What do Republicans have to do to become relevant again?

[anyaka21]

Political parties need to go away....

this and this and this and this and this

Let's face, it really is the truth these days too. Sure people can identify themselves with political parties, however, most people will agree that they have leaning and feeling towards both parties. The most basic example is people tend to like fiscal conservatism and like the social agenda of the democrats.

Add that the party system that is in place with the electoral college is antiquated and needs to go away. The way it is structured, there really isn't a chance for someone outside the two parties to actually make a good run at the office.

As for what repulicans need to change? probably not much other than to get a better candidate. Let's face it, people were asking the same question when Bush was in office, but it was what can the democrats do differently. Bottom line was they had weak candidates going against Bush

[Garnier Fructis]

How does the poll worker know if age isnt listed. How does the person counting the votes know?

You want the laws, you prove there's a big enough problem. It's not our job to disprove a position you put forward.

This would be like me saying we need laws that prohibit dogs from communicating via telepathy and then demanded that you prove it doesn't happen.

[petej0]

Who actually worries? How much does it happen? You still haven't provided any solid evidence. You keep saying we can't get evidence - well, that's your problem. The burden of proof is on you.

In our current system you can not prove how much of this type of voter fraud is happening. THAT IS THE WHOLE POINT OF VOTER ID. To ensure that the people who are voting are the people who are listed on the ballot. Otherwise ANYONE can show up and vote as any other person. Currently there is no way to STOP or PROVE that you showed up in my town and voted for my father. That is my whole point and that is the whole point of voter ID.

You keep coming back saying that I have to provide evidence. The evidence is that dead people voted. That is proof that there are people out there voting as other people. How big of a problem is it? Nobody know because there is no way to know that you voted in place of my father. How does an election official prove that? Honestly how do you not understand this?

Because the government generally deals in things with tangible, noticeable benefits to society - such as education, infrastructure etc.

So does the private sector, more so then government. Which shows the private sector knows how to create jobs more efficiently.

[Garnier Fructis]

In our current system you can not prove how much of this type of voter fraud is happening. THAT IS THE WHOLE POINT OF VOTER ID. To ensure that the people who are voting are the people who are listed on the ballot. Otherwise ANYONE can show up and vote as any other person. Currently there is no way to STOP or PROVE that you showed up in my town and voted for my father. That is my whole point and that is the whole point of voter ID.

You keep coming back saying that I have to provide evidence. The evidence is that dead people voted. That is proof that there are people out there voting as other people. How big of a problem is it? Nobody know because there is no way to know that you voted in place of my father. How does an election official prove that? Honestly how do you not understand this?

Let me get this straight. Your point is that we've been able to prove it happens (dead people voting), therefore there's a problem (voter fraud), and we can't prove it happens. Therefore, we need voter ID laws.

[GreatSageCorban]

OT: The Republican party is the last remaining frontier of social acceptance for people with far-right social views (racism, homophobia, chauvanism, plutocracy, Christianism, etc).

None of these are exclusive to the republican party. Though you could say 'far-right social views' could contain some of these, depending on how far back your looking to go. Being 'right leaning' socially is a very nebulous thing. It can mean you hold many traditional Christian values (circa 1920-40. Not necessarily a bad thing.), or it could mean you hold 'traditional' Christian values, as wanting to burn people at the stake. :-p

As such, the Republican party will continue to dwindle until 1) there's a truly radical overhaul of the party or 2) Democratic success lulls the country into political complacency a la 2000.

Republicans, in my view, are democrats (policy) that have a terrible media image, and give lip service to a base that has become wise to it. For them to become relevant to their base, they simply need to enact right'wing policies and spending.

There are several problems the Republicans have to address to remain relevant and rebuild their image:

1) Gerrymandering. With huge levels of state control in 2010, the GOP purposely gerrymandered districts to maintain control of the US House despite having millions of votes less than Democrats in House elections. The backlash of this for the GOP is that they gerrymandered the districts to be TOO SAFE. What this means for moderate and reasonable Republicans is that, in a safe red district, their biggest worry is a primary challenge from a candidate to the right of moderate. Consequently, more far-right nut jobs like Ted Cruz are being elected and the moderate Republicans are moving further right to avoid being primaried.

2) "Center-right?": The Republicans like to pretend that the U.S. is a center-right country. They're right that polls show more people identifying as such, but when questioned about *specific* policy matters regarding Medicare, healthcare, Social Security, abortion, gay rights, foreign war, tax policy, corporate personhood, and Wallstreet accountability, the numbers shift overwhelmingly (about 2:1) in favor of Democrats. So basically the Republican establishment has the talk right but the walk incredibly, horribly wrong. Congress has done the Republican brand no favors by being elected in 2010 on a mandate of "jobs, jobs, jobs," and then using their majorities to do nothing but push budget-busting tax cuts for the wealthy, increases taxes on the poor, and the gutting of the arts and social services.

3) Democrats are the new Republicans: I disagree with a lot of Reagan's policies, especially regarding his invention of discretionary public debt and horribly tax policy. But whatever the technical disagreements, Reagan was a uniter, a negotiator, and a leader in every sense of the word. He deserved to be President. His "big tent," however, was only partially his doing. On the opposite side, the Great Society Democrats had veered so far to the left (into actual socialism, not what the tea party pretends is socialism) that they ran off a lot of the center-left. After 12 years under Republicans, Clinton brought the Democratic party radically right (to the actual center), and this is where Obama has kept it. The Republicans now have done to themselves exactly what the Democrats did post-JFK - marginalize themselves while the other side creates unity and concensus.

I don't think i have enough information at hand to discuss the above.

[Zhangfei]

In our current system you can not prove how much of this type of voter fraud is happening. THAT IS THE WHOLE POINT OF VOTER ID.

If you can't prove it's happening, then I simply don't care about fixing that supposed problem.

You keep coming back saying that I have to provide evidence. The evidence is that dead people voted. That is proof that there are people out there voting as other people. How big of a problem is it? Nobody know because there is no way to know that you voted in place of my father. How does an election official prove that? Honestly how do you not understand this?

Because we know about the dead people voting thing because there is evidence for it and people have been imprisoned for it. How do you not understand that we fix the stuff when there's evidence for it? You're trying to fix a problem that you don't even know exists.

So does the private sector, more so then government. Which shows the private sector knows how to create jobs more efficiently.

No, it doesn't. Historically, the private sector has been remarkably poor at many things or has never been present in others. Education is a prime example. The private sector only succeeds when there's a strong and effective government, not the other way around.

[petej0]

Let me get this straight. Your point is that we've been able to prove it happens (dead people voting), therefore there's a problem (voter fraud), and we can't prove it happens. Therefore, we need voter ID laws.

No, my point is that we know people who have died have cast ballots. This proves that other people casted their ballots. So we know, by cross checking death records that they could not possibly have voted.

So since we know that LIVE people have cast ballots for DEAD people (which we can prove using death records). The next question is how many LIVE people have cast ballots for other LIVE people.

It is easy to know that a ballot cast for Obama in 2012 by Johnny Cash is fraudulent because we know that Johnny Cash is dead.
What we dont know is how many people voted for other live people. If we lived in the same town it is possible you could vote using my ballot and your own ballot and nobody would be the wiser.

[Kujako]

No, my point is that we know people who have died have cast ballots. This proves that other people casted their ballots.

Actually, no it doesn't. It only proves a ballet was entered into the system at some point with a dead persons name on it. You are assuming that was done by an individual that would have been thwarted by a voter id law.

Beyond that you are assuming that there is a significant enough amount of in person voter fraud to justify denying a known quantity of citizens the ability to vote.

[petej0]

You're trying to fix a problem that you don't even know exists.

And my point is that we dont know how widespread it is because it isnt something that can easily be proven. You understand my scenario yet you cant see how hard it is to find evidence of it happening?

No, it doesn't. Historically, the private sector has been remarkably poor at many things or has never been present in others. Education is a prime example. The private sector only succeeds when there's a strong and effective government, not the other way around.

Your right, Computers, cars, cellphones, TV's, video game consoles were all created by government programs. How I forget. Education? Really so on average private schools do a worse job graduating kids then public schools?

[GreatSageCorban]

since the voter ID thing is still putting about, I'm just going to throw some stuff out. If it's already been cited and or 'shot down' my apologies.

24 million invalid voter registrations still on rolls & 1.8 million dead still able to vote
http://www.pewtrusts.org/our_work_re...id=85899370677

People registering to vote after their death:
http://marylandreporter.com/2012/09/...-on-the-rolls/

The whole "More people registered to vote then live in the county" thing in ohio. Official document recognizing the fact:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/104449069/Complaint-Ohio-NVRA

(Yes it's the blaze, don't have time to find another source.) Federal records show 160 counties nation wide with the same "more registrations then people" thing.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2012...gible-to-vote/

Leaving work, good day gents.

[petej0]

Actually, no it doesn't. It only proves a ballet was entered into the system at some point with a dead persons name on it. You are assuming that was done by an individual that would have been thwarted by a voter id law.

Beyond that you are assuming that there is a significant enough amount of in person voter fraud to justify denying a known quantity of citizens the ability to vote.

If a person died in June and cast a ballot at a voting station in November I think it is safe to say short of a zombie outbreak that the vote was fraudulent.

Nobody is denying anyone the ability to vote. There is just an additional requirement. One that is easily obtainable.

[Kujako]

If a person died in June and cast a ballot at a voting station in November I think it is safe to say short of a zombie outbreak that the vote was fraudulent.

Again, fraudulent is not the same as in person voter fraud.

[Garnier Fructis]

No, my point is that we know people who have died have cast ballots. This proves that other people casted their ballots. So we know, by cross checking death records that they could not possibly have voted.

So since we know that LIVE people have cast ballots for DEAD people (which we can prove using death records). The next question is how many LIVE people have cast ballots for other LIVE people.

It is easy to know that a ballot cast for Obama in 2012 by Johnny Cash is fraudulent because we know that Johnny Cash is dead.
What we dont know is how many people voted for other live people. If we lived in the same town it is possible you could vote using my ballot and your own ballot and nobody would be the wiser.

You're exactly right. That is the question. Perhaps we should find the answer to that question before we craft legislation that assumes it to be arbitrarily large.

[Bridgetjones]

I sure wish a moderator would just obliterate this entire voter ID discussion for being way, waaaaaaaaay off topic.

[Zhangfei]

And my point is that we dont know how widespread it is because it isnt something that can easily be proven. You understand my scenario yet you cant see how hard it is to find evidence of it happening?

But then the burden of proof is on YOU to find it out!

Your right, Computers, cars, cellphones, TV's, video game consoles were all created by government programs. How I forget. Education? Really so on average private schools do a worse job graduating kids then public schools?

Computers: NASA. Cars: France's inventors were often state sponsored, especially by L'Academy. Cellphones: US military. Video game consoles: derivations from publicly funded universities?

Education is key (like you literally just listed things mostly invented by publicly funded organisation.) You can't compare public/private schools, different demographics.

[Cthulhu 2020]

I sure wish a moderator would just obliterate this entire voter ID discussion for being way, waaaaaaaaay off topic.

It's very one sided at this point. Wild claims of voter ID fraud that can't be proven or substantiated by any source whatsoever.

[GreatSageCorban]

It's very one sided at this point. Wild claims of voter ID fraud that can't be proven or substantiated by any source whatsoever.

I literally don't have time to look into depth on this. I was lurking, saw your post, and thought I might have a source/repository source:
http://www.truethevote.org/news/did-...s-in-46-states

[Rukentuts]

I literally don't have time to look into depth on this. I was lurking, saw your post, and thought I might have a source/repository source:
http://www.truethevote.org/news/did-...s-in-46-states

FYI: That source more than supports my claim of "couple thousand".

[stumpy]

True The Vote is about as far from reputable as you can get after actively trying to sabotage the Walker recall effort in Wisconsin. (They decided they were going to "independently verify" recall signatures, whereupon they went through all kinds of contortions to declare them invalid - including, but not limited to, their own errors in data entry.) They're the last people you should be going to for information about the integrity of the voting process.

[Masark]

since the voter ID thing is still putting about, I'm just going to throw some stuff out. If it's already been cited and or 'shot down' my apologies.

24 million invalid voter registrations still on rolls & 1.8 million dead still able to vote
http://www.pewtrusts.org/our_work_re...id=85899370677

People registering to vote after their death:
http://marylandreporter.com/2012/09/...-on-the-rolls/

The whole "More people registered to vote then live in the county" thing in ohio. Official document recognizing the fact:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/104449069/Complaint-Ohio-NVRA

(Yes it's the blaze, don't have time to find another source.) Federal records show 160 counties nation wide with the same "more registrations then people" thing.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2012...gible-to-vote/

Leaving work, good day gents.

1. Only 1.8 million? That's about 266 days worth of deaths, so the time from death to removed from the voter rolls is about that long. Faster than the probate courts.

2. Yes, it's not an uncommon thing. People move. And how many of those 160 counties has a university/college? (Answer: probably lots. There are about 4100 colleges and universities in the USA) Student comes in, is there for 1, maybe 2 elections, then goes somewhere else, and doesn't bother to inform anyone they're leaving the district (who does?). And they probably didn't inform anyone when they moved from home, so they might be registered in 3 places and because you've got a seemingly random distribution of responsibilities between levels of government (whoever thought having state governments managing federal elections didn't plan on your country getting this big), you get massive left-hand-not-talking-to-the-right-hand situation, resulting in the rolls getting cluttered, but having to err on the side of caution so you don't mispurge someone.

We have less of a problem, as our elections are done federally by Elections Canada, who can get their info from the CRA and also statscan.