Dems want Republican success? I'm confused...

2009-03-04 20:31:55

#1

unnamednewbie13: Moderator; +2,060|7075|PNW

Don't mind the source. It was lifted from Google news.

article wrote:
[...] Democratic strategist Maria Cardona said Steele should never have apologized because his criticism of Limbaugh is appealing to the moderate audience his party needs. [...]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/03 … clout-gop/

I'm going to throw the whole article aside for the moment to express my confusion as to why Democrats would be interested in Republican success. I know not to take it seriously of course (advice from a Democratic strategist?!), but I'm still scratching my head over why it was even cited, given who said it. Let's look at it again:

"Democratic strategist Maria Cardona said Steele should never have apologized because his criticism of Limbaugh is appealing to the moderate audience his party needs."

Wow. McCain's moderate approach sure got him a landslide, didn't it. And Limbaugh's not even as fiercely conservative as some of his fellow talk show hosts.

In other news, Mongoose strategist Fluffy to give Snake Party advice on fang maintenance.

2009-03-04 20:46:19

#2

Reciprocity: Member; +721|6884|the dank(super) side of Oregon

She's speaking as a strategist for a party that won by appealing to moderate voters.

2009-03-04 20:51:50

#3

Macbeth: Banned; +2,444|5889

They want to pull Republicans to a more moderate view. Slowly destroy them by changing their views.

2009-03-04 20:55:30

#4

Reciprocity: Member; +721|6884|the dank(super) side of Oregon

can republicans win with only hardcore conservatives?

2009-03-04 21:02:31

#5

OxenBreeder: Member; +46|6069|KTRI

fuck both parties!

2009-03-04 21:06:06

#6

LividBovine: The Year of the Cow!; +175|6683|MN

Reciprocity wrote:
can republicans win with only hardcore conservatives?

You'd be surprised.

Trying to be philisophical in every thread guy wrote:
They want to pull Republicans to a more moderate view. Slowly destroy them by changing their views.

True statement here.

"The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation" - Barack Obama (a freshman senator from Illinios)

2009-03-04 21:16:01

#7

Warhammer: Member; +18|5984

Reciprocity wrote:
can republicans win with only hardcore conservatives?

If you had hardcore Republicans you would not have questionable possibility of pork and spending. Obama now doing that with huge numbers... Some People didn't expect he was going to do that. Now a lot of people are furious at the government. If Obama's plan fails the strict conservatives are going to get elected for sure.

2009-03-04 21:18:15

#8

Macbeth: Banned; +2,444|5889

LividBovine wrote:
Reciprocity wrote:
can republicans win with only hardcore conservatives?
You'd be surprised.

Trying to be philisophical in every thread guy wrote:
They want to pull Republicans to a more moderate view. Slowly destroy them by changing their views.
True statement here.

O god I've become the very thing I hate the most, a Philosopher.

2009-03-04 21:18:26

#9

LividBovine: The Year of the Cow!; +175|6683|MN

Warhammer wrote:
Reciprocity wrote:
can republicans win with only hardcore conservatives?
If you had hardcore Republicans you would not have questionable possibility of pork and spending. Obama now doing that with huge numbers... Some People didn't expect he was going to do that. Now a lot of people are furious at the government. If Obama's plan fails the strict conservatives are going to get elected for sure.

Yes, it will happen, but what kind of shape will our country be in at the time, and will people wise up fast enough to not elect him to a second term?

"The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation" - Barack Obama (a freshman senator from Illinios)

2009-03-04 21:33:58

#10

Warhammer: Member; +18|5984

LividBovine wrote:
Warhammer wrote:
Reciprocity wrote:
can republicans win with only hardcore conservatives?
If you had hardcore Republicans you would not have questionable possibility of pork and spending. Obama now doing that with huge numbers... Some People didn't expect he was going to do that. Now a lot of people are furious at the government. If Obama's plan fails the strict conservatives are going to get elected for sure.
Yes, it will happen, but what kind of shape will our country be in at the time, and will people wise up fast enough to not elect him to a second term?

It won't matter if Obama runs again if he fails; he will lose if it doesn't turn around.

I hope our country doesn't get hurt badly for the next two years, but at this pace no guarantee. Just hope conservatives get back in 2 years if our country is heading to a bad road. I am not too sure what the Republican party is going to do though and what candidates they will have.

2009-03-04 21:49:23

#11

unnamednewbie13: Moderator; +2,060|7075|PNW

Reciprocity wrote:
can republicans win with only hardcore conservatives?

Or can Republicans win by taking willing advice from Democrats?

OxenBreeder wrote:
fuck both parties!

Show me the magical unicorn party that will sweep nation off its feet in 2012 and I'll vote for its candidates.

2009-03-04 21:54:46

#12

Reciprocity: Member; +721|6884|the dank(super) side of Oregon

unnamednewbie13 wrote:
Or can Republicans win by taking willing advice from Democrats?

was she offering advice or giving her opinion?

cow wrote:
You'd be surprised.

surprised how? Unless the majority of americans are hardcore conservatives there's no surprise.

Last edited by Reciprocity (2009-03-04 21:58:52)

2009-03-04 22:44:49

#13

unnamednewbie13: Moderator; +2,060|7075|PNW

Reciprocity wrote:
was she offering advice or giving her opinion?

Democratic strategist is Democrat.

If you were a Seahawks fan, would you want them to take advice from a dedicated Steelers pundit? Probably not, because by the time you figured out what reverse psychology was or wasn't involved, they might as well have ignored it.

I come across a much more simplistic version of it in computer games, where an opposing team tries to goad you into a position of greater vulnerability. It's been done so often that it's perpetually disregarded.

Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2009-03-04 22:48:13)

2009-03-04 23:02:30

#14

Reciprocity: Member; +721|6884|the dank(super) side of Oregon

unnamednewbie13 wrote:
Democratic strategist is Democrat.

If you were a Seahawks fan, would you want them to take advice from a dedicated Steelers pundit? Probably not, because by the time you figured out what reverse psychology was or wasn't involved, they might as well have ignored it.

I come across a much more simplistic version of it in computer games, where an opposing team tries to goad you into a position of greater vulnerability. It's been done so often that it's perpetually disregarded.

why do you continually insist that the republicans are taking this woman's opinion as advice. Are they that stupid? Do you think republicans are that stupid? I'm failing to see this connection.

is it not political common sense that in order to win national elections you must appeal to a broad variety of voters?

Last edited by Reciprocity (2009-03-04 23:04:25)

2009-03-04 23:52:43

#15

Flecco: iPod is broken.; +1,048|6968|NT, like Mick Dundee

unnamednewbie13 wrote:
I come across a much more simplistic version of it in computer games, where an opposing team tries to goad you into a position of greater vulnerability. It's been done so often that it's perpetually disregarded.

I've come across an even more simplistic version.

It is known as 'F10'.

Whoa... Can't believe these forums are still kicking.

2009-03-04 23:59:43

#16

AussieReaper: ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°); +5,761|6456|what

Macbeth wrote:
They want to pull Republicans to a more moderate view. Slowly destroy them by changing their views.

If the republicans move more towards centre, the Dems can move more towards left.

2009-03-05 00:39:13

#17

LividBovine: The Year of the Cow!; +175|6683|MN

Reciprocity wrote:
surprised how? Unless the majority of americans are hardcore conservatives there's no surprise.

The majority of voters are undecided.
http://people-press.org/commentary/?analysisid=95
Of course this means that if you move to the middle you would get the votes, right? Wrong, not when the general public becomes disenfranchised with the ruling party. They look for a drastically different view point. Thus, the far right now becomes more attractive and those that stand more in the middle are too much like the left. See where I am going with this?

"The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation" - Barack Obama (a freshman senator from Illinios)

2009-03-05 01:18:29

#18

Reciprocity: Member; +721|6884|the dank(super) side of Oregon

LividBovine wrote:
They look for a drastically different view point.

no, not really. parties accommodate moderate voters. not the other way around.

2009-03-05 01:22:06

#19

LividBovine: The Year of the Cow!; +175|6683|MN

I have to disagree. I actually think McCain would have done better if he would have stuck with a more right platform. He failed when he voted for the bailout bill. Lost respect and votes in the process. Just my opinion though.

1 more thought on this. This past election was 2 very different parties. The Democrats had a very good united front and no one was bucking the program. Not true for the Republicans. The result is obvious. 3 years 10 months left to go. I hope.

"The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation" - Barack Obama (a freshman senator from Illinios)

2009-03-05 01:44:12

#20

[pt] KEIOS: srs bsns; +231|6956|pimelteror.de

Warhammer wrote:
I hope our country doesn't get hurt badly for the next two years, but at this pace no guarantee. Just hope conservatives get back in 2 years if our country is heading to a bad road. I am not too sure what the Republican party is going to do though and what candidates they will have.

funny republicans... your last president had eight years to fuck up the country and leave it in the way it is now...

2009-03-05 01:46:55

#21

LividBovine: The Year of the Cow!; +175|6683|MN

[pt] KEIOS wrote:
Warhammer wrote:
I hope our country doesn't get hurt badly for the next two years, but at this pace no guarantee. Just hope conservatives get back in 2 years if our country is heading to a bad road. I am not too sure what the Republican party is going to do though and what candidates they will have.
funny republicans... your last president had eight years to fuck up the country and leave it in the way it is now...

Do I have to explain the reason we are where we are again? The blame is not on one administration alone.

"The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation" - Barack Obama (a freshman senator from Illinios)

2009-03-05 02:11:55

#22

unnamednewbie13: Moderator; +2,060|7075|PNW

Reciprocity wrote:
why do you continually insist that the republicans are taking this woman's opinion as advice. Are they that stupid? Do you think republicans are that stupid? I'm failing to see this connection.

₁is it not political common sense that in order to win national elections you must appeal to a broad variety of voters?

Um...

Fail platitude is fail. I'm not 'continually insisting' that they are. If I was, the OP title would've been something like 'dumb Republicans take advice from Democrats.' What I asked was this: why should they? The very worst you could do is call it a rhetorical question that has no place in 'debate.' So jump to conclusions about someone else.

₁Completely beside the point.

LividBovine wrote:
The blame is not on one administration alone.

Spending certainly didn't help. We might as well have had Bubba in office for 16 years.

Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2009-03-05 02:20:23)

2009-03-05 03:18:17

#23

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6714|'Murka

LividBovine wrote:
Trying to be philisophical in every thread guy wrote:
They want to pull Republicans to a more moderate view. Slowly destroy them by changing their views.
True statement here.

I see her analysis more as viewing Steele as a threat to Dems. The moderates went with the Dems this election. The Republicans know that, in order to win the 2010 mid-terms and to have any shot at 2012, they have to pull moderates back to the fold. If they do that, it's at the expense of the Democrats.

Of course a Democrat strategist won't want that.

AussieReaper wrote:
Macbeth wrote:
They want to pull Republicans to a more moderate view. Slowly destroy them by changing their views.
If the republicans move more towards centre, the Dems can move more towards left.

And commit political suicide by doing so.

Last edited by FEOS (2009-03-05 03:19:35)

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2009-03-05 16:42:00

#24

Turquoise: O Canada; +1,596|6708|North Carolina

By all means... Make Rush your party leader and keep appealing to the far right. Surely, that will bring in the moderate middle....

/sarcasm

2009-03-05 16:54:19

#25

{M5}Sniper3: Typical white person.; +389|7063|San Antonio, Texas

Turquoise wrote:
By all means... Make Rush your party leader and keep appealing to the far right. Surely, that will bring in the moderate middle....

/sarcasm

They tried to appeal to the "moderate middle", look where it's gotten us.

Rush '12?

BF2S Forums Dems want Republican success? I'm confused...

article wrote:

Reciprocity wrote:

Trying to be philisophical in every thread guy wrote:

Reciprocity wrote:

LividBovine wrote:

Reciprocity wrote:

Trying to be philisophical in every thread guy wrote:

Warhammer wrote:

Reciprocity wrote:

LividBovine wrote:

Warhammer wrote:

Reciprocity wrote:

Reciprocity wrote:

OxenBreeder wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

cow wrote:

Reciprocity wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Reciprocity wrote:

LividBovine wrote:

Warhammer wrote:

[pt] KEIOS wrote:

Warhammer wrote:

Reciprocity wrote:

LividBovine wrote:

LividBovine wrote:

Trying to be philisophical in every thread guy wrote:

AussieReaper wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Board footer