern strategy, it's not winnable in the electoral college (Romney as a moderate easily took the South and West and it wasn't nearly enough votes), and it will never get Democrats to vote Republican or attract independents and attract/retain libertarians. Plus, the demographics of this country are changing and the GOP can not afford to continue this perception of being a 'white' party with a hard-line against immigrants, as the country becomes more diverse.

In August, Sen. Graham said: “The demographics race we’re losing badly. We’re not generating enough angry white guys to stay in business for the long term.” I hope the people heed the words of Sen. Graham and listen to Jeb Bush, Jim Boehner, Michael Steele, and others and not think that we need someone more conservative, more extreme, and end up ensuring Democratic victories with the Michelle Bachmans and Herman Cains representing the party.

[Boris Godunov]

Demographics are killing the Republicans.

Obama lost the white vote 59-41, but the White vote accounted for 72% of the electorate, down from 74% in 2008.

In 2004, Kerry lost the election while winning 53% of Latinos. In 2008, Obama won this group 67-31. Last night, Obama carried Latinos 71-27. Meanwhile, the share of the vote held by Latinos increased from 9% in 2008 to 10% in 2012. It was 8% in 2004, so the trend is obvious.

Republicans have never been able to make any inroads with black voters, and that continued.

Asian-Americans were 3% of the vote, their highest portion ever. Obama carried 73% of their votes.

Women? Obama wins them overall 55-44, and he won about 65% of single women.

Obama won every age group under 40.

Basically, the Republican party has become the party of straight white guys and old people. Hell of a coalition there.

Based on the Latino populations alone, both Texas and later Arizona are going to become legitimate swing states, should the demographic trends continue like this in the Democrats' favor. The Republicans are facing an abyss if they don't have some serious reflection and change their platform and rhetoric for these demographics. It's the social issues that are killing them.

But by all means, let the Republicans believe the problem was Mitt being too moderate and live in the fantasy that a "true conservative" would have won. By modern Republican standards, that would be... Rick Santorum? Mike Huckabee? Go for it, nominate one of those guys in 2016. See what happens.

[-Jrabbit]

Basically, the Republican party has become the party of straight white guys and old people.

Whattya mean, straight?

[regexcellent]

I think as more hispanics get settled in the United States and become ordinary citizens like every other immigrant group in history they'll drift naturally toward the GOP, just like every other immigrant group in history. It would of course help if the GOP did something like immigration reform. I don't mean amnesty, I mean letting more people in. Though amnesty would likely help.

[Boris Godunov]

I think as more hispanics get settled in the United States and become ordinary citizens like every other immigrant group in history they'll drift naturally toward the GOP, just like every other immigrant group in history. It would of course help if the GOP did something like immigration reform. I don't mean amnesty, I mean letting more people in. Though amnesty would likely help.

That's what Republicans claimed was already happening in 2004. Look what's happened since.

I do think Immigration is the most likely issue on which the GOP surrenders after this election, though, yes.

[regexcellent]

The democrats are hardly better on immigration. They're in favor of certain increased rights for illegals, but not generally on solving the fundamental problem with our immigration, which is that we don't just let everyone in. Democrats like to let in more family members, and Republicans like to let in more skilled and educated individuals. Then they argue over whether to go the "humanitarian" route in quotas or "economic" route in quotas. It's kind of retarded.

Republicans should dash past Dems on this issue and go all out for immigration.