GOP rolling out new 50-state strategy for 2014

• Republicans unveil start of nationwide 2014 outreach campaign to attract women voters.

Brian Kilmeade of Fox News does his best to promote the effort.

• Arizona Republicans begin 2014 outreach campaign to attract Latino voters.

• Florida Republicans begin 2014 outreach campaign to attract Muslim voters.

• Maine Republicans begin 2014 outreach campaign to attract minority voters.

• Tennessee Republicans begin 2014 outreach campaign to attract women voters.

  • Pat

    2014 scares me. While there is much talk about how the craziness of the partly led to their resounding loss, they had the same amount of craziness in 2010. The difference being that they didn’t have Romney’s relatively genial and moderate coattails for all the “rape guys” and other idiots to hang onto. Instead they all followed Sarah Palin, the woman who if anything exacerbated heir 2008 loss, and Glenn-freaking-Beck. And these stupid, terrible people won in landslides in what were previously deep-blue districts because Democrats can’t get out the vote unless it’s a presidential election. With two more years of gridlock, voter suppression, and the ridiculous gerrymandering the Tea Party carried out, I’m worried about another uprising.

    Aside from their terrible ideas, they’ve said, repeatedly, out loud, that they’ve been trying to obstruct and outright sabotage the recovery to spite Obama. It’s freaky that we basically have to electorally destroy the most powerful political party on Earth to get a government that functions at a bare minimum, let alone create progress.

  • http://apocalypsereview.wordpress.com/ Invisible Neutrino

    Ah, so their strategy is “keep appealing to nativist tendencies among white men”. You know, FDR had it about right when he said a conservative is a person who’s never learned to walk forwards.

  • TheDarkArtist

    The GOP is nothing but idiots. From the leadership, to the politicians, to the staffers and on down to the base. They’re the party of uneducated, resentful ignoramuses. They’re the party of white anger and racial suspicion. The American Taliban. They’re utterly and completely useless in every aspect. They bring no ideas, no compromises, and no connection to their constituents.

    The GOP is a dead party, desperately clinging to the last bits of life that it has, deeply resentful of the fact that this country is better off without them being in power and unable to accept those facts. It’s really pathetic.

  • Magic_Cracker

    Hey now, the GOP is the party of principle, and if their principles say that blacks, women, queers, Muslims and other non-Christians, youngs, olds, sicks, and poors are inferior unter-menschen who deserve to be trampled under cloven hooves, then they need to start right now convincing the blacks, women, queers, Muslims and other non-Christians, youngs, olds, and poors that it’s in their best interest to be trampled under cloven hooves.

  • http://mistformsquirrel.deviantart.com/ mistformsquirrel

     I largely agree; though I’m hoping, desperately hoping, that 2010 was a wakeup call, and 2014 will also benefit from the full implementation of Obamacare… that said I’m not counting on it.

  • cjmr

    I can’t get over the Maine Republican describing ‘six or eight or ten’ African-Americans as ‘a lot of black people’.  

  • Magic_Cracker

    In his defense, he did say that one of his best friends is black. He plays basketball with the guy and everything!

  • MaryKaye

    It’s worth noting that not everyone who runs with (R) next to his/her name is part of this moral morass.  I voted for a Republican this last election because, frankly, what they were proposing, and what they’d done in the past, was better than what the (D) candidate could claim ((D) was an incumbent so we had solid evidence he was useless.)  I do question why anyone would want to associate with the (R) brand, but still, there are reasons other than being a cretin (like, it’s the only way to get on the ballot in your particular situation, and you think you could do a good job with the office).

    So could we maybe keep the name-calling focused on those who earn it?

  • Random_Lurker

     True enough- but there’s a conspicuous lack of “calling out” the crazies within the party by those that aren’t.  Maybe they fear the backlash, or maybe they tacitly agree. We can’t tell.  Either way, it’s hard to separate them when they won’t separate themselves.

  • http://twitter.com/FearlessSon FearlessSon

    Before following any of the links, I took this post at its face value.  It made me think, “Wow, just what would the Republican party look like doing this?”  

    I mean it, I really have trouble imagining it.  Sure, plenty of individual Republicans can be intelligent and articulate ambassadors to outreach to any of these groups, and could succeed, but as a unified party?  I just do not see how it could do it.  The only way such outreach would work is to back away from some of the positions the party as a whole would have had in the past.  This is why an individual outreach could work where an organizational one would not, a lone dissenter is easier to believe than a large group pulling a one-eighty.  

    But if the party as a whole were trying to broaden their message to include such groups?  How the heck would that happen?  I am genuinely curious as to what form that would take.  Undoubtedly it would alienate significant portions of its own base in the process, which is why I have trouble envisioning it, but it is still an intriguing thought experiment… 

  • ohiolibrarian

    Ohio Republicans are doing their bit by defunding Planned Parenthood and reintroducing the “Heartbeat Bill”.

    It might reassure some of you to know that Obama’s organization is not going away.

  • http://www.facebook.com/jrandyowens Randy Owens

    Sorry, but I’m having a hard time buying “Romney’s relatively genial and moderate coattails” being a key difference between 2010 and 2014.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=659001961 Brad Ellison

    Slow learners learn slow.

  • http://twitter.com/rebelsquirrel Not That Thena

    Outside of the densely populated areas, Maine is so white that “French” is still an ethnicity… complete with ethnic jokes.  

  • LL

    LOL, Fred. 

    And not at all surprising. People who don’t think they’re wrong generally don’t change. They go to their grave convinced everybody else is wrong. No matter the evidence to the contrary.

    Here’s our (Texas) new Senator, Ted Cruz: 

    “So by the third debate, I’m pretty certain Mitt Romney actually French-kissed Barack Obama,” Cruz said during an address to the Federalist Society’s annual conference Friday.

    Because Romney is the only reason he lost. He was too easy on Obama. The Republican party can’t be culpable here. The Republican party isn’t doing anything wrong. 

  • Tricksterson

    To be fair, in northern Maine, it is.  I’ve gone up there on work related road trips and had people look at some of my co-workers and go “Look, a black person!”

  • Tricksterson

    So I guess these guys really don’t believe in evolution.

  • stardreamer42

     And he expects to “get some elbows” over it. Because, y’know, black people are just naturally violent.

  • http://www.oliviareviews.com/ PepperjackCandy

    My first reaction was “So they’re going to try to convince women and minorities that the GOP’s boots are stamping on their faces for their own good? Good luck with that.”

  • stardreamer42

     It’s worth noting that by choosing to run with an R after their name, they are aligning themselves with the party of the Batshit Crazy and all that entails. When you choose an action, you also choose the consequences of that action.

  • Damanoid

    ‘ Before following any of the links, I took this post at its face value.
     It made me think, “Wow, just what would the Republican party look like
    doing this?”  ‘

    I bought into it until the bit about Florida Republicans reaching out to Muslim voters.   At this point it reads less like an unlikely event and more like some kind of logical paradox.  Add in appeals to women and gays and the concept starts to resemble an Escher landscape.

  • Kirala

     “Six to eight, did you say?”

    (For full effect, listen to Sedaris reading the line and relevant context from about 9:55-10:10. My Dutch family loves this whole piece SO MUCH.)

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Ann-Unemori/100001112760232 Ann Unemori

    I’ll just be bald: out of respect for my father, a Pacific War veteran, I admit I’m a Republican. All the same, I am ashamed of what my party has become. 
    Well, all thrown at my head is profoundly deserved. 
    (Listening to “Gone With The Wind” as Ah type.)

  • Albanaeon

     Why would we do that?  You see what your party has become and maybe will work to change it.  I mean look where we are talking.  I’ve been hurt deeply by Evangelicals, yet I respect and like Fred Clark and many others here who are.  I can respect that people choose to identify with groups that aren’t perfect and are going to work to change that. 

    The Republican Leadership and bosses have earned my contempt, but you, and probably a fair number of other Republicans, have not.

  • http://www.nicolejleboeuf.com/index.php Nicole J. LeBoeuf-Little

    I think that respect for your father’s military service is insufficient reason to align yourself with a party that is espousing the things described in the linked articles. And in the end, I’m not sure it’s particularly respectful anyway, because it not only aligns your name but his also with such ugly party-approved behavior as disenfranchising minorities, violating women’s agency and bodily integrity, and treating non-Christians as second-class citizens.

    It isn’t for me to tell you how you should show respect to your dad, but it does puzzle me that you think this is the way to do it.

  • http://twitter.com/FearlessSon FearlessSon

    It’s worth noting that by choosing to run with an R after their name, they are aligning themselves with the party of the Batshit Crazy and all that entails. When you choose an action, you also choose the consequences of that action.

    I think that Ann Unemori has provided a good example here as to why someone might retain party affiliation despite not buying into the crazy.  

    There was a time when the Republican party was much more sane, and many more people were affiliated with them.  Trickle-down economics may not have worked in the long run, but I can understand the optimism of wanting to give it a shot in the first place.  Some people might have been Republicans so long, that their history of affiliation with the party is part of their own identity, and such is not so easily altered.  Or the more old school Republican politicians who are still sane (John Huntsman for example) cannot afford to simply jump ship if they ever hold any need to be elected again.  Politics is often about having the right connections to make things happen, and leaving the party means abandoning a lot of that.  

    I do not want to excuse some of the things that the Republican party has done lately, but we should no more paint all Republicans with the same brush than we should any other group.  We do not need to tolerate intolerance, but the beginning of intolerance is an unwillingness to see diversity.  

    An addendum:   I think that the increasing insanity of the Republican party as a whole has to do with those pulling the strings of its influence losing sight of that diversity themselves.  It not only makes them more intolerant and more extreme in their goals, it also alienates those in their own base who are not their “core” demographic.  

  • P J Evans

    I wonder about people who run for office but are unwilling to put their party affiliation on their signs. (Most of them are running as Republicans.)

    I suspect that if the GOP keeps going down the road they’ve been following for the last twenty or so years (at least), that they’ll become another one of the third parties of US politics, and the Democrats will split into two parties, one left of center and one right of center.

  • thebewilderness

    I thought the Rs did well in 2010 because they convinced so many people that the POTUS was making things worse instead of better, and so many Ds thought the POTUS could have done better and chose not to. Turnout/voter suppression is still the key to every election, that and controlling the state house for purposes of gerrymandering.

  • Ursula L

    I’ll just be bald: out of respect for my father, a Pacific War veteran, I admit I’m a Republican. 

    Huh?  Why?

    “Pacific War veteran” doesn’t equal “Republican.”  “Respect for Pacific War veterans” doesn’t equal “Republican.”  

    I’ve known a fair number of US WWII veterans, Pacific and European, who were Democrats.  And a fair number who were Republicans decades ago, but changed affiliation when the Republican party started being about hate and oppression, because that isn’t what they fought for.

    When the party is no longer what your ancestor supported, sticking with it is not respecting what that ancestor believed.  

    And if your ancestors genuinely supported hate and oppression, it isn’t respect, in any way, to stick with their party.  (Which is why I’m not, quite literally, a Nazi.)  

    The fact that an ancestor of yours supported a particular political party in the past isn’t going to gain you points for supporting that party in the present when that party is actively working to promote hate and oppression.  And if you claim to be sticking with that party out of respect for that ancestor, you are only making a point of labeling that ancestor as someone who would want you to support a party promoting hate and oppression, and not worthy of respect at all, no matter what sort of military job they had at some point in their life.  

  • Anton_Mates

     Given the Republican party’s current attitude toward veterans’ benefits I’m not entirely clear why that’s respectful, but you know your father better than I do.

  • Fusina

     I dunno, the most elbowy person I ever played basketball with was a youth pastor. Damn near took out my rib cage. Um, he was/is white. Yeah, I realize you were being sarcastic there.

  • Ken

     

    It’s worth noting that by choosing to run with an R after their name,
    they are aligning themselves with the party of the Batshit Crazy and all
    that entails.

    I might be able to deal with that, if they ever let daylight show between them and the crazies.  Case in point, my own soon-to-be-former representative, Judy Biggert.  I’m pretty sure she didn’t believe one tenth of the R craziness, but you couldn’t prove it from her voting record over the last couple of years, since it was indistinguishable from Allen West’s.

  • AnonaMiss

    I’m inclined to give the guy in Maine the benefit of the doubt. If the proportion of (people with X phenotype) you notice voting is double that what you notice in the community, I don’t think it’s racist to consider that suspicious.

    Unless he made it up, in which case fuck him.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Ann-Unemori/100001112760232 Ann Unemori

    He’s my dad and I love him. That the party has changed I regret, that its former ideals are forgotten make me weep. But not everything changed means the original was wrong, and and not all old ideals are outdated. My dad stood by my marriage to a man he would have shot 25 years earlier, even when I divorced said man years later. Sometimes respect is a personal thing.
    Now you have me musing on there being such a thing as an “anti-Nazi”. Or a “counter-Nazi”.
    Seems I give more credence to my enemies than to my friends.

  • Lori

    Are their any (R)s whose voting record is significantly different from the rest of their herd? GOP party discipline is enormous and has been for quite some time, so they all tend to be lockstep on virtually everything.

  • MaryKaye

     Lori wrote: 

    Are their any (R)s whose voting record is significantly different from
    the rest of their herd? GOP party discipline is enormous and has been
    for quite some time, so they all tend to be lockstep on virtually
    everything.

    In Congress, probably not.  I would not vote for a Republican for Congress for this reason.  But there are a ton of state legislatures and state executive offices, and those are all over the place politically.  If you run for Governor in my state you’d better run fairly close to the center or you’re toast; the (R) candidate tried to walk back some of his previous party-line decisions.  (But he lost anyway.  I like to think people are noticing these tactical flip-flops.)

    The person I voted for was running for Lt. Governor, which is a fairly do-nothing office here, but he had reasonable ideas about what to do with the do-nothing office.  The incumbent used it to go on junkets, as far as I can tell–he actually bragged about this in his candidate’s statement.

  • Lori

    There’s one thing wrong with that piece. It’s the bit about the blind hunters. What Sedaris doesn’t get is that in Michigan, unlike in Texas, lawmakers figured that the blind would know enough not to go out on their own without being told :)

    (I’m from Michigan—I have to stick up for them a little or I get the guilts)

  • Lori

    This is a fair point. I’ve voted for Republicans for state and local offices in the past.  I haven’t done that since 2000 though. My level of disgust with the GOP will simply no longer allow me to vote for anyone with an R next to their name. I know that in some cases this probably contributes in a teeny, tiny way to a less than desirable outcome, but I just can’t do it. 

  • Matri

    Heck, considering what the Republicans have done to veteran benefits, you’d be showing far more respect by kicking his face.

  • Lori

     

    But not everything changed means the original was wrong, and and not all old ideals are outdated.   

    But you’re not voting for the original, you’re voting for the current. And if you liked the original ideals (that weren’t about hate and oppression), the GOP is no longer the party representing them. That means that you’re voting for/identifying with the name, not with the ideals.

    In the past the positions of the GOP and the Democrats were basically reversed from what they are now. If your father had fought in the Civil War would you be still have been voting GOP in the 1950s because of that? Most of the positions currently held by the mainstream of the Democratic Party are to the Right of the 1940s and 50s GOP on economic issues.

    As others have said, you know your dad best and you have to do what feels right to you, but this is more than a bit difficult to understand.

  • Lori

     

    I’m inclined to give the guy in Maine the benefit of the doubt. If the
    proportion of (people with X phenotype) you notice voting is double that
    what you notice in the community, I don’t think it’s racist to consider
    that suspicious.  

    So we’re supposed to give this guy gets a pass for making a racist statement about the election because in his every day life he’s so racist that black people other than his black friend with whom he plays basketball are literally invisible to him? I don’t think we want to say that.

    Setting that aside, his statement was fairly breathtaking in its stupidity. Maine has been solidly Dem for decades now and it’s not exactly a secret that it’s full of white people. So what exactly would have prompted Dems to try any election shenanigans in the first place? Assuming someone decided to commit totally unnecessary voter fraud because apparently they lost their entire minds and feared Romney’s vast appeal to Main voters, why would they have smuggled in a tiny group outsiders who stood out like raisins in rice pudding to implement this fraud? Makes no sense.

    Racism is a way more logical and likely explanation of Webster’s dumbassery and I don’t see any reason to bend over backwards to pretend otherwise.

  • http://twitter.com/FearlessSon FearlessSon

    I think that I voted for the same Republican that MaryKaye did, seeing that we are both in the same state (gathered from other comments on this blog.)  Felt kind of strange to vote for someone with an (R) next to their name, but the Progressive Voters Guide actually endorsed him as being more progressive  on certain important issues than the Democrat incumbent he was challenging.  

    I would rather vote based on a candidate’s position on issues than their party affiliation (though the later often implies the former, that is not necessarily true.)  To do otherwise invites blind loyalty, and that is far too easy for the focus of the loyalty to abuse.  

  • http://twitter.com/FearlessSon FearlessSon

    I am less concerned about the guy’s potential racism (though that may be there) than his confusion of anecdotes for data.  I think that such a mentality tends to be far more damaging in the long run (and indeed allows racism to persist the way it has in the first place.)

  • Albanaeon

    I ended up voting for one Republican on the last election simply because the other two candidates were an Ayn Rand Libertarian and a Tenther Constitutionalist.  Talk about the lesser of three evils…

  • Anton_Mates

    Felt kind of strange to vote for someone with an (R) next to their name, but the Progressive Voters Guide actually endorsed him as being more progressive on certain important issues than the Democrat incumbent he was challenging.

    He certainly seemed progressive on social/environmental issues.  The Democrat seemed to have slightly stronger ties to labor, so I ended up going for him.  Partly on the verrry slight risk of the governor exploding and a Republican ending up in charge, in which case he’d almost certainly fall more in line with the party agenda.  But mostly on the theory that Our Mysterious State is already pretty progressive on social/environmental issues, but could use some shoring up in the labor area.

    But I spent a long time pondering it.  Probably longer than is merited for a Lt. Governor’s race.

  • http://www.facebook.com/j.alex.harman John Alexander Harman

    I hope not; it was notably quiescent in 2010, and the Democratic House majority paid the price.

  • stardreamer42

     Ann Unemori is not (AFAIK) running for public office. If she chooses to call herself a Republican, it’s her business.

    As noted by others, the Republicans have demonstrated a ferocious degree of lockstep enforcement, including the purging of those who do not embrace the Batshit Crazy. I fully expect Huntsman to be primaried out as a RINO if he chooses to run again for his current office — if he doesn’t drink the Kool-Aid to save his chances.

    I stand by my original comment. By choosing to run with an R after your name, you willingly associate yourself with the current leadership of the Republican Party and their toxic policies. You also commit yourself to endorsing those policies if you want any support from the state and Federal party levels. And you commit to taking their financial support, which at this point is IMO not much different from blood money.

  • stardreamer42

     In Texas, there are a number of offices which have no formal party affiliation — candidates just run, and none of them show up on the ballot with a party designation. Mileage probably varies elsewhere.

  • Demonhype

     It might have something to do with the fact that what the Republicans were proposing and what they’ve done in the past is, in fact, demonstrably WORSE than anything the Dem candidates could claim or had done.

    Between the Republicans efforts at de-regulating the rich corporatations, reducing their taxes to almost nothing, starting two unafforadable and unnecessary wars (one of them, at least, highly illegal), their war on women on every front (not just against abortion, but even to the point of trying to define rape out of existence), their open racism, their open efforts at voter suppression/gerrymandering (cheating), encouraging and rewarding those who send jobs overseas to sweatshops,  their constant efforts to eliminate any and all public services and move them to the highly mis-managed, highly dishonest and sociopathic private sector (including the prisons), their efforts to eliminate any and all poverty alleviation services, their efforts to raise the taxes of the poor to glut the rich and their ravenous over-stuffed military war machine, defining a corporation as a “person”, making efforts to force their religious beliefs onto the general public and to enshrine into law the “right” to monitor and control the private lives of their employees ……seriously, it just keeps coming.

    At some point, there are those of us who believe that someone who thinks that the Dems are worse must either be terminally blinded, or must  be some kind of sociopathic libertarian-type who thinks these monstrous characteristics of the Republican party are actually good things, and that privatizing everything, eliminating the middle class, removing the rights of women, minorities and LGBT people, and stealing the very lives of the poor so the rich might get richer are all excellent ways to make sure our society thrives.  No one who is clear-minded, intelligent, well-informed and concerned with the health and well-being of others not themselves could see it that way at this point.

  • cjmr

    “I’m inclined to give the guy in Maine the benefit of the doubt. If the proportion of (people with X phenotype) you notice voting is double that what you notice in the community, I don’t think it’s racist to consider that suspicious.
    Unless he made it up, in which case fuck him.”
    Because clearly, it would be a GOOD idea to try to commit voter fraud by showing up in a precinct where you are such the minority WRT race that everyone will notice you, remark on you, and remember you.  Sorry, that doesn’t pass the stink test.  
    I think the guy either doesn’t care to notice the African Americans in his town when he sees them on the street, or doesn’t go to the kind of place where they are.   


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X