The love affair between Barack Obama and young Americans may be on the rocks. Recently released figures from the Department of Labor reveal staggeringly high joblessness numbers among America’s youth. Indeed, 53.4 percent of young Americans are without a job – a post-World War II high.
With over half of 16-24 year olds jobless, even after stimulus package after stimulus package supposedly meant to create jobs, one has to wonder how Barack Obama’s approval ratings are doing among his strongest supporters. Unsurprisingly, the answer is “worse.” According to Gallup, approval of President Obama among young adults aged 18 to 29 fell 11 points this summer. While the President’s approval ratings have fallen recently among all age groups, this drop was the sharpest decline of any age demographic.
And yet, President Obama still gets his strongest support from young Americans, with 60 percent of people under 30 still approving of the job he is doing. But the recent economic and public opinion trends provide a huge opportunity for Republicans to make up some ground with the youngest generation of voters. The GOP’s challenge, however, is to stay on message as they sweet talk young Americans.
For the past two years, the economy and jobs have consistently been at the top of young voters’ list of most important issues. Even before this financial crisis began, when unemployment rates were not so alarmingly high, young Americans ranked “jobs and the economy” as their number one issue. In November 2007, 18 percent of 18-29 year olds put it at the top of their list; by September 2008, that number climbed to 29 percent. And the economy certainly tops the priority list now, with skyrocketing unemployment and America’s youngest workers facing weeks, months, and even years of joblessness that could have detrimental effects on their long-term earning potential. There are 1.1 million job seekers that are new to the workforce and have not found a job.
A survey by the Young Republican National Federation at the beginning of this year showed that 23 percent of Young Republicans wanted their party to focus on job creation and the economy. Only 6 percent of these young party activists thought the GOP should focus on social issues. (And social conservatives were well represented in the survey.) For young voters of all social stripes, it seems it is a matter of priorities.
Recession or no recession, young Americans care most about jobs. And if Republicans take advantage of this opportunity to talk competently and confidently about the economy, the party has a chance to break young America’s love affair with Obama and win these voters back to the GOP.
As a candidate, Barack Obama captured the hearts, minds, and votes of the youngest Americans, in no small part simply by talking to them. In many ways, President Obama has stopped talking to young people, largely leaving them out of important conversations likehealthcare reform as he focuses on senior citizens. And we all know that communication is the key to any healthy relationship. It’s time for the GOP to start communicating with young voters – and it is abundantly clear what these voters want to talk about.
37 responses so far
1 Cforchange // Oct 15, 2009 at 9:20 am
Well what’s new here? Just what do you think Rudy’s canidacy was all about? Where are the forward thinking leadership types of this party? Too confused by social issues?
To help end this confusion, I will no longer vote for any candidate if they mention their church membership during the campaign. I ask, what does that have to do with running government? Does that particular membership mean that governing will benefit your church? For the majority, mere membership of a particular faith does not guarantee ethics. I will no longer give a candidate the benefit of the doubt – I am concluding that the candidate is consfused about their role and is only attempting to serve a particular special interest group.
It’s time to get back to fiscal basics folks. Where’s the new leader? They are tardy.
2 LessThanExpert // Oct 15, 2009 at 9:41 am
The Republican Party has a couple of major problems among people in my age group:
(1) Just because young Americans are upset about job losses doesn’t mean that they don’t favor the stimulus. While there is anger among all demographics about the bailouts, that does not translate into support for the GOPs ‘government can’t work’ approach either. Talking to a Republican friend of mine last night, she lambasted Obama’s deficit spending but then agreed that if McCain had been elected, said the economy would have ceased to exist entirely.
(2) If you took a random sample of 18-30 year olds in the U.S. today and played a word-association game with them, Republican would likely be associated with words like ‘crazy,’ ‘irritable,’ ‘obstructionist’ and ‘white’ on a regular basis.
3 DFL // Oct 15, 2009 at 9:53 am
I graduated college in 1982 when unemployment peaked at 10.8 % so I know what these kids are going through. They want to work and make money. They have my sympathy. Unfortunately, the Baby Boomers, the Quiet(Eisenhower) Generation, and what’s left of the Greatest Generation have the votes and still want full funding of the programs that have weighted down the young with debt. The Reagan boom is over to be replaced by a more austere time even for young adults with college degrees. Jobs will be hard to come by for a very long time. The economy, the budget and jobs will remain at the forefront of public debate yet social issues will remain with us due to the fact that we are more than economic beings.
4 sinz54 // Oct 15, 2009 at 9:55 am
If you asked young people, particularly at Ivy League colleges, what they think of the GOP, they would tell you it’s anti-gay, anti-sex, pro-religion, and pro-war. Which is the inverse of the culture at those colleges.
Appealing to young voters carries with it the same problems that appealing to Hispanics or any other new cohort has: The GOP base, mostly composed of middle-aged white men, are suspicious of any appeal that seems to dilute their own power. The GOP has yet to craft an appeal that sounds like it can benefit everybody, so that Hispanics and young people may be interested yet without alienating the GOP’s existing base. Frankly, the GOP doesn’t seem to have any economic program at all besides cutting corporate taxes.
5 LFC // Oct 15, 2009 at 10:37 am
And if Republicans take advantage of this opportunity to talk competently and confidently about the economy, the party has a chance to break young America’s love affair with Obama and win these voters back to the GOP.
This is true, but first the GOP has to come up with an economic platform that is nothing but more tax cuts and more deregulation. These failed miserably under George W., causing the current massive recession, and the youth of today know that. They may be unhappy, but they see no alternative from Republicans.
Bruce Bartlett is saying that supply side economics are over because conditions today are not the same as under Reagan. He is also saying that we’ve cut taxes to a point where we can never get back to a balanced budget, especially since neither party has the political will to do any real spending cuts. He’s presenting a sane and conservative approach to the economy … and he’s getting torn apart for it.
6 DFL // Oct 15, 2009 at 10:57 am
I read you, ifc. Count me a supporter of David M. Walker as president. Walker is the retired US Comptroller who presently is President of the Pete Peterson Institute in Washington. The era of tax cuts are over but so is the era of massive federal spending. America needs to cut expenditures drastically, especially for programs subsidizing the elderly. Almost the whole budget should be up for a paring, including defense, NASA, roadbuilding and education.
7 rbottoms // Oct 15, 2009 at 11:13 am
Lets look at the positives and the negatives.
On the Minus Side
———————-
Scare and insult blacks. Insult and disparage Hispanics. Insult and attack Muslims. Denigrate and insult women. Disparage elites (you know smart people).
On the Plus Side
——————-
War. No new taxes. No contraceptives. A moose hunter. A plumber. An exorcist.
See you in 2012.
8 ottovbvs // Oct 15, 2009 at 11:20 am
……Oh you mean he’s down to 68%…….I’ve no idea what the actual figure is but since Ms Hoff doesn’t give it I assume it’s still in the relative stratosphere…….would you like to tell me what the Republican party’s economic policies are apart from cutting taxes (which Bruce Bartlett has masterfully debunked in several articles and his new book which I’ve just ordered) and saying no to every proposal aimed at getting the economy moving again which now shows every signs of happening.
9 ottovbvs // Oct 15, 2009 at 11:30 am
ireign // Oct 15, 2009 at 11:14 am
“Right now, most young people who really don’t have the foggiest clue of his positions ”
…….Actually based on my conversations with young people in the 19-30 age group, most of them not particularly into politics, I’d say they have an infinitely better grasp of the political issues out there than people in the 50 plus age group. As of now they generally regard the GOP as both ugly and irrational on a host of issues like creationism, racism, global warming, international relations, economic opportunity, gender issues, etc. It’s only because of its ugliness and irrationality that the GOP is so easily mocked at venues like SNL. If you behave like an idiot people tend to believe you are one.
10 chinagreenelvis // Oct 15, 2009 at 11:52 am
“Recession or no recession, young Americans care most about jobs. And if Republicans take advantage of this opportunity to talk competently and confidently about the economy, the party has a chance to break young America’s love affair with Obama and win these voters back to the GOP.”
Hey, I’ve got a great idea! How about instead of being concerned how many voters you have in your pen, you actaully try making a difference in the economic situation and let the people decide for themselves who is doing them more good? All the “sweet-talk” in the world doesn’t compare to action. What matters is that we all do our part to make sure our economy doesn’t collapse and — get this — stop perpetuating the myth that the president is somehow solely responsible for the amount of available j0bs in the country or that he alone has some magical power to resolve the situation.
This is about as inspirational as hearing your pastor bragging about how many “numbers” are in his congregation. People shouldn’t be digitized and valued as numerical quantities.
The Democrats got elected into power again based not on the accomplishments they were achieving, but instead on the piss-poor image that the Bush administration managed to give conservatives despite being fiscally liberal. Does the Republican party really need to rely on the same lazy, opportunistic tactic of scooping up disenfranchised strays?
Perhaps both parties should adopt a slogan: “The Other Guys Are Doing a Shit Job, So Vote For Us Because We’re Your Only Other Option.”
11 LFC // Oct 15, 2009 at 12:03 pm
Shorter slogan for chinagreenelvis: “Vote US. We’re not THEM.”
12 MI-GOPer // Oct 15, 2009 at 12:14 pm
Young voters generally have neither property nor do they have others who rely upon them to provide for them from a deeply tax-depeleted paycheck. Until young voters get property or a family or a house (no, not an apt shared with 3 others), they won’t appreciate the value of the GOP message of lower taxes, fiscal restraint, smaller govt, local decision making, federalism, strict constructionist judges, et al.
Nothing short of Obama being unmasked as a pedophile would break the irrational love-fest that college age people have with Obama… and even then, I doubt that it would (please see Michael Jackson). Their support of him is irrational. It’s based on expectations that were whipped out of proportion by Alexrod & Company. These are voters who were motivated to show up in the voting booth because they thought they were ending their parents’ world of politics as usual –taking command of their future, as it were.
The GOP doesn’t need to “grab” these voters away from Obama; what it needs to do is to expose Obama as just another corrupted, ego-centric, big money Democrat lining his pockets while on the public’s dime. We need to discredit him to the basement level of voter disapproval “enjoyed” by many Democrat governors, Senators and Representatives -and the entire Democrat Congress. We need to depress the young vote –not give it a new home.
They’ll come back to the GOP & GOP values once they get some property beyond a pair of $150 nike basketball shoes, have a legitimate family, acquire property.
Til then, keep them out of important decision making moments like voting for elected officials and redirect their attentions where it rightly belongs: drugs, sex, and rock & roll.
13 DFL // Oct 15, 2009 at 12:51 pm
I pretty much agree with your claims, mi-goper. In my case, I’m 49, own a house, and have a wife and six kids. My perspective is much different than some young adult who lives with his parents, has no mortgage payment to make every month, has no wife, and has no children. That’s just part of the unraveling of life. However much I expect Barack Obama to disappoint many youths who voted for him, I expect the Bush presidency will be as much a deadweight for Republicans as Jimmy Carter’s presidency was to the Democrats when I was in my twenties in the 1980s.
14 Cforchange // Oct 15, 2009 at 1:26 pm
dfl,Drastic spending cuts will also result in law enforcement reductions. I’ve lived through this exercise. Lawlessness quickly occurs. Like roaches, the underground is ready, willing and able to immediately assist. Their solution has and will simply bring us down.
Throngs of people have been self medicating and with agents they can never refuse – never ever. This is not exclusively an urban problem – it occurs anywhere there are insufficient opportunities for occupation. Junkies too need to earn thier fix so they target adventuresome children with means – addiction plague has been growing and growing. There is a direct relationship between lacking employment, choking back law enforcement and the growth of the junkie population especially since the only solution now is the criminalizing management approach.
Moderate program spending cuts if that, are probably all we can tolerate. This leaves only eliminating wasteful programs (which I believe was promised) but I believe providing tax incentives to the investor class to create jobs for the American army of middle class is necessary. Taxable income by job creation is our only way out. Work in abundance would be so good for our country.
It isn’t just the young that have been idled. I too am the class of 1982 and reside in the city that took this bashing the hardest. Just recently Pittsburgh has moved from near last to the top third for job prospects. What does this really mean – for the regular middle, it will always be very difficult to find a decent job. There is a huge part of the population that have been long omitted from the current stats. Many have fallen into the seedy trade I describe above. That’s reality kids.
Just ponder where your college peers may venture if they don’t find work, have to default on loans, have too much spare time…. All young have dreams and success is ability plus luck. The current GOP discussion never ventures near those who fall out of luck. How can it be avoided now that so many are in some state of default. How can we craft solutions from this current state of GOP denial. We’ve wasted a decade in this mode – also explaining why there are so few youth currently interested.
Maybe we’re not good social workers but on the other hand it’s so mystifying that the GOP has not been leading in the area of job creation and incentives to do so. How too in the party leaderhip to respond to the significant income shift out of our party? Wow, its depressing. Rush is the only member making any money.
I too think that Bruce Bartlett has a very sensible view and that we should hear alot more from him.
15 ottovbvs // Oct 15, 2009 at 4:17 pm
mi-goper // Oct 15, 2009 at 12:14 pm
“They’ll come back to the GOP & GOP values once they get some property beyond a pair of $150 nike basketball shoes, have a legitimate family, acquire property.
Til then, keep them out of important decision making moments like voting for elected officials and redirect their attentions where it rightly belongs: drugs, sex, and rock & roll.”
…….Dream on…..it clearly escaped your notice that Obama for the first time received a majority from the college educated, those earning over $150k a year, and burb dwellers…..in other words archetypal property owners…….. Basically the Republican base is increasingly non college educated, southern, and aging.
Cforchange // Oct 15, 2009 at 1:26 pm
“I too think that Bruce Bartlett has a very sensible view and that we should hear alot more from him.”
………Couldn’t agree more…..the only realistic Republican I’ve heard for a long time.
16 balconesfault // Oct 15, 2009 at 4:20 pm
Cforchange Maybe we’re not good social workers but on the other hand it’s so mystifying that the GOP has not been leading in the area of job creation and incentives to do so.
Well, the problem is that over the last couple decades, stimulating investment has become dislinked with simulating job creation in America. As we’ve done a great job with stabilizing the world, and with opening China up to foreign investment, if you give an American investor a dollar he’s as likely to put it in Brazilian growth funds or the Chinese stock market as he is to invest in an American company … and even if invested in an American company it may well go to expanding a production line in Singapore instead of in Methuen or Montgomery.
So we produce jobs in the financial sector, obsessed with moving money back and forth across the globe. But can the supply of those jobs continue to grow ad infinitum?
17 DFL // Oct 15, 2009 at 4:54 pm
Fortunately, Otto, those who call themselves conservative have a higher birth rate. Hurrah for the Duggers and those like them.
18 balconesfault // Oct 15, 2009 at 6:37 pm
Hurrah for the Duggers and those like them.
Yep – we’ll need someone to pick grapes when the fence finally gets completed …
19 MI-GOPer // Oct 15, 2009 at 7:09 pm
ottovbvs claims:
“…….Dream on…..it clearly escaped your notice that Obama for the first time received a majority from the college educated, those earning over $150k a year, and burb dwellers…..in other words archetypal property owners…….. Basically the Republican base is increasingly non college educated, southern, and aging.”
Ummm, if we’re dreaming… it’s a NIGHTMARE for your side, ottovbvs.
In a recent poll, only 43% of voters who voted for Obama in Nov would vote for him now. That’s some serious buyers-remorse, dude! Serious. You still support him and say that “I’m dreaming”???
http://www.fireandreamitchell.com/2009/10/15/only-43-of-those-polled-would-vote-to-re-elect-obama-as-president-if-the-election-was-held-today/
In a recent poll, less than a 1/3 of Americans think America is heading in the right direction. Now, that’s some serious voter INconfidence in your president. Heck, nearly 1/3 of all Americans are supposedly Democrats now, no?
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/right_direction_or_wrong_track
There are nearly 10% more American voters who strongly disapprove of Obama than approve of his antics. His strong approve/strongly disapprove gap widens like a sink hole on a rain-soaked Oregon hillside every day.
And the real killer for your argument? Nearly 3:5 18-29 yr olds who voted for Obama, the so-called FirstGlobals generation, don’t think he’s doing a good job right now. In fact, he’s lost nearly 20% of their support –18.9% declaring in a Zogby 08-31-09 poll that they wouldn’t vote for him again.
Ouch, ouch, and double ouch.
Where’s the advantage to the GOP? Just let Obama be Obama… at this rate, he’ll lose the entire 18-29 yr old vote by year’s end. LOL.
20 Reason60 // Oct 15, 2009 at 11:10 pm
“Fortunately, Otto, those who call themselves conservative have a higher birth rate. Hurrah for the Duggers and those like them.”
The Duggars, and the Garcias, and Al-Muhhammeds and all their children….. God-fearing conservatives, all.
(sorry, couldn’t resist)
21 balconesfault // Oct 15, 2009 at 11:39 pm
mi-goper: In a recent poll, only 43% of voters who voted for Obama in Nov would vote for him now.
http://www.fireandreamitchell.com/2009/10/15/only-43-of-those-polled-would-vote-to-re-elect-obama-as-president-if-the-election-was-held-today/
From the link: For 2008 Obama voters, 81 percent say they would vote to re-elect him — that’s a slight up tick from the 79 percent who said so previously.
Didn’t do that well on that reading comprehension portion of the SAT, did we?
22 ottovbvs // Oct 16, 2009 at 9:25 am
mi goper and all the other jokers:
…….Some nightmare……I must be dreaming then………just about every poll has his appro in the low to mid 50’s……his pollster average is about 54.5 as I recall which is higher than he won the election by……meanwhile Republican appro is in the 20’s…..that’s the real nightmare for you guys as you spend hours bloviating about whether the president is only fairly popular rather than very popular
23 ottovbvs // Oct 16, 2009 at 9:30 am
mi goper you might also want to note from that even in that Faux news poll you quoted 60% of the country regarded him as a strong and decisive leader….you guys are funny with your capacity for self delusion.
24 MI-GOPer // Oct 16, 2009 at 9:41 am
blaconesfault “Didn’t do that well on that (sic) reading comprehension portion of the SAT, did we?
Hmmm, you must be caught in the same NIGHTMARE that captivates your fellow-troll tool ottovbvs… here’s the money quote>
“Back on April 22-23 when this poll was first conducted, 52% of those polled said they would re-elect Obama if the election was held today. Fast forward to October 15th, and those 52% has dropped to a new low of 43% who would vote to re-elect Obama had the election been held today. In addition to this, Obama’s approval rating comes in at 49% this week, a new low overall approval rating for Obama, and the first time the Fox News poll has measured an approval rating of under 50%.”
We didn’t take the SAT. I went to a real high school that was known for its high standards so the Univ of Michigan Admissions Office ruled our graduates didn’t need to take SATs… our transcript was sufficient proof of academic prowess. Where’d you go to school, balconesfault?
Looking at the money quote and what I wrote, balconesfault, I’m trying to imagine your score on reading comprehension for any test, any time. Did they give you a negative score on your college entrance exams?
But let’s remember that this was a case of your fellow troll tool, ottovbvs, claiming that I was wrong about the notion that young voters would become behavioral GOPers once they had property, had a family, had others who relied upon them for food, water, housing, education, safety. Right now it’s all about sex, drugs and rock & roll for them. Right now their choice in the polling booth doesn’t impact them beyond the anti-establishment, anti-parent impulse that they’ve helped to select a president who isn’t from their parent’s political world of stalemate, bickering, partisan hijinks, lying, deception, crass greed and self-interest… but even in that limited sense, they ain’t too happy with the Great MMMM MMM MM Obama. And Obama is proving himself to be every bit the old style Chicago thug politician.
That’s the nightmare you share with ottovbvs. Over-hyped, over-promised campaign pledges are now meeting the reality of politics and the Do-Nothing president is, well, short on accomplishments. Walking on water and replacing Jesus was tougher than Obama thought.
If reading comprehension was a problem for you, balconesfault, there’s gotta be a local community college that can bring you up to speed. Maybe you should sue your high school for failing to prepare you for life or a civil discussion?
25 balconesfault // Oct 16, 2009 at 9:53 am
mi-goper.
Not a surprise that you cannot even admit that you completely blew it with your claim In a recent poll, only 43% of voters who voted for Obama in Nov would vote for him now. – and instead respond with a series of invective and defensiveness.
This does not make you appear to be a serious person.
The correct response is to say “oops, I made a mistake. Sorry.”
26 MI-GOPer // Oct 16, 2009 at 9:56 am
ottovbvs opines >”mi goper you might also want to note from that even in that Faux news poll you quoted 60% of the country regarded him as a strong and decisive leader”
How do we get you to wake up from your nightmare, ottovbvs? The FoxNews polls doesn’t do a very good job of tracking Presidential Approval Ratings. For that we need to look at Scott Rasmussen’s insightful poll on that very topic –he does the poll every day, day-in, day-out. Obama up or Obama dropping like a lead weight.
Today, Rasmussen has Obama’s PAR at a negative 11. (Negative numbers might interest your fellow Democrat troll tool balconesfault… I think he got a negative on his SATs).
Why negative 11? It’s the difference between those who strongly approve of Obama and those who strongly disapprove of his job performance. Today, that stands at 28% who strongly approve and 39% who strongly disapprove… and the trend has been for the stongly disapproval number to grow as more moderates and independents get disgusted with Obama as God/World Apology Tour.
Can’t be a good nightmare?
Are you having night time sweats?
That could just be buyer’s remorse setting in… as the Left and fellow Socialists don’t think Obama is being tough enough on ObamaCare, exiting Iraq, cutting the military budget, Afghanistan, solving world hunger, ending AIDS, turning Africa into an oasis, repealing DADT, expanding gay rights and being a better mentor and model to inner city black youth who still have a violent crime, unwed pregnancy, illiteracy, & school drop out problem that would implode any suburban community gripped by widespread Democrat corruption in the local govt, the courts, the schools, et al.
I’m not dreaming. It’s your nightmare.
27 sinz54 // Oct 16, 2009 at 10:15 am
dfl:
The problem is,
so far in American political life, that’s been a non-starter.
Nobody gets elected by promising specific cuts. The outcry from those who will get socked is huge.
Even after the 1994 Republican sweep, Gingrich tried to cut domestic spending by $700 billion. Clinton opposed him. The public sided with Clinton.
I don’t see how to get the public to back massive cuts in specific programs–unless there is a true economic crisis like hyperinflation.
And who knows, that may happen.
28 MI-GOPer // Oct 16, 2009 at 10:20 am
By the way, Democrat trolls? The headline here is:
“Obama Plummets Among Youth Over Jobs”.
Spin, prevaricate, twist yourselves into pretzels, poke critics in the eye with stick… that’s the truth of your nightmare.
And guess what, the more the Great Obama does… the lower his numbers sink. 2010 and 2012 are looking pretty bad for the Democrats and damn good for the GOP. A blue state like Michigan, ripped by the inaction of Obama on the economy and 8 yrs of failed policies and non-leadership by a Democrat gov and two US Senators, looks like it may be going red in 2010 and 2012. We’ve had 8 yrs of Obama already… their names are Granholm, StupidCow and Levin.
29 sinz54 // Oct 16, 2009 at 10:21 am
mi-goper:
Some things are not going to change, however.
When these young voters get older and get careers and families:
They’re not suddenly going to become less tolerant of Hispanics or gays.
They’re not suddenly going to become sexual prudes.
They’re not suddenly going to stop smoking marijuana.
Social attitudes don’t change much as they age.
How do I know that? Because the entrepreneurs of Silicon Valley, the ones who created the giant electronics and computer firms that made America the world leader in computers, are still hippies at heart. They still go hot-tubbing on weekends, smoke pot for relaxation rather than drink booze, and have libertarian social attitudes about homosexuality, drugs, and sex.
And they were among the strongest backers of Obama. The CEOs of Google, for example, backed Obama strongly. The fact that they are now self-made billionaires didn’t change that.
30 sinz54 // Oct 16, 2009 at 10:32 am
Cforchange:
It’s not mystifying to me.
We conservatives are strong believers in the free market and free trade–globalization.
And the global free market has delivered its verdict: American workers are overpaid and under-educated. You can get graduates from Chinese or Indian universities to work for less money. And so capital and jobs move out of the U.S. to these other countries.
The principle of comparative advantage suggests that for the world as a whole, this is a good thing. Consumers around the world will be offered cheaper goods and services.
But for America, it means that our workers’ wages are being bid down to a global equilibrium level. And since there are EIGHT TIMES more Chinese and Indians than Americans, it means that the global equilibrium level will be much closer to their per capita income than to ours.
We conservatives are also patriots and nationalists. We want America to be on top. But so far, we’re stymied as to how to reconcile that with global free market economics. If China can produce goods cheaper than America, and if India can write software and staff call centers cheaper than America, why shouldn’t they?
Bush 43, for all his fault, knew that one necessary condition for improving American competitiveness was improving the dismal state of American education. But the more recent glorification of “Joe the Plumber,” implying that a master’s degree doesn’t buy you anything more than having a good heart, wiped out the GOP’s advantage there.
31 balconesfault // Oct 16, 2009 at 10:35 am
Following on Sinz:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-10-13-House-wealth-gap-Democrats-richest-districts_N.htm
Democratic members of the House of Representatives now represent most
of the nation’s wealthiest people, a sharp turnaround from the
long-standing dominance that Republicans have held over affluent
districts.
…
Democrats now represent 57% of the 4.8 million households that had
incomes of $200,000 or more in 2008. In 2005, Republicans represented
55% of those affluent households.
*****************************************
The Republicans might be able to dampen contributions from those households to Democrats by a relentless attack message … but they’re not going to win them back easily without proving that Republicans understand how incompetence and bad decision making that plagued the Bush years led the US to the brink of a financial meltdown. It may well be a very interesting fight in 2012, between a governor who seems to exemplify competence (Pawlenty), and an ex-governor who exemplifies ideological purity for social conservatives (Palin). The tough thing for the GOP is that I don’t believe the followers of the latter are going to fight nice.
32 Cforchange // Oct 16, 2009 at 11:06 am
Sinz – in essence, this is what I said ” But so far, we’re(conservatives) stymied as to how to reconcile that with global free market economics. ”
Because of this, “If China can produce goods cheaper than America, and if India can write software and staff call centers cheaper than America, why shouldn’t they?” We the GOP will remain in the forest because in essence you are saying who cares. I think we should, it appears to be hitting us Republican’s in the wallet hard. Evidence – new stats on wealth of Dem membership. Plus the brand new reports of US income drops in general. If we were passionate about this single issue – new members would come.
Well I’ll have to go lick my wounds after another Sinz beheading. It’s getting to be a yawn routine of reprimanding followed by partially/ differently restating my point. But here you add the fatal perceived flaw of our party – “who cares?” which is not good for attracting a majority.
Rachel, Are you the pant suit wearing former Young Republican presidential candidate – if so, high five to you and don’t give up.
33 MI-GOPer // Oct 16, 2009 at 3:20 pm
sinz54 offers> “They’re not suddenly going to become less tolerant of Hispanics or gays. They’re not suddenly going to become sexual prudes. They’re not suddenly going to stop smoking marijuana. Social attitudes don’t change much as they age”
I gotta laugh at your characterization that GOPers are intolerant of hispanics or gays; unless you’re intent on painting the Party into some cartoonish misperception in vogue on the far Left or over at DailyKos-sack land. As a gay father of 3 and Party activist, I can tell you the greatest intolerance I’ve experienced in my life has repeatedly come from Democrats and gay Left activists who’ve called me an Uncle Tom, a concentration camp jew enabler of Nazi Republicans, turncoat, etc. As for hispanics, until conservative talk radio got a-hold of the Immigration Reform proposal of Bush 43 and McCain, hispanics were the largest, fastest growing segment of the GOP… legal and illegal hispanics viewed the GOP as the Party of Opportunity.
As for sexual prudes, I can only say that the far Left media has been working overtime to portray elected GOPers as sex fiends and perverts… whether it be Larry Craig, Mark Foley, Clarence Thomas, Mark Sanford, Ensign, Bob Livingston, et al… if you believed the spin from the MainStreamMedia, you’d think elected GOPers are randy in the extreme. But then, for you probably, monogamy translates into a sexual straightjacket and prudish values, eh?
Smoking dope is hardly new or a trend that distinguishes modern day 18-29 yr olds to prior generations… ever hear of Woodstock?
When you opine that social attitudes don’t change much with age, I wonder what planet –outside of the Left Coast– you live on. Social attitudes and political views definitely DO change with aging and added responsibilities… it’s why older voters generally saw through Obama’s hype on Hope & Change… they had wisdom and life experience on their side. If you don’t think social and political attitudes change with age, sinz54, then you need to tell all those PoliSci and Soc experts in the field… because their research trumps your gut instincts or personal observations of nanny-men in the Silicon Valley.
Nice try, but that’s 3 strikes… and you haven’t even connected with one, yet.
34 YCC » Blog Archive » Obama Plummets Among Youth Over Jobs // Oct 16, 2009 at 5:44 pm
[...] Direct link to article [...]
35 hormelmeatco // Oct 16, 2009 at 11:19 pm
@mi-goper:
You missed Sinz’ point: perception is reality. If people perceive the GOP to be intolerant and prudish, they’ll vote accordingly, regardless of what Republicans actually think.
And, “left-coast”? That’s 55+ million people you’re writing off. If you want to rebuild the party, is that really a good attitude to have?
36 MI-GOPer // Oct 17, 2009 at 10:30 am
Hormel suggests: “You missed Sinz’ point: perception is reality. If people perceive the GOP to be intolerant and prudish, they’ll vote accordingly, regardless of what Republicans actually think”.
That wasn’t sinz54 point at all –not from the words he wrote and in response to what I wrote. Perception requires correctly perceiving first, Hormel. We were talking about how there isn’t a need to debase the GOP by abandoning political policy to court or pursue the “youth vote”… further, that what the GOP needs to do is to drive down Obama’s numbers with the “youth vote” by painting him properly as “SOSO bickering, partisan, divisive politician”… that as those voters age, they’ll find a more appealing home inside the GOP because of low tax, smaller govt, greater economic opportunity, etc. If a voter wants to change the world through social policy –which is the driving impulse among most “youth voters”, then go join a frickin’ church or volunteer in your community.
Sinz wrote, contrary to all the long-standing in-depth poli sci and soc research, that somehow, “suddenly” voters won’t be changing their social attitudes. Of course, I didn’t say that; he did –that was his spin. I don’t anticipate “youth voters” to shed liberal, sociallly progressive attitudes “suddenly”… it comes with time, with a mortgage, with a family obligation, with fighting for more salary and seeing it sucked dry by fed taxes, etc.
Perception begins, Hormel, with correctly perceiving reality. Sinz didn’t do it. You don’t in reducing the discussion to “perception is reality” cliche. We don’t need more cliched thinking.
BTW, the “Left Coast” doesn’t write off 55m people –it writes off the values of those who comprise the 14.3m eligible voters who have far Left values… which is about 55% of eligible CA voters. Just because CA and the Silicon Valley CEOs in their pampered estates want dope legalized, or drug laws voided, or abortion on demand, or all the felons freed, or a new fed tax to support global enviromental initiatives doesn’t mean that Kansas, Michigan, NY or FLA voters have to support that burden.
Try discussing the issues fairly, Hormel. Left coast doesn’t write off 55m people… it means the GOP shouldn’t pander to an extreme niche of the CA vote that it never has a chance to win.
37 hormelmeatco // Oct 17, 2009 at 12:34 pm
You said the GOP wasn’t intolerant. He said that students at Ivy league schools and other colleges perceived them to be that way. When it comes to politics, perception is reality.
“Sinz wrote, … that somehow, “suddenly” voters won’t be changing their social attitudes. Of course, I didn’t say that”
Except that you said it: “Social attitudes and political views definitely DO change with aging”
“as those voters age, they’ll find a more appealing home inside the GOP because of low tax, smaller govt, greater economic opportunity, etc.”
I’m one of those voters. Do you know what I’m going to remember the GOP for? Medicare part D, Iraq, Katrina, the economic crisis and huge budget deficits long before the economic crisis started.
If you think me and most people my age will “wise up” to something you think you’ve learned and start voting Republican because of it, stop deluding yourself.
Just Medicare part D alone is enough to convince me that the Republican party does NOT have the economic interests of younger people at heart. If you want something more recent, look at Michael Steele’s ad targeted at seniors promising them that their Medicare won’t be touched.
How are positions like that supposed to appeal to younger people, let alone actually be better for them policy-wise?
“doesn’t mean that Kansas, Michigan, NY or FLA voters have to support that burden.”
The GOP lost 3 of those 4 states in 2008.
“We don’t need more cliched thinking.”
You’ll need to abandon “low taxes, small gov’t” as the mantra the GOP is going to win back voters with, then.
You must log in to post a comment.