First time visitor? Learn more.

GOP’s Tolerance Problem

by coldwarrior ( 36 Comments › )
Filed under Elections 2012, Elections 2016, Politics, Special Report at December 12th, 2012 - 8:47 pm

Some points to think about.

Obama’s pollster: Republicans have a tolerance problem

Obama’s campaign pollster, Joel Benenson, says the Republican challenge goes beyond the Latino vote, extending to anyone who isn’t white and thinks differently from party orthodoxy.

posted December 12, 2012 at 2:41 pm EST Washington

Much has been made of GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney’s catastrophic performance last month among Latino voters – just 27 percent to President Obama’s 71 percent.

Now at 10 percent of the American electorate, Latinos are the nation’s fastest-growing minority. Suddenly, Republicans are suing for peace on comprehensive immigration reform, an issue they have long resisted out of fear it could lead to “amnesty” for those in the country illegally.

But to Joel Benenson, Mr. Obama’s campaign pollster, the GOP’s problem is bigger than Latinos and immigration.

“The Republican Party has a tolerance problem,” Mr. Benenson told reporters Wednesday at a session hosted by Third Way, a centrist Democratic group. “I think when you define people who look differently than you as illegal aliens, and use that term over and over again, and talk about self-deporting them, that’s a tolerance issue.”

The “looking different” issue, Benenson adds, also helps explain why Asian-Americans voted for Mr. Obama over Mr. Romney by an even wider margin than Latinos, 76 percent to 23 percent. He suggests that the Obama campaign’s message on investment – in education, in building a future through hard work –also won Asian-American votes.

But the tolerance issue, he says, goes beyond race and ethnicity – it goes to issues.

“When you call people who believe in global warming ‘job-killers,’ you have a tolerance problem,” Benenson says.

“When you want to deny gay people, who want to make a lifetime commitment to each other, just as their parents did, because they want to spend a life together, and you want to deny them that life aspiration, you have a tolerance problem,” he says.

In addition, Benenson frames Republican attacks on contraception and Planned Parenthood as intolerance toward women.

A piecemeal approach to fixing the party’s demographic challenges won’t work, he suggests.

“If they think they can solve all their problems by picking off any one of those groups and saying, ‘Oh, we’ll fix our problem here or there,’ this goes to whether you have core beliefs that are in line and in touch with the vast majority of Americans,” the pollster says.

For most of the campaign, Obama led Romney by 10 percentage points on the question of whether his views and policies were in line with mainstream Americans. Only in the period immediately after the first Obama-Romney debate did the Republican nominee come close to even on that question.

The Republicans have embarked on a period of soul-searching, including a party-led task force that is reviewing the results of the 2012 election and brainstorming a path forward on how to widen the party’s appeal. And there’s no time to lose. Public acceptance of gay marriage, for example, is growing rapidly, as older Americans who are most resistant to the idea die off and younger people, who are broadly accepting, reach voting age.

Look at voters under age 40, says Benenson. “How do you redefine yourself now with what is almost half the electorate? They’re hearing a very strident, intolerant point of view on specific issues…. I mean, they have become a party of orthodoxy.”

He also points out that Romney won the white evangelical vote by the same margin as President George W. Bush in 2004 – 57 percentage points. But he lost the remaining three-quarters of the electorate by 23 points, 60 percent to 37 percent. Mr. Bush lost those voters by 13 points.

 

Maybe quit being the angry old guy who screams ‘GET OFF MY LAWN, YOU DAMNED KIDS!’ You know the guy, everyone hates him because he is such a miserable curmudgeon. Maybe be the guy who can explain to those kids why it is that private property is important to them and to society as a whole. Change one mind at time instead of turning off entire swaths of the electorate by looking like the ‘get off my lawn’ guy.

This doesn’t mean giving up in beliefs, it means being able to explain the beliefs and persuade others to just even think about these things in a different way. It’s easy to scream and yell; it’s much harder to educate and convince people to come to your side.

Comments

Comments and respectful debate are both welcome and encouraged.

Comments are the sole opinion of the comment writer, just as each thread posted is the sole opinion or post idea of the administrator that posted it or of the readers that have written guest posts for the Blogmocracy.

Obscene, abusive, or annoying remarks may be deleted or moved to spam for admin review, but the fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes an endorsement of their content by any other commenter or the admins of this Blogmocracy.

We're not easily offended and don't want people to think they have to walk on eggshells around here (like at another place that shall remain nameless) but of course, there is a limit to everything.

Play nice!

36 Responses to “GOP’s Tolerance Problem”
( jump to bottom )

  1. Speranza
    1 | December 12, 2012 9:14 pm

    We are the party of “Eat your veggies”, now veggies are good for you but in an age of low information voters is that the right image?


  2. Mars
    2 | December 12, 2012 10:14 pm

    Great article. Thanks for digging up another liberal who wants to solve our problem by making us liberals.

    “I think when you define people who look differently than you as illegal aliens, and use that term over and over again, and talk about self-deporting them, that’s a tolerance issue.”

    Any chance of this article being anything other than crap went down the drain with that comment.

    No one defines people who look different as illegal aliens, people who broke the law are illegal aliens. This is a total strawman and I really expected more from someone like Coldwarrior than to post crap like this.

    Since we are apparently now headed the way of the swamp, I think I am going to drop out tonight. Not sure if I’m ever returning at this point.


  3. lobo91
    3 | December 12, 2012 10:26 pm

    For most of the campaign, Obama led Romney by 10 percentage points on the question of whether his views and policies were in line with mainstream Americans

    That says more about what those surveyed think “mainstream Americans” are than it does anything else.

    If it’s actually true, it’s probably time to start looking into property in Costa Rica, because the country we knew is lost.


  4. unclassifiable
    4 | December 12, 2012 10:48 pm

    I am reposting this from an earlier thread:

    We have to explain the reasons why a smaller Federal government is desired. But the first thing we have to recognize is that it has been a very long time since this has been a prevailing sentiment — at least since the Civil War by my reckoning.

    First, the reason for a smaller government has to do with the belief in whether man can be perfected. I know this is going a little in the weeds but wait a bit. If you believe man can be perfected through his own initiative then the fact that an organization (or group of organizations) can be formed where most of your hard decisions are made for you and are always correct sounds plausible. Through time and adjustment that organization will be filled with “perfected” citizens who will be experts at various “difficult” aspects of life and arrive at the “correct decision” 100% of the time — eventually.

    On the other hand, if you believe the above paragraph is total BS then you may feel that maybe society would best be benefitted by thousands if not millions of separate ad hoc collections of people (or even individuals) who will try different sets of policies and procedures and whose success or failure will be judged by the society at large rather than promulgated by an overarching organization (like the ones in the paragraph above).

    Needless to say there is a lot of old dead white guy stuff on this (Locke and Hume come to mind). If folks bothered they may start to see our point of view.

    This will not be an easy road. I almost feel like what really needs to happen is almost like a huge missionary project to the “blue” locales of our nation.

    As always, I am appreciative of a place to rant. Thank y’all.


  5. Buffalobob
    5 | December 12, 2012 10:48 pm

    More prog claptrap. It’s not that conservatives are intolerant it is that progs can’t handle the truth.


  6. lobo91
    6 | December 12, 2012 10:53 pm

    Buffalobob wrote:

    More prog claptrap. It’s not that conservatives are intolerant it is that progs can’t handle the truth.

    I’ve always wondered if there’s anything they don’t think we should be tolerant of.


  7. unclassifiable
    7 | December 12, 2012 10:54 pm

    @ unclassifiable:

    I do not think it is a tolerance issue as much as plain old fear. Now people who fear are not necessarily cowards. It is quite rational for one to look at a situation or an environment and beleive that there is a great chance that harm will come to them. But it hampers us in that we fear going into the ghetto or the barrio or to blue states or campuses and bring the good word of classical liberalism. This is what I think we are seeking to do. I have my doubts that we will be able to achieve this with in the state education system. But one theme we need to start pounding is that school is not the only education.


  8. CynicalConservative
    8 | December 12, 2012 11:13 pm

    @ Mars:
    Um. Huh? Miss the point much?

    /whatever


  9. 9 | December 12, 2012 11:20 pm

    Speranza wrote:

    We are the party of “Eat your veggies”, now veggies are good for you but in an age of low information voters is that the right image?

    It’s Mooch who wants us to “eat your veggies”. And it’s Obama who told us to “eat your peas”.

    As for the rest of this article, I hope it’s all sarcasm.

    Because if the only way we can win is by being liberals, we’ve lost.


  10. Mars
    10 | December 13, 2012 12:21 am

    Decided to drop by after calming down. Just been stressed the last few days and not sure why.

    Something about his article is really bothering me.

    CynicalConservative wrote:

    @ Mars:
    Um. Huh? Miss the point much?
    /whatever

    No, I don’t think I missed the point. There is no critical analysis of this, there is no utilizing this as an example of how unhinged our opposition is. This article was posted with seeming agreement by someone I trust and like on here.
    What good does it do to post an article detailing all the typical liberal crap that we see and hear every day? Why are we looking at an article that expands on the absurd parody that the libs have already created?

    Are there problems in the republican party, hell yes, in fact at this point the republican party is so divided it should cease to exist and be replaced by something else.

    But, this article serves no purpose. Was the whole illegal alien thing about racism? No, anyone with a shred of honesty knows that. It is about people breaking the law and expecting to jump the line ahead of those who followed all the rules.

    Is voter ID racist? No, and the only people that would think that are people that want to encourage voter fraud.

    Is there anything of any validity in this article to suggest it should be here? No. If we need to hear or read this kind of crap there are plenty of elite republicans out there who would be more than willing to continue to attack conservatism as the problem. Hell, that’s all the elites have done since the end of the election.

    There are some disturbing things happening around here lately. I’m going to go out on a limb and think that maybe it’s stress, holiday issues, and disappointment in a political machine that rewards evil on a daily basis and stamps out all traces of decency.

    I let the darkness color my thoughts today. I would hope that everyone else avoids that trap. There’s no point. And rehashing our enemies lies helps no one, unless it is being used to show what they truly are.


  11. lobo91
    11 | December 13, 2012 1:26 am

    @ Mars:

    Anyone who seriously thinks we should follow the suggestions of Obama’s pollster has lost his mind.


  12. Mars
    12 | December 13, 2012 1:32 am

    lobo91 wrote:

    @ Mars:
    Anyone who seriously thinks we should follow the suggestions of Obama’s pollster has lost his mind.

    It’s disturbing.


  13. Da_Beerfreak
    13 | December 13, 2012 3:11 am

    low information voters” is that the new PC term for stupid dumb ass morons?? :twisted:
    Another stupid term. :evil:
    It would an improvement if the Right stopped sounding like the Left. :evil:


  14. coldwarrior
    14 | December 13, 2012 5:22 am

    @ Mars:

    “This doesn’t mean giving up in beliefs, it means being able to explain the beliefs and persuade others to just even think about these things in a different way. It’s easy to scream and yell; it’s much harder to educate and convince people to come to your side.”


  15. coldwarrior
    15 | December 13, 2012 5:24 am

    CynicalConservative wrote:

    @ Mars:
    Um. Huh? Miss the point much?
    /whatever

    yep, everyone missed the point of the article.

    you cant win a war if you cant communicate.

    but by all means, i’ll get off all yinz’s lawns right now.

    (cause i gotta go to work, see yinz tonight)


  16. coldwarrior
    16 | December 13, 2012 5:26 am

    unclassifiable wrote:

    But it hampers us in that we fear going into the ghetto or the barrio or to blue states or campuses and bring the good word of classical liberalism.

    yes, lets not explain why our side is better, lets just scream and yell and not bother. it would take too much effort to explain our side and win the minds of the uninformed.


  17. coldwarrior
    17 | December 13, 2012 5:40 am

    Da_Beerfreak wrote:

    “low information voters” is that the new PC term for stupid dumb ass morons??
    Another stupid term.
    It would an improvement if the Right stopped sounding like the Left.

    really? my wife fits the ‘low information voter’ she works 40 plus hours a week and raises 3 kids. she chooses not to spend her time doing politics. fortunately she gets it and votes conservative, reliably.

    some folks are too busy to be 100% saturated with info.

    but again, lets call them morons (tell them to get off the lawn) instead of maybe trying to reach them somehow and educated them.


  18. coldwarrior
    18 | December 13, 2012 5:40 am

    now im off to work…see yinz later

    remember, this isnt an echo chamber, so expect articles and views that clash with your own.


  19. Bumr50
    19 | December 13, 2012 5:55 am

    If we cannot bring our message to the electorate more effectively, we’re just going to keep losing big elections.

    What I got from the piece was that there are demographics that are AFRAID to vote for a Republican.

    I’m not just going to dismiss it because it’s coming from an Obama pollster, because I’ve seen evidence that there’s truth to what he’s saying.

    Until we control our messaging, public relations, and spin better this is very much indeed OUR problem. Granted it’s not going to be easy with the MSM providing all of these services free of charge to the competition, but to quote a sports cliche, “It is what it is.”


  20. Da_Beerfreak
    20 | December 13, 2012 6:02 am

    coldwarrior wrote:

    Da_Beerfreak wrote:

    “low information voters” is that the new PC term for stupid dumb ass morons??
    Another stupid term.
    It would an improvement if the Right stopped sounding like the Left.

    really? my wife fits the ‘low information voter’ she works 40 plus hours a week and raises 3 kids. she chooses not to spend her time doing politics. fortunately she gets it and votes conservative, reliably.

    some folks are too busy to be 100% saturated with info.

    but again, lets call them morons (tell them to get off the lawn) instead of maybe trying to reach them somehow and educated them.

    You completely missed my point. It’s a very bad term for that very reason.


  21. waldensianspirit
    21 | December 13, 2012 6:49 am

    Actually they’re right. I see a lot of intolerance toward conservatives on the ‘right’. This blog is illustrative of it. Too much desire to chew on powerless people on the right than taking on the proggies of late. If people will vote with us and are morally incapable of going for the Obama freebies then live and let live


  22. 22 | December 13, 2012 8:00 am

    We don’t change what we believe, but we’ve got to present those beliefs in a way that show how they’ll benefit these different groups, especially blacks, Hispanics, Asians & women.


  23. Fritz Katz
    23 | December 13, 2012 8:36 am

    Mars wrote:

    Great article. Thanks for digging up another liberal who wants to solve our problem by making us liberals.

    Buffalobob wrote:

    More prog claptrap. It’s not that conservatives are intolerant it is that progs can’t handle the truth.

    lobo91 wrote:

    Anyone who seriously thinks we should follow the suggestions of Obama’s pollster has lost his mind.

    Major dittos!

    Bumr50 wrote:

    If we cannot bring our message to the electorate more effectively, we’re just going to keep losing big elections.

    And we cannot get our message out because the MSM elites control the outlets.

    What I got from the piece was that there are demographics that are AFRAID to vote for a Republican.

    Because the MSM demonizes the Republicans.

    I’m not just going to dismiss it because it’s coming from an Obama pollster, because I’ve seen evidence that there’s truth to what he’s saying.

    The truth is Obama’s people have succeeded in demonizing us. The Obamanoids have given us two choices: Join them or die.

    Until we control our messaging, public relations, and spin better this is very much indeed OUR problem. Granted it’s not going to be easy with the MSM providing all of these services free of charge to the competition, but to quote a sports cliche, “It is what it is.”

    These MSM outlets are constantly going bankrupt too. Newsweek sold for $1. The NY Times fritters away hundreds of millions (but a Mexican billionaire keeps them on life support).

    Conservatives need to form a consortium to buy a major outlet next time one goes under — and get rid of all the progs. CNN doesn’t look too healthy.

    A great thinker once said: “Conservatism always wins when articulated properly!!” — however, many Republicans are either not conservative, or incapable of articulating it.

    Here’s how we can go OVER THE HEAD of the media and get our message out.

    The FCC rules (stemming from Section 315 of the Communications Act) prohibit broadcasters from censoring the content of advertising that is a “use” by a candidate. Essentially, that means that the broadcaster cannot reject an ad that is sponsored by the candidate or the candidate’s official campaign committee, if that ad has the recognizable voice or image of the candidate somewhere in the course of the ad. — the station CANNOT REFUSE to run the ad.

    Our candidate can force the MSM to stop ignoring and covering-up of important issues such as Benghazi, Solydra, … or the next Obama outrage and scandal du jour because there can be NO CENSORSHIP in a political ad.

    Another point to consider: TV stations are required by law to offer DISCOUNTED AIRTIME to politicians.

    After Reagan lost the nomination to Nixon, he made over 1000 short radio commentaries from 1975-79. Reagan articulated Conservatism properly — in millions of peoples minds — therefore he easily won the nomination. Reagan held no political office, but he mapped out a strategy to transform the economy, oil, guns, religion, taxes, energy, and welfare. He created a vision of America that propelled him to the presidency.

    Many of us want to see Allen West for our Presidential candidate — we need to start now for 2016. Imagine a 1 min. dose of pure conservatism, specifically tailored to the issues of the day, played daily on NBC, ABC, CBS, FOX, or even MSNBC followed by “I’m Allen West, and I approve this message”, for the next four years. Then when the libs heads predictably explode and their Tourette’s syndromes cause nastiness to spew from their mouths, WE GET TO CALL THEM RACISTS.

    “Where there is no vision, the people perish (also translated as: cast off restraint, become lawless)” (Prov.29:18). — Our nation is failing because we are not reaching our fellow Americans with a vision of liberty with prosperity. Only a vision that links their individual aspirations to some larger purpose can keep a people organized for their own welfare and survival. For such a vision to exist as an organizing reality, leaders must articulate it, and it must be delivered to people — where they live. Most Americans spend hours watching the prime-time TV. That’s where we need to deliver the message: in small 1 to 3 minute doses daily.


  24. darkwords
    24 | December 13, 2012 2:57 pm

    A great thinker once said: “Conservatism always wins when articulated properly!!” — however, many Republicans are either not conservative, or incapable of articulating it.

    seems true. I know conservatives who didn’t vote. It seems mostly like they were depressed about economic conditions and didn’t think either ROmney or Obama would help them.


  25. darkwords
    25 | December 13, 2012 2:58 pm

    The “get off my lawn” ego does exist. And some number of these people are not mature voters. Fair weather voting patterns only.


  26. darkwords
    26 | December 13, 2012 2:59 pm

    In this election democratic operatives were communicating to whole neighborhoods and describing to each person the voting patterns of their neighbors.


  27. darkwords
    27 | December 13, 2012 3:00 pm

    In this election obama reached into his grassroots and asked each supporter to speak up loudly and often whereever they were. He was trying to make a political wave.


  28. darkwords
    28 | December 13, 2012 3:03 pm

    Democrats think in terms of big government. They have no conception of success with a small government footprint. That makes them unpatriotic, dependent, and locked into big government. Romney never achieved a better outreach message than that. He should have been telling people about corruption, jobs, patriotism, and trade. In a close to home way. He should have explained his more jobs approach meant more union jobs.


  29. darkwords
    29 | December 13, 2012 3:05 pm

    The best way to raise consciousness about abortion is to tell a personal story about it. Has more impact than a national law. Tell your story and ask people to tell theirs.


  30. darkwords
    30 | December 13, 2012 3:10 pm

    And I would say there is a tolerance problem in the GoP. At least people perceive it that way. It seems like that would go away if the social issues were platform planked as states rights or individual choices. And the national platform had a strict focus on jobs, trade, public health, retirement, and defense.


  31. buzzsawmonkey
    31 | December 13, 2012 7:09 pm

    A friend of mine, the other day, was getting all het up about how “we just have to cut the budget! Why can’t people just see that and get together on this?”

    I pointed out to him that, aside from both parties using government favors to reward their own partisans and supporters, everything in the government budget, everything the government pays for, is there because somebody wanted it. That means that cutting anything is difficult, because it got into budget in the first place because somebody really, really wanted it—and wants to keep it now.

    This is true not only of tangibles, like subsidies and financial entitlements, but of intangibles, like “anti-bullying protection” or same-sex marriage. Some militant constitutency want want wanted it, and everyone else shrugged and said, “what the hell, it doesn’t cost that much, it doesn’t affect me that much.”

    That’s how we got where we are today—not only with the bloated spending on various spurious “rights,” but the bloated idea of what our “rights” actually are. Both of these things have to be attacked in tandem—otherwise it’s just you being a big meanie and attacking my rice bowl.


  32. Bumr50
    32 | December 13, 2012 7:28 pm

    @ Fritz Katz:

    Awesome attitude.

    I didn’t know that Reagan did that, but that’s the sort of foresight that we need.


  33. coldwarrior
    33 | December 13, 2012 8:31 pm

    pretty good discussion.

    no one stormed off and everyone kept it civil. well done.


  34. darkwords
    34 | December 13, 2012 8:38 pm

    @ coldwarrior: Conservatives are all going to have to learn to be rocks in the liberal storm. Can no longer run off if your feeling get hurt. Need to find one opinion you can get smarter than everyone else on and wait for the opportunity.

    I study the V volume of the Encylopedia Britanica. I suck at A-U and W-Z, but I will nail a V topic. Vesuvius, Vampires, Venezuela I got it covered in case of liberal attack Vizslas.


  35. Da_Beerfreak
    35 | December 13, 2012 9:14 pm

    @ buzzsawmonkey:
    The poly sci professor I had summed up the budget (any budget) as nothing more than a list of the winners and losers for that given fiscal year. I doubt that any real change is even possible within the current system.


  36. Fritz Katz
    36 | December 14, 2012 12:38 pm

    Bumr50 wrote:

    Awesome attitude.

    I didn’t know that Reagan did that, but that’s the sort of foresight that we need.

    And all we need to do is what Reagan did to win. We need to start now for the 2016 race — since it’s a political candidate, they won’t be able to censor what we say, and they’ll have to give us discounted airtime.

    We just need to articulate conservatism correctly (not like the weak adverts of the Romney campaign) for the next four years.

    Next time we need to have a candidate that can crush the spineless RINO wuss the elites will shove down our throats. Perhaps we need to have a pre-primary election so we can all get behind the best of our choice (and not have a ‘circular firing squad’ of conservatives so the only one left standing is the ‘moderate’). Then go into the primary with all the money riding on the most powerful conservative.

    Otherwise, I think we’re going to get Chris Christie vs. Hillary.


Back to the Top

The Blogmocracy

website design was Built By David