So, if we're LUCKY enough to be in power for the that period, we need to make changes that will affect the future. We need to institute changes to level the future playing field.
1) Make the Congressional Districts safer for Republicans...
There's your first problem, right there.
My second deepest political wish - right after a hunting license for anyone with a (D) appended to their name - is to sit back in my lawn chair with a bowl of popcorn and watch the Republican Party follow the example of the Whig party they replaced, and quietly fade into extinction.
:popcorn:
with a permanent DEM POTUS, we will need to make that office weaker.
No we don't. We just need to replace the officeholders in all three Federal branches with ones who are protective of their Constitutional responsibilities (AKA: ones who will defend the separations of powers as written and slap down an officeholder in the other two branches who oversteps his authority.
In other words, the DC Cesspool needs to be completely flushed. One way or the other.
yes, that's the Miss America answer and in principle I agree. I agree 100% that in theory we need complete change. But it will never happen.
But in reality, there are too many DEM-aligned parasitic class voters to elect Conservatives in the future. The parasite class is growing in size and will continue to grow. When one can vote directly for their own economic gain they will vote for the handout.
Virginia now looks to be a perma-DEM state. Florida won't be easy. North Carolina is a purple state. Look at an electoral map, fill it in yourself to get 270+.
We have a good shot at 2016 because I believe Hillary will not stand up well to scrutiny
yes, that's the Miss America answer and in principle I agree. I agree 100% that in theory we need complete change. But it will never happen.
But in reality, there are too many DEM-aligned parasitic class voters to elect Conservatives in the future. The parasite class is growing in size and will continue to grow. When one can vote directly for their own economic gain they will vote for the handout.
Virginia now looks to be a perma-DEM state. Florida won't be easy. North Carolina is a purple state. Look at an electoral map, fill it in yourself to get 270+.
[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLrpBLDWyCI[/youtube]
I would suggest to you that the reason those states are turning blue/purple, is because squishes like yourself refuse to offer a clear alternative to the commie bastards of the Democrat party's Marxist "utopia" (shithole). You don't take a stand, so nobody will stand with you.
This more than any other reason, is why I wish to see the Republican Party dead, buried and forgotten.
I'm not a "squish" at all, I'm a realist. Attention must be paid to countering the parasite class in the future, because the parasite class WILL be the majority.
how am I a "squish"?
I'm pointing out a reality. That reality is that there is a demographic shift in states that are needed to elect a Republican President. ALL I am saying is to take precautions if we have power in 2014 or 2016. Take precautions that can reduce the power of the executive branch. What's "squish" about that? There are too many dependent parasite voters that can't be persuaded by promises of Liberty and Freedom. Virginia is now a lost cause because of D.C. leeches and parasites in NoVa. Florida is being overrun by former NorthEast liberals who are still voting the same way they were in Vermont, Mass or NY.
We have a window over the next 5-10 years before the Demographics win. During this time, we need to strengthen the power of the State, the Congress and if possible the SCOTUS. If State Legislatures appointed their own Senators (like they did for most of the past 200+ years) we'd have a Senate majority today.
I'm not a "squish" at all, I'm a realist. Attention must be paid to countering the parasite class in the future, because the parasite class WILL be the majority.
D6, I love ya like a brother, but I think you're blinded by your idealism. B1B is on point with this analysis, at least on the surface.
First of all, if you're an engineer, you know that statements like "getting a hunting license with anyone with a (D) appended to their name" is pure rhetoric and not at all based in reality. You ain't changin' that one, lever or no lever -- unless you want to go to jail, of course.
Like it or not, the demographic and cultural shift IS a reality. The country is swinging left, and this is not just Euph lamenting and pissing in the wind. When you've got entire sections of the country that look at our social practices these days (on-demand, state-funded abortions, gay marriage, entitlement-hungry pissants, illegal immigration is okay, etc.), it's pretty easy to see where things are headed.
BUT, this doesn't mean to throw in the towel, and I take exception to your statement to B1B that he's defeated before he even starts. He never said he wouldn't work toward keeping those things from happening -- he's just pointing out trends and what the data show. Engineer that you are, you should know this.
I couldn't agree with you more about the Republican party. It's a shadow of its former self and I don't like what I see there. But it is the "other party" at the moment and you're forgetting that the aim of the Tea Party isn't to become yet another (failed) third party, but to effect change within the Republican party. This has the Repub elite in a quandary and they are employing all the means at their disposal to squash the Tea Party.
I've donated to the Tea Party and will continue to do so, because I believe in those general principles. But being the realist I am, when you've got the Dems, the MSM, and even the Repub elite drawing a bead on the Tea Partiers, how long can that last? I hope their efforts fully fail and the Juan McLames, McConnells, Boners, and the rest of the Repub elite run out of ammo, but that just might be wishful, hopeful thinking on my part.
Nope, I think B1B is on target with this. And it's a fight to the finish. If the illegal/amnesty thing becomes a reality, we're ****ed. Pure and simple.
I suppose a lot of people thought Hillary was a shoo-in for the Dem nomination, but I never did. I always felt she had too much baggage, too much D.C. taint, too many questions remained about too many things.
I think the elites that run the DNC knew that and groomed a no name leftist black man for the job. If anyone could unseat Hillary at the time, it was a "clean, well spoken, articulate black man".
WHEN did the DNC find a "clean, well spoken, articulate black man"? I certainly don't see any, unless they're talking about Ben Carson but he's a conservative.