What do Republicans have to do to become relevant again?

[Levitt]

Hello everyone,

I pose a question to you all: What do Republicans have to do to become relevant again?

Fueled by an explosion in the projections of Hispanic population growth (Here's a graph for you visual people):



As most of you already know, Caucasians will no longer make up the majority of American's at some point between 2044 and 2052. Historically, the Republican Party has catered to the "White Male" and has upheld an archaic vision for the country in an age where the relevance of their message is waning.

What do you all think the Republican Party has to do to remain relevant? Do they have to finally ease up on some of their core convictions that, though not implicitly, help solely their demographic (hint: White Males); or do they have go even further to the right in the hopes that, when executed without the presence of any liberal influence, the country has the drastic turn-around that they preach so ardently?

Please be civil as I don't want this thread to be closed.

[Istaril]

I pose a question to you all: What do Republicans have to do to become relevant again?

Completely cut itself loose from the Ultra-Conservative Christianity; religion and politics should -NEVER- mix. It's a recipe for disaster, as has been proven. Honestly, I'd argue burning the name to the ground and starting afresh under a new banner not tainted by it's past would be the best solution.

[Didactic]

Completely cut itself loose from the Ultra-Conservative Christianity. Honestly, I'd argue burning the name to the ground and starting afresh under a new banner not tainted by it's past would be the best solution.

Basically. As long as they shackle themselves to the White Christian Male voter demographic, their support base will continue to dwindle.

Honestly, they need to drop social conservatism and stick to fiscal conservatism.

[Sky High Shark]

drop the fanatics. IE the anti gay righters, big business whores (well both parties lets be honest here), and religious fanatics. when they start to live like its the 21st century and not try to go for "the good old days" you'll see progress.

[Collegeguy]

Historically, the Republican Party has catered to the "White Male" and has upheld an archaic vision for the country in an age where the relevance of their message is waning.

Really now? Do you have any evidence of this?

[kynthrus]

Political parties need to go away....

[Sky High Shark]

religion and politics should -NEVER- mix. It's a recipe for disaster, as has been proven.

if i wanted to hear what a church has to say about the way this country works they can start paying taxes.

---------- Post added 2013-02-24 at 02:53 PM ----------

Really now? Do you have any evidence of this?

70% of woman
70% of latinos
90+% of blacks voting democrat says so.

[Collegeguy]

70% of woman
70% of latinos
90+% of blacks voting democrat says so.

Correlation only means correlation.

[Kaleredar]

If they want to stay relevant, they need to distance themselves from the overzealous, anti-science strains that permeate their party. Cutting off the tea partiers wouldn't hurt them either.

Correlation only means correlation.

Obviously, something about their message isn't doing much to infatuate those groups.

[GreatOak]

Be more Libertarian which for the Repulicans, basically means cutting out enforced social conservatism, aggressive foreign interventionism, hyper nationalism, anti-drug policies, and anti-immigration policies

Being Anti-Science doesn't work either. Literally all of the young people I know who aren't liberals lean libertarian. Anecdotal, but it's what I see

[Sky High Shark]

Correlation only means correlation.

no your right, saying women shouldn't have an abortion or that famous vid of Mitt Romeny discounting 42% of americans as leaches doesn't cover anyone but white people. my bad.

---------- Post added 2013-02-24 at 03:03 PM ----------

Be more Libertarian which for the Repulicans, basically means cutting out enforced social conservatism, aggressive foreign interventionism, hyper nationalism, anti-drug policies, and anti-immigration policies

on top of that but get off the tit of big business who lines their pockets. but as I'v said both parties are guilty of this. I might be a socialist but i have on more then a few cases seen myself agreeing with libertarians.

[GreatOak]

no your right, saying women shouldn't have an abortion or that famous vid of Mitt Romeny discounting 42% of americans as leaches doesn't cover anyone but white people. my bad.

---------- Post added 2013-02-24 at 03:03 PM ----------



on top of that but get off the tit of big business who lines their pockets. but as I'v said both parties are guilty of this.

Yeah, I would think that is obvious. I just didn't say it because it's not exclusively Republican in the slightest.

[Collegeguy]

no your right, saying women shouldn't have an abortion or that famous vid of Mitt Romeny discounting 42% of americans as leaches doesn't cover anyone but white people. my bad.

I don't know whether you're trying to say white people are to blame or Republicans are to blame for any of that? There is a big, big difference.

[Sky High Shark]

I don't know whether you're trying to say white people are to blame or Republicans are to blame for any of that? There is a big, big difference.

since i must spoon feed this: yes its the republicans. I'm not at all saying its white peoples fault. what we are saying is the GOP for the most part doesn't give a shit about anyone else but rich, white, men.

[rnbwtrout]

there'll be no questions of relevancy once they get a republican back in the white house. they'll get back in the white house not because of relevancy, but because they'll finally nominate a candidate that's not terribad and makes questionable decisions like not releasing his tax returns... either that or the democrats nominate their own terribad candidate.

[oplawlz]

Simply cutting ties with religion would probably rocket them to the forefront, assuming the dems fail to cut ties with the radical left.

[Sky High Shark]

Simply cutting ties with religion would probably rocket them to the forefront, assuming the dems fail to cut ties with the radical left.

radical left? didn't know they had a liberal version of the tea party.

[Collegeguy]

Just adding the race into it in the manner as the OP did is the wrong direction if you want to measure something. Also, it inadvertently makes assumption that Democrats don't cater to the White male. This would be a completely false conclusion. There are other obvious reasons that have nothing to do with race.

[Didactic]

radical left? didn't know they had a liberal version of the tea party.

We have our greenies, commies, and anarchists. However, they either tend not to vote or be very marginal.

[Uennie]

Agreeing with others here. Get off the religious platform. Religion and politics don't mix.