Quantcast

Comments about ‘GOP dilemma: Draw new voters without irking base’

Return to article »

Published: Monday, May 27 2013 3:07 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
riverofsun
St.George, Utah

Until Republicans can truly accept the embrace the diversity of America...
Until the GOP can truly understand the suffering of those who do not make a living wage...
Until the "top" Republicans can go without healthcare, and understand what that means...
Until the GOP leaders can understand the need for women to have decent reproductive rights...
Until vocal republicans lose their jobs and must accept food stamps, and other assistance...
Until "famous" Republicans live like the majority of society, send their children to public schools, live in high crime areas of the country, live without the perks awarded to them by lobbyists and their "high status job"....
.....there will be NO change for them.
Appears that they cannot accept the results, or the most recent election Presidential has been forgotten?

The Skeptical Chymist
SALT LAKE CITY, UT

This article hits the nail on the head. The Republican party will have a very tough time winning nationwide (i.e. presidential) elections because their base is so intransigent. And their policies do not appeal to members of the increasing demographics in society, specifically young people and minorities. Sure, they'll continue for a while to be the party in power in Utah and in the South, but until they moderate significantly, they will not win presidential elections.

TRUTH
Salt Lake City, UT

The base is conservative, Romney and McCain lost because they pandered to the RINO GOPers and conservatives didnt vote...!!!!

DHan
Syracuse, UT

Chymist:

? Fertility rates are declining. I suppose young people were mobilized in this election, but it's a fad.

"Show me a young conservative and I'll show you someone with no heart. Show me an old liberal and I'll show you someone with no brains."

sherlock holmes
Eastern, UT

Clinton gets way more accolades than he deserves. He was not a good president in some ways, and all would agree he won because Ross Perot entered the race and siphoned off enough conservative votes for him to win a few close states. Arkansas was glad to seem him win (so he would leave the state), though he barely won, and would have lost if Perot hadn't been in.

Women feel he was charismatic. He owed his election to them, as well as the third party candidate. A mojority of white men couldn't stand him.

Say No to BO
Mapleton, UT

And why should we take counsel from an AP reporter?
Four million conservative voters stayed home rather than vote for Romney. That's the problem.
The GOP leadership under Karl Rove has ignored the platform and struck out to become the Democrat-Lite party. And their foolishness shows.
We need to stand for conservative principles.

JoeBlow
Far East USA, SC

If the GOP believes the key to success is a further "right" candidate, they miss the point and lose again.

The party is divided. They have to decide if they want to embrace the far right and continue to lose, or find a sensible moderate conservative and be in the game.

Like it or not, this article is spot on. The GOP is rigid and searching for their identity. The Democrats are more open and accepting of candidates and allows more leeway in their thinking.

A dem candidate can look for cuts in Medicare and SS and not be ousted.
A GOP candidate is on thin ice if he/she thinks a 10 to 1 spending cuts to tax increase is OK.

How many of the GOP "base" think that

- we need to deport 11 million people
- that the earth is only 6000 years old?
- Obama is a Muslim born in Kenya?
- we should teach creationism in science class?
- lower taxes are ALWAYS the answer

This mentality does not appeal to "thinking" Americans.

Tolstoy
salt lake, UT

@dhan

So your solution is tired old cliches?

HS Fan
Salt Lake City, UT

Sherlock-
Your living in denial. Clinton left office with the highest approval ratings since Dwight and still has them. Your opinion is shared by many in Utah but not by many else accross America.

JWB
Kaysville, UT

The Republican Party since President Nixon's fall from grace, law, example, lack of moral values has led them down the trail to President Reagan. He knew how to get the votes by setting an example. He was tried and trued on and off the screen in public and even hard decisions in his private life. His Vice-President Bush was not a strong man but had money and some bureaucracy behind him. If he had strong moral character he would have defeated Bill Clinton. That lack of real leadership allowed Ross Perot to divide the party up. Perot wasn't there to help the Republicans or he would have stopped his run after the convention. Since then, Democrats have gotten people elected who don't have a hint of character, being stalwart or true to the Constitution of the United States of America.

Republicans around the country were upset with President Obama's lack of values but they didn't want Mitt Romney who had moral and ethical values with leadership and had governed with success. Instead people elected a man who has none of those values. Republicans need to bring fragments together with a common goal of integrity.

JoeBlow
Far East USA, SC

JWB,

I agree that Mitt is a decent guy. But, one would be hard pressed to say that he has more morals and ethics than Obama. One would also be hard pressed to say that he ran a "cleaner" campaign than Obama.

As far as Mitt's leadership skills, I am not too sure that they were wanted or needed.

According to Grover Norquist

“We don’t need a president to tell us in what direction to go. We know what direction to go. We want the Ryan budget,” he told New York magazine. “Pick a Republican with enough working digits to handle a pen to become president of the United States.”

LDS Liberal
Farmington, UT

Let them go...Let them go...

The Republicans are suffering the same death throes of the Whig Party they replaced.

Although winning Presidential elections for many years,
The Whigs claimed to be the "Conservative" Party,
they suffered divisions over slavery (they were pro-slavery - while America in general was moving away from it),
promoted American Protectionism,
Fought hard against immigration [singling out the Mexicans, Irish and Germans].

Early Whigs were pro-expansion [ala, Jerfferson] and pro-public education,
while later Whigs fell into becoming a party lacking in new ideas, and just being the "opposition party" of "No".

Irony of the day --
Republicans are going the way of the Whigs they replaced.

Bored to the point of THIS!
Ogden, UT

That's the fundamental problem with the Republican party as is... they (their base) want to be an elite group rather than open and accepting to others. If they (the base) don't move past themselves they will find themselves on the short end of most broad based elections.

Often they speak of "core values". It's good for the Republicans to have 'core values' but their problem is that compromise, tolerance, acceptance, and empathy are not a part of those values.

Interloper
Portland, OR

I would urge people scratching their heads about why support for the GOP is eroding to read the comments by people on the far Right here and at other sites. The hostility they express to people of color and those of limited means is disseminated to everyone these days because of the Internet. It simply is not possible for those of us who are not white, not reactionary and/or not Christian to share a political party with people who hate us. As long as those people have the loudest voices in the GOP, we will not be joining it.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments