What must the Republican party do?

[zman1]

What must the Republican party do to get back seats in the house and senate? Including states that have typically been in RED - VA, IN.
Also , the 8 states that flipped from Red in the last presidential race to Blue, with two still yet TBD.
Besides the typical answers I expect to hear like wait 2 and 4 years.

 

[michaeltx]

for one they are going to have to figure out a way to re-energize the party. I didnt see much in the way of excitement and flare out of them in this election. A big reason they have lost alot of territory is that their message was the same old same old which hasnt worked out to well for the country.
as far as exactly what they need to do I dont know they had to many issues against the party to have a real chance in this election IMO. to many bad things going on that even if they werent to blame for they still got the blame. Alot of the issues have been rising for many years and just happen to come to ahead this year.
Mike

 

[pontius]

do the things that Republicans are supposed to do.........lower spending and small government with the power of the country being the power of the citizens. those are the most important aspects, and those are what Bush has ignored for 8 years. granted, not to be so hard on Bush because he's had to face several crises (particularly 9/11 and Katrina) that other presidents have not had to face, but it's hard at this point to consider him a conservative, because he's not conservative in any way.
also, drop the abortion and gay rights issues once and for all, I'm sick of hearing about it. issues like these are NOT where the federal government should be putting it's nose. you can be religious, you can be against something. but trying to force your morals into the laws of a democratic country is alienating.
small government, less spending, more transparency, more power to the people and not corporations, independent of foreign energy suppliers, and basically allow people to live their own lives.......when they do these things, they will return to relevance.

 

[jpc763]

Originally Posted by Pontius
http:///forum/post/2827685
do the things that Republicans are supposed to do.........lower spending and small government with the power of the country being the power of the citizens. those are the most important aspects, and those are what Bush has ignored for 8 years. granted, not to be so hard on Bush because he's had to face several crises (particularly 9/11 and Katrina) that other presidents have not had to face, but it's hard at this point to consider him a conservative, because he's not conservative in any way.
also, drop the abortion and gay rights issues once and for all, I'm sick of hearing about it. issues like these are NOT where the federal government should be putting it's nose. you can be religious, you can be against something. but trying to force your morals into the laws of a democratic country is alienating.
small government, less spending, more transparency, more power to the people and not corporations, independent of foreign energy suppliers, and basically allow people to live their own lives.......when they do these things, they will return to relevance.

Also, the republican platform needs to move more to the middle. Aligning with the religious right will continue to alienate their constituents.

 

[spanko]

I think Sean Hannity has it pretty well spelled out.
Hannity's Top 10 Items of Conservatism
1) To be the Candidate of National security:
a) Victory in Iraq
b) Fully support NSA, Patriot act, tough interrogations, keeping Gitmo open
c) A Candidate that pledges to NOT demean our military while they are fighting for their Country. eg Harry Reid: "the surge has failed", "the war is lost"
d) Candidate that promises to ensure that our veterans can live out their lives in dignity.
2) The Candidate who pledges to oppose Appeasement:
a) The Candidate will oppose any and all efforts to negotiate with dictators of the world in places like Iran, Syria, N.Korea, Cuba, and Venezuela without "pre-conditions"
3) The Candidate Pledges to support Tax CUTS, and fiscal responsibility:
a) The American people are NOT under taxed, Government Spends too much
b) The Candidate who Pledges to ELIMINATE and VOTE AGAINST ALL Earmarks
c) The Candidate pledges to BALANCE the budget
4) The Candidate Pledges to be a supporter of "Energy Independence"
a) supports Immediate drilling in Anwar and the 48 states
b) Building new refineries
c) Begin building and using Nuclear Facilities
d) expand coal mining
e) realistic steward of the environment
While simultaneously working with private industry to develop the new energy technologies for the future, with the goal being that America becomes completely energy independent within the next 15 years.
5) The Candidate pledges to secure our borders completely within 12 months:
a) build all necessary fences
b) use all available technology to help and support agents at the border
c) train and hire agents as needed
6) Healthcare:
The Candidate will look for Free-Market solutions to the problems facing the Healthcare industry, and will vigorously oppose any efforts to "nationalize healthcare".
a) The Candidate will fight for Individual health savings accounts, that includes "catastrophic insurance" for every American, so people can control their own healthcare choices.
7) Education:
a) The Candidate pledges to "save" American children from the failing educational system
b) The Candidate will fight to break the unholy alliance of the Democratic party and teachers unions, which at best has institutionalized mediocrity, and has failed children across the country
c) fight for "CHOICE" in education and let parents decide
d) fight for vouchers for parents
8) Social Security and Medicare:
a) The Candidate will "save" social security and medicare from bankruptcy.
b) Options will include "private retirement" funds so people can "control" their own destiny.
9) Judges
a) The Candidate vows to support ONLY judges who recognize that their job is to interpret the Constitution, and NOT legislate from the bench.
10) American Dream:
The Candidate accepts as their duty and responsibility to educate, inform, and remind people that with the blessings of Freedom comes a Great responsibility. That Government's primary goal is to preserve, protect and defend our God given gift of freedom.
That Government's do not have the ability to solve all of our problems, and to take away all of our fears and concerns. We need their pledge that we will be the candidate that promotes Individual liberty, Capitalism, a strong national defense and will support policies that encourage such...
It is our fundamental belief that limited Government, and Greater individual responsibility will insure the continued prosperity and success for future generations.
We the people who believe in the words of Ronald Reagan, that we are "the best last hope for man on this earth," "a shining city on a hill," and that our best days are before us if our Government will simply trust the American people.
And to have these things be the consistent message of the entire party from the states through the federal governments.

 

[al mc]

Originally Posted by jpc763
http:///forum/post/2827691

Also, the republican platform needs to move more to the middle. Aligning with the religious right will continue to alienate their constituents.
It will especially alienates the Suburbinites who usually vote roughly 60/40 for Republicans and this election in some of the 'to close to call states' went the opposite way.

 

[zman1]

Originally Posted by spanko
http:///forum/post/2827694
I think Sean Hannity has it pretty well spelled out.
Hannity's Top 10 Items of Conservatism
.
Sean Hannity's - fear mongering isn't a good approach to use next time, so tell him that. All out nightly bashing will not convert independents. Next election cycle he should flip the time he spent this time slamming democrats to supporting the candidate with his beliefs. I must admit I would flip his nightly show on for humor, in that, he thinks this will sway people in his direction.

That's my opinion though.
Fixed a few typos

 

[nordy]

Originally Posted by Pontius
http:///forum/post/2827685
do the things that Republicans are supposed to do.........lower spending and small government with the power of the country being the power of the citizens. those are the most important aspects, and those are what Bush has ignored for 8 years. granted, not to be so hard on Bush because he's had to face several crises (particularly 9/11 and Katrina) that other presidents have not had to face, but it's hard at this point to consider him a conservative, because he's not conservative in any way.
also, drop the abortion and gay rights issues once and for all, I'm sick of hearing about it. issues like these are NOT where the federal government should be putting it's nose. you can be religious, you can be against something. but trying to force your morals into the laws of a democratic country is alienating.
small government, less spending, more transparency, more power to the people and not corporations, independent of foreign energy suppliers, and basically allow people to live their own lives.......when they do these things, they will return to relevance.
Agree on this post! Less is more, stay the F out of our lives and the lives of everybody, whether or not they are black, white, hispanic, gay, straight, abortion supporters or not, keep YOUR religion out of MY life and JUST LEAVE CITIZENS ALONE TO RUN THEIR LIVES THE WAY THEY WANT TO!!!!!
I just haven't seen any real Republicans in many. many, years. They are all big time spenders, in the way of the Dems, supporting earmarks, pork, and big time defecit spending. Ronald Reagan, the darling of the neocons, never, ever, submitted a budget anywhere close to being balanced during his entire 8 year reign.
I am a long term Democrat, but would gladly support, and vote for, a Republican slate that acdtually pledged to stop spending our great grandchildrens money like a herd of drunken sailors. Believe me I know from drunken sailors-I was one while serving in the Navy back in the early 70's in Vietnam.
My only disagreement would be that government does need to exercise proper and thoughtful regulation of financial markets. If our government had been doing the job that I thought we had hired them to do, we would not be in the fix we are in right now!!!
Generally though, less government is good government and should be good for the citizenry. Sadly, the last 8 years have proved that relaxing our guard, letting the golden idol of unbridled capitalism run amok, is totally an insufficient way of safefguarding our country. Plus, having a raving idiot in the White House, without any responsible oversight from Congress, didn't help at all.
I do have a question for my fellow posters on SWF.com-do y'all remember the last time that our government had a balanced budget, and at the same time was actually paying off our national debt at a level that was causing yields on T-Bills to drop- Anybody? Here's a clue-there was a Democraty in office and his name was-Gasp-Bill Clinton. Oh, and the dollar was strong, gas was low, and we were not in an invented and endless war, and our national name was, get this, respected around the world.
Bush and Congress, Democrats and Republicans alike, have dug this country in a hole so deep that it will be la ong, hard, climb out of that hole.
Thank you Congress, for your spineless approval of the Shrub's and Cheney's evil doings and for your incredibally reckless spending, and spending, and spending, and more spending. A pox on the whole bunch of y'all.
Rant over.

 

[sickboy]

Originally Posted by zman1
http:///forum/post/2827723
Sean Hannity's - fear mongering isn't a good approach to use next time, so tell him that. All out nightly bashing will not convert independents. Next election cycle he should flip the time he spent this time slamming democrats to supporting the candidate with his beliefs. I must admit I would flip his nightly show on for humor, in that, his thinks this will sway people in his direction.

That my opinion though.
I'm glad I'm not the only one that thinks the show is comedy...

 

[reefraff]

The Republicans need to alter their right to life plank. Accept the fact Roe is settled law and promote policies to limit the need for abortions.
First thing they need to do is crack out Newt's playbook from 94.
It's a given the media will work against them so it has to be a plan that sells it's self.
Get back to being part of the solution rather than part of the problem. There were several Republican senators that threw in with the Democrats to protect Freddy and Fanny. Any of them that are left I would throw under the bus and make real government reform the keystone of the comeback.
The absolute last thing they need to be doing is move to the left. That is the problem now, they have gotten away from their conservative agenda. Remember how much press they got in 94 over that stupid deal of eliminating ice delivery to the house offices? It only saved like 94 grand a year but it was a great stunt.
For this round I would love for them to expose the waste and fraud in congressional staffing. I don't think it's too much to ask these 3 day a week wonders to pick up their own dry cleaning and drive themselves to and from work.

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by zman1
http:///forum/post/2827723
..... All out nightly bashing will not convert independents. ..
First, they need to write off ever winning the Moderate vote. People claim to be Moderate because they don't want to be publically associated with the Left. They still vote Left. McCain's loss proved you will never out Left a Leftist and still be a Republican.
The winning stragedy for Repubicans was laid out nicely in the above posts. I'll simply add we must start promoting Conservative Hispanics in our ranks. We need to write off the "black" vote and court the Latino vote.

 

[rylan1]

the republican party is too rigid... The difference is that dems speak to a bigger cross section of america.. whereas GOP is limited because of the rigidity of the base which alienates moderates and independents...
The position that you must "write off" a segment of the population means that you are not the political party of the people.
The philosophy is hypocritical because you claim to be one thing...family values and such.. the party of Lincoln... but you are willing to write off votes.. You will never win if you write off latinos and african americans because soon, the minorities will make up 50% of the population... these are the tactics of the 20th century... which is why you are the G "old" Party.
We also are not a Free Market System.. we are a mixed system where gov't has always played a role when the free market failed to achieve certain goals.
Republicans don't seek the black vote but speak to rural or big business agendas... America is much more than just these segemented populations... which is why you lost. All your talk about one america... is bull because you don't practice what you preach.

 

[sangria]

I read these all the time and never say anything... but since this last election I will be silent no more.
I am not religious (althouth I grew up Catholic). I have nothing against gays. I am very conservative in spending. I am the person who would say "lower my taxes so I can pay for college." Instead of "Give us all college educations with taxpayer money." Judge me if you will. I live in one of the highest taxed states and they claim its for education, but tuition still goes up almost every year and no huge leaps have been made in education.
The Republicans are going down without a fight. The public relations committee is horrible. The democratic campaign has more to work with, but WE KNEW THIS!!! We know we're up against the media, and we just limped along. Bush didn't help matters any. He has all but been nonexistent the last four years. A lot of the Republicans who voted for him were upset by his "moderate" stance (including me). The liberals hated him anyway, so there was no point in trying to appease them. He lost a lot of support by trying to be bipartisan.
I won't go as far as to say we should ignore the moderate vote, but I will say that moderates like people who are strong leaders. That will likely sway them more than anything else. McCain did not portray that well. He also just let it go that the media covered up Obama's ties with radicals and terrorists. Maybe Obama hasn't told a single lie and it just appears he surrounded himself with questionable people, but I find it unlikely.
I am so proud that the president-elect is an African American. Unfortunately he is also a radical leftist and surrounds himself with people who are, at best, highly questionable.
The Repubican Party needs to drop the religious element. It needs to hold onto the Christians, by proving their right to religion will be protected, but alienating gays and other religions is driving the party into the ground. Roe V Wade will never be overturned, so we need to show we respect a woman's rights (I am a woman) but offer alternatives to abortion. We need to show that a strong defense and fiscal conservatism are positives and instead we allowed scandal and the "moderate" movement to all but kill the party.

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by sickboy
http:///forum/post/2827886
I'm glad I'm not the only one that thinks the show is comedy...
His arguments are horrible.

 

[stdreb27]

I think you have to articulate conservatism. Instead of this McCain reach across the isle and work with democrats garbage.

 

[kjr_trig]

George Bush has set our party back to the Stone Age. Obviously all that is wrong with the economy is not his fault, the sub-prime mortgages started under Clinton, that was the biggest cause of this disaster. But GW had a horrible 2nd term.
The Republicans still have the right philosophy in our country, it's just going to take some time for people to figure it out again.
Once Obama gets in office and his screwy policies start into effect, people will understand....He is a charismatic, brilliant speaker that people fell in love with. His policies are still horrible.

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by Rylan1
http:///forum/post/2828150
the republican party is too rigid... The difference is that dems speak to a bigger cross section of america.. whereas GOP is limited because of the rigidity of the base which alienates moderates and independents...
The position that you must "write off" a segment of the population means that you are not the political party of the people.
The philosophy is hypocritical because you claim to be one thing...family values and such.. the party of Lincoln... but you are willing to write off votes.. You will never win if you write off latinos and african americans because soon, the minorities will make up 50% of the population... these are the tactics of the 20th century... which is why you are the G "old" Party.
We also are not a Free Market System.. we are a mixed system where gov't has always played a role when the free market failed to achieve certain goals.
Republicans don't seek the black vote but speak to rural or big business agendas... America is much more than just these segemented populations... which is why you lost. All your talk about one america... is bull because you don't practice what you preach.
I never talked about "one" America. I talked about being American. You are never going ot please everyone; That was McCain's biggest flaw-he tried.
Nor did I say to write off the Latino vote. I said to court it. I said to write off the black vote because this election showed the Democrats have it firmly in their pocket.
What you call "rigid" I call standing on principles.
This election, for far too many people, wasn't about issues.
Saying something like "we are not a free market system" doesn't excuse Government from taking a bigger hand in Business.
No; the difference was the Dems promised to redistribute wealth and benefits to a large segment of people by punishing others.

 

[kjr_trig]

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2828345
This election, for far too many people, wasn't about issues.
No; the difference was the Dems promised to redistribute wealth and benefits to a large segment of people by punishing others.
So well put

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by kjr_trig
http:///forum/post/2828269
George Bush has set our party back to the Stone Age. Obviously all that is wrong with the economy is not his fault, the sub-prime mortgages started under Clinton, that was the biggest cause of this disaster. But GW had a horrible 2nd term.
The Republicans still have the right philosophy in our country, it's just going to take some time for people to figure it out again.
Once Obama gets in office and his screwy policies start into effect, people will understand....He is a charismatic, brilliant speaker that people fell in love with. His policies are still horrible.
I talked with a local today. He asked me what I thought about the election. I smiled and asked "what do you think about the election". He said; "You know, Saddam was a good talker. He promised us everything. We had no running water, but he promised us a lot...."
I disagree that President Bush sat us back to the Stone Age. I believe, in the coming years, the success of the War on Terror will become an example for future models of warfare. I also believe the Middle East will forever be changed because of our presence and the founding of a Democracy in its heart.
For Conservatives, President Bush let us down; Let's not forget, however, Senator McCain lead one of the greatest rebellions against Conservatives in the Senate.
I agree with much of Sangria's well-written post.

 

[rylan1]

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2828345
I never talked about "one" America. I talked about being American. You are never going ot please everyone; That was McCain's biggest flaw-he tried.
Nor did I say to write off the Latino vote. I said to court it. I said to write off the black vote because this election showed the Democrats have it firmly in their pocket.
What you call "rigid" I call standing on principles.
This election, for far too many people, wasn't about issues.
Saying something like "we are not a free market system" doesn't excuse Government from taking a bigger hand in Business.
No; the difference was the Dems promised to redistribute wealth and benefits to a large segment of people by punishing others.
Anybody running for President should not write any group off.. and as I said its not about what I say about the Free Market... its the reality of the current system we have in place..
As for as socialist tendacies republicans speak of Obama... he is not doing anything different... people making $250k would simply go back to the tax rates they paid before Bush... this is not some drastic change...
And its not about pleasing everyone... what its about is speaking to everyone... your party doesn't do this...His biggest flaw in his campaign is that he catered to voters he already had... conservatives because even though they weren't enthused before Palin, they were not going to vote for Obama... So after the decision to choose Palin... which further sold the conservative base... he should have focused his message on the middle class and moderates and independents... This campaign was just simply out of touch.