Thread: Seeking Votes In The Wrong Places

The GOP does not need more Hispanic, Black or Asian votes. It just needs more votes—period.
No one even acknowledges or talks about the existence of the Blue Collar, Reagan Democrats. This entire group has disappeared from discussions of voter demographics. Of course they still exist; they are simply ignored. So now we have the spectacle of Republicans trying to compete with Democrats for votes among those ethnic groups that are inherently predisposed to vote Democrat.

Heather Mac Donald of the Manhattan Institute has proven that Hispanics vote Democrat because they are Democrats. They like big government, big welfare programs and government control over the economy, these are Democratic issues. No matter what socialistic policies the GOP may propose it can not compete with Democrats who will always match them and offer even more socialism.

The Silent Majority that Donald Trump has been talking about recently is in a large part made up of the Blue Collar Reagan Democrats.

In the 2012 election about 72% of voters were White. Obama got about 39% or about 36 million votes and Romney got about 59% or 54 million votes.

Obama won reelection by just 5 million votes, about 66 million to 61 million for Romney. If just a little more than 7% of Whites voted for Romney instead of Obama, Romney would have won the popular vote. Because there were only 13 million Hispanics who voted, to win, Romney would have needed to get a little over 50% of their votes or an increase of 23% over what he actually received.

About 28% of all voters are non White. There area about 93 million White voters and about 36 million non White voters. Blacks voted 93% for Obama, Hispanics 71% for Obama, Asians 73% for Obama. If Whites voted like the other ethnic groups do, e.g. about 70% for Republicans, they would get about 61.5 million votes or 600,000 more than half of the total votes and win every election even if the other ethnic groups voted 100% for the other candidate.

The lesson is obvious—isn’t it? Of course we should welcome votes from everyone, but instead of chasing behind the Democrats pursuing votes from the latest trendy “minority,” how about seeking to increase the number of Whites voting for our politicians? We will get a much better return for our time and effort.

Romney lost the election because he lost the woman vote. Women come in all shapes, sizes, religions, races and ethnic origins. When you lose the women vote, you loose the election. Not only do more women register to vote, they vote at higher participation rates. Until the GOP renews its former successful policies that served women the same as men, then the GOP is going to have problems, and rightly so.

Women are no more important then men, but women are certainly no less important either. Women are a distressed majority of this country, because too many Republican politicians abuse them to win elections on wedge issues.

When Republicans oppose annual or frequent increases to the minimum wage to keep our base wages in line with inflation and cost of living, do they know or care that 2/3 of all minimum wage earners are women?

Minimum Wage, State by State
Women and the Minimum Wage, State by State
May 19, 2015

The minimum wage is falling short for millions of Americans — especially for women, who represent about two-thirds of minimum wage workers across the country, and at least half of minimum wage workers in every state. Today, the federal minimum wage is just $7.25 per hour, and full-time earnings of $14,500 a year leave a family of three thousands of dollars below the federal poverty line. Twenty-nine states and the District of Columbia currently have minimum wages above the federal level, but in every state, the minimum wage leaves a full-time worker with two children near or below the poverty level.

Click on a state below to see its statewide minimum wage and tipped minimum wage, plus the share of minimum wage workers who are women.

Cont. in link

http://www.nwlc.org/resource/women-a...ge-state-state

Do Republicans who oppose minimum wage increases not understand that when minimum wages are too low to stay above the poverty line, these families are forced on to welfare to survive which increases government spending, the opposite of what the Republican Party used to be about, and grows our national debt?

Do Republicans who are Pro-Life and who want to advocate against a woman's right to self-determination regarding having children not understand that they're abusing women through the power and authority of government to force pregnant girls and women into childbirth against their will or an unsafe procedure that could threaten their lives? This is not what the Republican Party is, was or should be about. This is barbaric to put the welfare of an "unborn" above the welfare of the born. Where did people get the crazy idea that this was proper? First in time, first in line.

Do Republicans who oppose contraception as a medical prescription really not understand the health consequences and medical costs much if not most of it funded by government, of an unwanted pregnancy? To cover Viagra for men to have sex but not cover prescribed contraception to protect women from the consequences of sex is discrimination. The Republican Party was formed to stop "discrimination" and all these years later when our society can no longer abuse black slaves, the party that freed them and established equal rights for them is now picking on women? Really?

Democrats aren't Democrats because they're just Democrats. Democrats are Democrats because Republicans are no longer Republicans.

In 2016, there will be new Conventions. Each party will establish their Party National Platform. The Republicans will convene and through a process vote on the Republican National Platform largely prepared in advance by a Committee of Delegates.

It's time for Republicans who attend the Convention and who are involved in the platform process to grow a spine and stand up against the discrimination of the Pro-Life Movement and the low wage agenda of the US Chamber of Commerce.

If you do, you'll be pleasantly surprised with the outcome assuming of course that you actually believe in equal rights and self-determination as inherent benefits of liberty.

Judy's Five Republican Principles To Abide:

1. if you don't believe in abortion, don't have one
2. if you don't believe in gay marriage, don't marry one
3. if you want it, you pay for it
4. if you breed 'em, you feed 'em
5. if you make it over there, you sell it over there

Dear Judy:

I'm sorry thatmy analysis does not fit your pet ideas about pandering to woman's lib types for more votes, but you are advocating the same old failed efforts of competing with Democrats for groups identified by liberals as the only sources for getting more GOP votes. That is precisely what I am trying to get away from because it does not work for patriots. It is a really bad idea because on rare occasions when it does succeed we simply get a Democrat liberal who calls himself a Republican and who works mightily for open borders and amnesty.

Do you really think that the liberals who want abortion on demand will dessert the Democrats and go running in droves to the GOP just because it slaps down and loose the pro-life, family values, voters? Their issues are a really low priority with me but we need them and their ideas are not “anti woman,” and often have a positive influence on a society in decline. You want the GOP to do the same old stuff of competing with the Democrats by being more like the Democrats instead of reaching out to the ignored and disenfranchised "Silent Majority" White voters. Oh sorry "White voters" is now politically incorrect kind of like "Confederate flag."

It would seemTrump is perusing a successful strategy that is very much like what I am proposing.

You should also note that my vote numbers are for total white voters MEN AND WOMEN. The GOP can not possibly win by alienating the Christian family values voters, that apparently is what you want it to do. Again it is self defeating for the GOP to try and compete with Democrat by adapting liberal Democrat issues.

Apparently you are determined to ignore the Blue Collar voters--why? The whole idea of my post is to propose forming a new coalition of voters, like Reagan did in 1980. A large part of that “new” coalition would be to revive the "Blue Collar Reagan Democrats" who don't give a rats ass about the women's lib stuff one way or the other because they want to earn a living and stop seeing their country turned into Mexico, neither of which have anything to do with "freedom of choice." and by the way it was Jerry Falwell with his Moral Majority that probably was the largest source of Reagan votes.

I am sorry that my strategy for wining elections does not promote your favorite women's lib ideas. But I have laid out a sound strategy that will work. You are trying to push patriots into accepting a really bad election strategy that will cause them to loose the fight to secure our borders and stopping amnesty.

Originally Posted by csarbww

Dear Judy:

I'm sorry thatmy analysis does not fit your pet ideas about pandering to woman's lib types for more votes, but you are advocating the same old failed efforts of competing with Democrats for groups identified by liberals as the only sources for getting more GOP votes. That is precisely what I am trying to get away from because it does not work for patriots. It is a really bad idea because on rare occasions when it does succeed we simply get a Democrat liberal who calls himself a Republican and who works mightily for open borders and amnesty.

Do you really think that the liberals who want abortion on demand will dessert the Democrats and go running in droves to the GOP just because it slaps down and loose the pro-life, family values, voters? Their issues are a really low priority with me but we need them and their ideas are not “anti woman,” and often have a positive influence on a society in decline. You want the GOP to do the same old stuff of competing with the Democrats by being more like the Democrats instead of reaching out to the ignored and disenfranchised "Silent Majority" White voters. Oh sorry "White voters" is now politically incorrect kind of like "Confederate flag."

It would seemTrump is perusing a successful strategy that is very much like what I am proposing.

You should also note that my vote numbers are for total white voters MEN AND WOMEN. The GOP can not possibly win by alienating the Christian family values voters, that apparently is what you want it to do. Again it is self defeating for the GOP to try and compete with Democrat by adapting liberal Democrat issues.

Apparently you are determined to ignore the Blue Collar voters--why? The whole idea of my post is to propose forming a new coalition of voters, like Reagan did in 1980. A large part of that “new” coalition would be to revive the "Blue Collar Reagan Democrats" who don't give a rats ass about the women's lib stuff one way or the other because they want to earn a living and stop seeing their country turned into Mexico, neither of which have anything to do with "freedom of choice." and by the way it was Jerry Falwell with his Moral Majority that probably was the largest source of Reagan votes.

I am sorry that my strategy for wining elections does not promote your favorite women's lib ideas. But I have laid out a sound strategy that will work. You are trying to push patriots into accepting a really bad election strategy that will cause them to loose the fight to secure our borders and stopping amnesty.

My post was about why Mitt Romney lost the election, because he lost the women vote.

But they did, I think, tell us something important about why exit polling showed Obama won women 54 to 45 nationally, not so far off his 56 to 43 showing in 2008. Obama won women in every swing state, besting Romney with female voters 53 to 46 in Florida, 55 to 44 in Ohio, 58 to 42 in New Hampshire, 51 to 49 in North Carolina, 54 to 45 in Virginia, 57 to 42 in Wisconsin, and 59 to 40 in Iowa. Gender-based gaffes from Missouri Republican Todd Akin and Indiana Republican Richard Murdock without any question lost those senatorial seats for their party, and kept the Senate, where a record 18 women will hold seats, for the Democratic Party.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...ey-lost-women/

I wasn't criticizing your plan. I was giving reasons why the Republican Party doesn't do as well as it otherwise should because of at least 2 erroneous platforms that either only impact women or impact women more than men. There's another one, equal pay for the same work which I didn't delve into.

You are trying to push patriots into accepting a really bad election strategy that will cause them to loose the fight to secure our borders and stopping amnesty.

I don't think you realize the role the "Moral Majority" churches have played in keep the borders open, and here's why:

Nine out of 10 (86 percent) want more border security. Six in 10 (61 percent) support a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants. More than two-thirds (68 percent) favor both. And they want Congress to take action soon.

Those are among the results of a new survey of evangelicals from Nashville-based evangelical research firm. The study, sponsored by the Evangelical Immigration Table and World Relief, found widespread support for immigration reform.

"Evangelicals are united in their desire for significant immigration reform," Scott McConnell, vice-president of Lifeway Research, said.

A number of high profile evangelical groups have promoted immigration reform in recent years, including the National Association of Evangelicals and the National Latino Evangelical Coalition. Many evangelical pastors also support reform.

http://www.bpnews.net/44359/survey-e...gration-reform

That's the position of what you call the Moral Majority.

I think that's why Trump is calling upon the Silent Majority, and so should the Republican Party.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/29/politi...lle/index.html

Donald Trump courts tea party at Nashville straw poll
MJ Lee

By MJ Lee, CNN Politics and Finance Reporter

Updated 8:31 AM ET, Sat August 29, 2015 | Video Source: CNN

Story highlights

Donald Trump will compete in a presidential straw poll and address the National Federation of Republican Assemblies
Tea party activists say they're looking for a presidential candidate who can do more than just vent angrily about Washington

(CNN)Donald Trump is taking his colorful campaign to Nashville on Saturday, where he will court a constituency that some say he is tailor-made for: the tea party.

He will compete in a presidential straw poll and address the National Federation of Republican Assemblies, a group that boasts it was "the tea party before there was a tea party."

Trump's appearance is highly anticipated at the conservative gathering: As a candidate, he's hitting the same notes -- anger at conventional politics, contempt for Washington and distrust of special interests and lobbyists -- that propelled the tea party movement in 2010.

With his fiery rhetoric and utter disdain for Washington, the billionaire real estate mogul has already captured the interest of many tea partiers, including former vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin, who praised him for having the "guts to say it like it is."

But many tea party activists remain undecided at this stage in the cycle as they consider a number of GOP candidates who fit the "outsider" mold. And some have the same question about Trump as establishment Republicans and members of the media: What are his policy proposals?

"He seems to fire everyone up," NFRA President Sharron Angle said of Trump. With the tea party's backing, Angle attempted to dethrone the Senate's top Democrat, Harry Reid, in one of the most high-profile races in 2010.

READ: Donald Trump allies quietly seek money from rich, anonymous patrons

"He seems to be striking a chord with voters. There's anger, as evidenced by the response to the NSA scandal, the IRS scandal, the Benghazi scandal," she said. "They are also very cynical because they feel that they've been lied to over and over and over again."

At campaign rallies, Trump ticks off reasons he differs from his rivals: His tremendous wealth means he doesn't need favors from donors; he has decades of business experience; and he is not a career politician.

"The tea party is looking for somebody that didn't spend their entire life planning to be president," said Ryan Rhodes, who worked for former Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann and is now the chairman of the Iowa Tea Party.

But he noted that there are multiple White House candidates this cycle tapping into a "movement of grass-roots unrest."

Neurosurgeon Ben Carson -- who Rhodes supports -- and former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina are both attempting to win public office for the first time.

And each of the three first-term Republican senators seeking the party's presidential nomination -- particularly Ted Cruz of Texas and Rand Paul of Kentucky -- are aligned with the tea party movement and arrived in the Senate by defeating establishment-backed opponents.

A new Quinnipiac University Poll this week highlighted the widespread aversion to D.C. insiders. The survey showed that 73% of Republicans believe someone who is a "D.C. outsider" would make a better president than a candidate with Washington experience.

Republican political consultant Roger Stone, who recently parted ways with Trump's campaign but remains a fervent supporter of his longtime friend, said the candidate is soaring because when he says that "the entire game of politics and government is rigged against the people," it has "credibility because he has enough money to be independent of the system."
Donald Trump: His own words
6 photos: Donald Trump: His own words

He added that the candidate's broad appeal has everything to do with the fact that "voters are more sour and more angry than they've ever been."

Tea party activists caution, however, that they're looking for a presidential candidate who can do more than just vent angrily about Washington. There's no one umbrella organization representing the movement, but over the years, its grass-roots activists have become more focused on the workings of policy and deliberate about local organization.

Taylor Budowich, executive director of the Tea Party Express, said in the year 2016, a candidate like Trump would have to put out detailed policy proposals on issues of fiscal responsibility and slashing federal regulations to win tea party support.

"Once you understand the frustration, how do you solve the problem?" Budowich asked. "It's not enough to capture the frustration. You're going to have to go further than that, and that speaks to the maturation of the tea party movement."

Yet for many voters, what's resonating most for now is Trump's unvarnished talk.

At his campaign events in early primary states like New Hampshire and Iowa, voters consistently say they are drawn to Trump's unorthodox campaign style and candidacy. Some marvel that despite being a famous TV personality and undoubtedly a member of the "1%," Trump's message is plain and relatable.

"He sounds like a good American. He sounds like me," said Roy Harwood, a 57-year-old Trump supporter from Oskaloosa, Iowa, at a campaign event there last month. "He's from New York, but he sounds like an Iowan."

Trump is reaching out to everyone. Last week he reached out to women on women's health issues and asserted he "cherishes women", he reached out to black voters on the "terrible" situation with black unemployment especially younger workers, and I Pray they listen to his message because he'll do more for them than any President since Richard Nixon.

Yes, he reached out to the "evangelicals" saying "I love evangelicals", today he's reaching out to some of the Tea Party voters.

Yesterday he mentioned the FairTax as a possible end game but felt the quickest way to solve some immediate issues is simplification of the existing tax code, but mentioning the FairTax as an end game shows signs he's reaching out to FairTax voters (he'll need to do more) and I think he will.

With the re[publican party trying to keep him off the republican ballot in 3 states, I hope he can reach out far enough to destroy a party that insists upon dictating! If every American has not at least in heart endorsed Trump, it is questionable who they are loyal to and for what reason?

Originally Posted by kevinssdad

With the re[publican party trying to keep him off the republican ballot in 3 states, I hope he can reach out far enough to destroy a party that insists upon dictating! If every American has not at least in heart endorsed Trump, it is questionable who they are loyal to and for what reason?

I agree and I've not yet committed to Trump because I'm holding out for .... LEVERAGE.

But he is without a doubt the fresh oxygen we need to fix our country, maybe not in every way I would like but he will definitely solve at least these 8 problems:

1. illegal and excess immigration
2. free trade treason
3. black unemployment
4. middle class decline
5. Veterans health and benefit issues
6. resources for mentally ill
7. women's health issues
8. unemployment, underemployment for all American Workers

That's a pretty strong list. It will be much easier for him to achieve those goals if he would also support the FairTax which by helping to solve the illegal alien and free trade treason problems and making the US a Tax Haven, stimulates the economy to create the good jobs needed to get US on track again and in a very big way.

I have one focus, one issue only: stop the invasion of alien foreigner squatters. If we do not put and end to that our nation, our culture our society will be lost and every other issue “conservatives” and “Christians” promote will be swept away at the voting booth by an ignorant intractable voting block of Democrat/Marxists who do not know there is something better than a Banana Republic despotism.

I am well aware of how the scum left has been manipulating gullible naïve Christians into promoting open borders and amnesty as if it were some kind of requirement of the Christian faith, which it most certainly is not. But wave a bible at the uneducated “faithful” and many genuflect that Christ forbids them to have a society and a country to call their own. The final straw was when the Southern Baptist Convention came out in favor of amnesty. But one must make a distinction between the Moral Majority which is a specific organized group and everybody who waves a Bibles. Like all large groups the top presumed leaders are out of touch with and do not represent the members for whom they claim to speak. It is left wing politics: infiltrate and get into the leadership offices and hijack the whole group to support leftists issues. They do not represent the little local church congregations.

I assure you that conservative Christians like Jerry Falwell’s Liberty University do not support open borders and amnesty.

I suspect that you and I are not that far apart. But I must insist that the Blue Collar Reagan Democrats are the critical group of voters that must be recruited to create an electron winning coalition.