Is a GOP win even possible?

Forthewall

Long Time Member
Messages
3,327
Nixon and Reagan won 49 out of 50 states, the only 2 presidents to ever do so. The 2 states respectively that did not go red were Massachusetts and Minnesota.

However after Reagan's 2nd term the GOP has continually lost states many of which have remained solidly blue ever since. The entire Northeast gone, west coast gone, great lake state gone, New Mexico, Nevada and Colorado gone. Florida seems to remain blue for the last 2 election cycles and will probably go blue again in 2016 along with Virginia.

Best hopes for the GOP would have been a Walker/Rubio ticket to sway Florida (pivotal) along with Wisconsin, Iowa, Ohio, Virginia, and possibly New Mexico. Any run by the GOP will probably slot Rubio in as VP, he's a good token (see were not racists) for the GOP.

With Walker out, this only leaves Carson or Fiorina and I believe if it is Carson a double digit percentage of GOP voters will stay home.

As for Trump.....he is the Dems best asset for 2016.
 
Forthewall, what really bothers me about Trump is what was his reason for wanting to talk to Bill Clinton prior to throwing his hat in the ring. Bill Clinton confirmed that he returned Trump's call and they had a good conversation, but denies they talked about the election in 2016. No way I believe that.
Trump is saying the things to pull away conservatives from any other GOP candidate and may be a Trojan horse for the Clintons and wants favorite consideration for his business adventures if he runs as a third party candidate.

If Trump runs as a third party candidate, to pull GOP votes, then in my mind he and Bill Clinton cooked up a scheme so Hillary would win and she would return the favor to Trump with possible government contracts to enrich his pocket even more.

RELH
 
Rubio is an empty suit I don't see the base getting anymore fired up for him than token. his immigration stance will kill him even if being a " mexican " wasn't enough already.

Fiorina is toast, her record and pathological lying are already catching up to her. she's headed to the same place Boxer sent her.

What can anyone say about Carson besides he's a doctor? he's a black doctor ? that might help if you're a lib but Bubba isn't excited. the base won't turn out for a boring black guy even if he does preach a lot.


I see no path for the GOP other than a Trump phenomenon. and if they don't nominate Trump a 3rd party run is more likely than not. guys with an ego and a big checkbook don't take to being shut out of the club with grace. so then it's game over.

So I'd say they could win, but odds are against it. look at paddypower if you don't believe it. why listen to the wingnut clowns here make up crap to help them sleep at night when you can look at what the people putting their money where their mouth is are doing.

Democrats 4/6 Republicans 6/5








Stay Thirsty My Friends
 
LAST EDITED ON Sep-27-15 AT 06:56PM (MST)[p]If the GOP nominates a " conservative " just who will that please? less than half the republicans.

So if you nominate a " conservative " that would give you roughly 20% of the vote since only part of the republicans , few moderates and no liberals would vote for him. sounds like a winning plan ?













Stay Thirsty My Friends
 
LAST EDITED ON Sep-27-15 AT 07:42PM (MST)[p]So we should nominate a moderate rino like the last 2? C'mon lennie, we realize you're insane, the rest of us arent.
 
I can actually see a lot of Dems supporting Trump. Certainly a lot of moderates.

Trumps biggest enemy is his own party. What's he done that's so anti-conservative?

Eel

Guns are like parachutes. If you need one and don't have one you probably will never need one again.
 
Trump is white, male, old, rich, greedy, selfish and a blowhard. he lacks only two features the far right demands, he's not a religious freak and he breathes through his nose too much.



I'm a moderate, I'd vote for Trump if he choses his running mate wisely. lots of us would. the rest of the losers no friggin way.



Stay Thirsty My Friends
 
The GOP still can't seem to figure out the obvious. If you look at them historically, they run a wide but shallow pool of candidates. Most of them are too far right of center to entice the moderates and independants. When the GOP loses an election, rather than head to the center, they typically double down and think "gee, we weren't conservative enough". I don't know what it is about people who belong to the Republican party, it seems whenever someone challenges them on their beliefs, the first move is to scream that the other person is a subhuman lib, then to double down even if reality is kicking them in the face that they may be wrong about something.

Pandering to a small group of people is not how elections are won. Your centrists like Reagan are the ones who did it correctly. I don't see one centrist in this lot, and that spells doom for Republicans in November.
 
LAST EDITED ON Sep-28-15 AT 05:51AM (MST)[p]

Lol.....they should continue to run away from their base....good plan. When Reagan was runnin back in 79, they called him an unelectable crazy right winger who wasn't a serious candidate and couldn't win......right up until he did!
 
>The GOP still can't seem to
>figure out the obvious. If
>you look at them historically,
>they run a wide but
>shallow pool of candidates. Most
>of them are too far
>right of center to entice
>the moderates and independants. When
>the GOP loses an election,
>rather than head to the
>center, they typically double down
>and think "gee, we weren't
>conservative enough". I don't know
>what it is about people
>who belong to the Republican
>party, it seems whenever someone
>challenges them on their beliefs,
>the first move is to
>scream that the other person
>is a subhuman lib, then
>to double down even if
>reality is kicking them in
>the face that they may
>be wrong about something.
>
>Pandering to a small group of
>people is not how elections
>are won. Your centrists like
>Reagan are the ones who
>did it correctly. I don't
>see one centrist in this
>lot, and that spells doom
>for Republicans in November.
You must be a fan of Whoppie Goldberg and the View.
 
If you want to look at recent history, see post #4.

Eel

Guns are like parachutes. If you need one and don't have one you probably will never need one again.
 
Trump may be serious if he develops some decent policy issues like his tax plan. I think Kasich, Bush and Rubio are fairly moderate. My bet is that Carson, Fiorina and Trump will flame out and we will have a Bush/Rubio ticket just like we ended up with Romney. If people are pissed off enough at the democrats we could win with a moderate right team.
 
>You must be a fan
>of Whoppie Goldberg and the
>View.

I don't watch TV, but I heard that you have an autographed picture of Rachel Maddow over your bed.
 
There was a time I thought Bush would be the republicans best shot, until he started talking. Jeb makes his retarded brother look like a wiz bang dynamo. the Bush family is done.

What does Rubio have going for him? you think Obama is unqualified? the waterboy has a resume that wouldn't get you hired at walmart.

No question whatsoever a moderate ticket is the GOP's only chance. but a loser is still a loser even if they're a moderate.

It brings us back to Trump. I thought he did well in his 60 minutes bit last night.









Stay Thirsty My Friends
 
>>You must be a fan
>>of Whoppie Goldberg and the
>>View.
>
>I don't watch TV, but I
>heard that you have an
>autographed picture of Rachel Maddow
>over your bed.
Rachelle better looking than Barney Frank over your bed.
 
In case you missed it Rubio is hispanic. Blacks and hispanics vote for their own for the most part. You can bet Hildebeast will have one of the Castro brothers from Texas as her VP.
 
If it were that simple the republicans wouldn't have a chance. it would also mean all politicians in CA would be hispanic since non hispanic whites are a minority.


Would Rubio being a " mexican " turn away more of the far right base than it would attract in new republican hispanic voters? yes.


What does Rubio bring to the table besides wanting to open the border? the dems have that covered already I don't think the republicans want in on it.












Stay Thirsty My Friends
 
The country needs a center right or center left Executive Team. Either way....it makes no never mind. We just need to lop off the extremes on both sides of the ticket and enact sensible policy reforms to reduce the National Debt and reign in entitlements AND rampant and extreme capitalism.

What bugs me is businesses leaving the country "because of the high US corporate taxes" to set up HQs in Countries with "lower coroporate taxes" to increase corporate profits. These folks are just plain wrong to do this. We have the largest army in the world. Our military and legal influence protects their ability to do business throughout the world because the US Govt is very, very influential world-wide enforcing international business law....and it costs the US an arm and a leg to maintain this physical and legal influence. We protect these Corps both legally and physically, in the international workplace.....and those Corps need and want those protections to stay in business and make money. But they will move out of Country to pad their bottom line and avoid paying their fair share of taxes to maintain the very, very expensive US armed forces and world-wide legal structure and influence....all the while whining and complaining about high US taxes...as though that justifies their move. I have zero respect for Corps that move out of country on the excuse of too high US corporate taxes. The US has a "Cadillac" government that is very expensive and was largely "built" by Congress because of these Corps demanding this protection in the International workplace.....and our economy needs these protections. These Corps want all the benefits of our costly "Cadillac" government but will jump out of Country to avoid paying for it. They are "deadbeat" corps....not paying their fair share of the US system built to protect their pocketbooks.
.
 
Hmmm. Me thinks the scapegoat of Corporations being the sole problem is a tad simplistic.

What is the purpose of any "corp"? Why was it incorporated? Why is the corporation a preferred business structure?


I will give you a hint. There isn't a corporation anywhere in the world that is incorporated to earn respect.

How did you decide what is and isn't anyone's "Fair Share" of taxes? What makes you the "decider" of that?

Nemont
 
LAST EDITED ON Sep-28-15 AT 12:20PM (MST)[p]"There isn't a corporation anywhere in the world that is incorporated to earn respect."

No doubt, indeed. The main and only goal of any corporation is to make profit for it's shareholders.

But I do think there is a huge disconnect when corporations have more protection under the law, more access to and influence on politicians along with the political system as a whole.

Do we really have a higher corporate tax rate than other countries?

Let's see...(excerpt Citizens for Tax Justice)

Profitable corporations are supposed to pay a 35 percent federal income tax rate on their U.S. profits. But many corporations pay far less, or nothing at all, because of the many tax loopholes and special breaks they enjoy. This report documents just how successful many Fortune 500 corporations have been at using these loopholes and special breaks over the past five years.

The report looks at the profits and U.S. federal income taxes of the 288 Fortune 500 companies that have been consistently profitable in each of the five years between 2008 and 2012, excluding companies that experienced even one unprofitable year during this period. Most of these companies were included in our November 2011 report, Corporate Taxpayers and Corporate Tax Dodgers, which looked at the years 2008 through 2010. Our new report is broader, in that it includes companies, such as Facebook, that have entered the Fortune 500 since 2011, and narrower, in that it excludes some companies that were profitable during 2008 to 2010 but lost money in 2011 or 2012.

Some Key Findings:

? As a group, the 288 corporations examined paid an effective federal income tax rate of just 19.4 percent over the five-year period ? far less than the statutory 35 percent tax rate.

? Twenty-six of the corporations, including Boeing, General Electric, Priceline.com and Verizon, paid no federal income tax at all over the five year period. A third of the corporations (93) paid an effective tax rate of less than ten percent over that period.

? Of those corporations in our sample with significant offshore profits, two thirds paid higher corporate tax rates to foreign governments where they operate than they paid in the U.S. on their U.S. profits.

These findings refute the prevailing view inside the Washington, D.C. Beltway that America?s corporate income tax is more burdensome than the corporate income taxes levied by other countries, and that this purported (but false) excess burden somehow makes the U.S. ?uncompetitive.?

Other Findings:

? One hundred and eleven of the 288 companies (39 percent of them) paid zero or less in federal income taxes in at least one year from 2008 to 2012.

? The sectors with the lowest effective corporate tax rates over the five-year period were utilities (2.9 percent), industrial machinery (4.3 percent), telecommunications (9.8 percent), oil, gas and pipelines (14.4 percent), transportation (16.4 percent), aerospace and defense (16.7 percent) and financial (18.8 percent).

? The tax breaks claimed by these companies are highly concentrated in the hands of a few very large corporations. Just 25 companies claimed $174 billion in tax breaks over the five years between 2008 and 2012. That's almost half the $364 billion in tax subsidies claimed by all of the 288 companies in our sample.

? Five companies ? Wells Fargo, AT&T, IBM, General Electric, and Verizon ? enjoyed over $77 billion in tax breaks during this five-year period.

Privatized profits, subsidized losses.

Full article: http://www.ctj.org/corporatetaxdodgers/sorrystateofcorptaxes.php

Here's another interesting article on the divide between the common man's taxes and taxes on the wealthy.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/how-the-gop-became-the-party-of-the-rich-20111109
 
LAST EDITED ON Sep-28-15 AT 12:34PM (MST)[p]Corporations leave the us for 3 reasons, lower taxes, fewer government regulations, and $2/day labor. We've been importing low wage labor for years, now we're importing low wage white collar workers with h1b1 visas.
 
LAST EDITED ON Sep-28-15 AT 01:00PM (MST)[p]FTW

Entirely different issue. None what you posted regards what is anyone's, including a Corporation's, "fair share". In addition who is the decider?

There isn't a politician anywhere in the US, including Sanders, who is going to take on corporations and win.

It is equal opportunity when it comes to the intersection of corporate money and politicians. Ask Barrack Obama

https://www.opensecrets.org/pres12/


Nemont
 
"? As a group, the 288 corporations examined paid an effective federal income tax rate of just [n] 19.4 percent over the five-year period ? far less than the statutory 35 percent tax rate.[/b]

FTW,

Wouldn't the above statement hold true for EVERY tax payer in the United States? Even if you get hit with the AMT your effective tax rates is always lower than the Statutory rate.

The average for all American income tax payers, including all excise, payroll and income taxes is right at 20% averaged for all payers. That is right in line with the 19.4% for Corporations.

taxrates_zpsavzz6c8h.jpg


Just saying that the "statutory" rate has nothing to do with your effective tax rate.
 
I'm not really sure how we ended up here, but what about Trumps plan? tax imports and cut taxes on domestic producers?

Some say protectionism won't work, I say lets try it. what we're doing clearly isn't working.

You could cut the corperate tax rate to zero and chinese products will still be far cheaper. end of story.














Stay Thirsty My Friends
 
True Nemont, I was only expanding on what Clearwater posted to show the tax inequity between real people and corporations.

Who decides? Congress decides and the IRS processes and enforces. It looks like Congress decided on 35%.

Given the number mentioned in the article of an average of 19%, it would appear that closing loopholes would enable that number to be lowered should congress decide to a more palatable 20%.

It's funny, not much has changed here...the point of this post was solely to illustrate that all the states were up for grabs as far back as 1984. And to possibly opine on what's changed, where is the trend heading, what does this mean for the future of the GOP when it comes to presidential elections?

But all posts suffer from ADD, we live in a complex world. I agree about politicians taking on corporations, which is why I am big advocate of public funded elections...but again, a different discussion for a different time.
 
okay well back on topic.

The reason there isn't a Nixon or Reagan is that there is no messenger of a better future coming from any Republican, unless you count Trump's, "I am great and will make the country great" rhetoric.

Reagan had a positive message about "It is morning in America". Name a GOP candidate that inspires any anyone. What the message is, "Everything Sucks and I will just make it suck a little less". That is not a message that people buy into.

There is no positive message coming out of the GOP. They cannot make the case that the economy is off the cliff, nor can they make the case that Obamacare is going away any time soon, nor can the make the case about spending because they have passed everything sent to them when they have control. Now they are eating their own.

Nemont
 
True, unless you look at Trump.

" Make America Great Again " that's his slogan.

I don't know how he can do half the crap he's talking about but I like his jib. what do we have to lose.











Stay Thirsty My Friends
 
Couldn't be worse than the last 7. When is that summer of recovery again? Next summer?
 
Still looking for that rainbow stew are you? good luck.

If you weren't part of the recovery you only have yourself to blame. you can't get anything done around here everyone is 6 months behind and looking for workers.












Stay Thirsty My Friends
 
"It couldn't get worse" is not a winning attitude or message. Tell me a conservative, one who is acceptable to the right wing, who is preaching a positive message. There isn't one.

Nemont
 
>"It couldn't get worse" is not
>a winning attitude or message.
> Tell me a conservative,
>one who is acceptable to
>the right wing, who is
>preaching a positive message.
> There isn't one.
>
>Nemont
post 28
 
>"It couldn't get worse" is not
>a winning attitude or message.
> Tell me a conservative,
>one who is acceptable to
>the right wing, who is
>preaching a positive message.
> There isn't one.
>
>Nemont


How bout "hope and change back!"
 
After today when Trump revealed his "tax plan", I think you are going to see a surge in his poll numbers. He outsmarted the Democrats on this one by jumping out now and laying down what should be done with taxes to stimulate the economy.

Even Piper should love it as he will not have to pay any federal taxes.

RELH
 
Nobody with a fully functioning brain that has any background with math or a basis with taxes believes his numbers or that it will create enough revenue. Which means the people that support him will continue to support him the democrats smiled a little more on this one. The economy is stimulated now people that want to work are and those that don't have skills or wanta can't or won't.
 
>Nobody with a fully functioning brain
>that has any background with
>math or a basis with
>taxes believes his numbers or
>that it will create enough
>revenue. Which means the
>people that support him will
>continue to support him the
>democrats smiled a little more
>on this one. The
>economy is stimulated now people
>that want to work are
>and those that don't have
>skills or wanta can't or
>won't.
Corn is it lowering taxes or is it the fact about cutting Government waste? like a lot from Educational waste?
 
He does make one good point, most of the people who wouldn't pay taxes under his plan don't anyway. net loss is zero.

His plan to change the medical system while unclear has promise. it's the first step to a single payer system where we're going to end up anyway. he knows that but can't say it.


Anyone who wants to work damn sure can. the only thing wrong with the unemployment picture is lazy people. if it ain't broke don't fix it.















Stay Thirsty My Friends
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos
Back
Top Bottom