President Barack Obama. Not the words which most Republicans had hoped to hear on election night, but a reality most could see coming. The failures of the Republican Party to rein in its excesses, stick to its principles and pursue positive policies over opportunistic self-interest played as large a role in winning Obama the White House as his rousing oratory and grassroots organizing skills.
While McCain did win Texas, he won by a smaller margin than any recent Republican presidential contender and his nationwide results were respectable, but not really close enough to ever raise much hope as the evening wore on. As the map of states won and lost became clear, it was a reminder of how strongly the nation remains divided along geographic lines, with the west and south resisting Obama's message of change and the northeast and Pacific coast firmly behind him.
I spent much of my day handing out flyers for our local Republican candidates and talking to voters outside of our precinct polling spot. I wasn't alone. Some teenage Democrats were there with me, promoting Congressional candidate Larry Joe Doherty, best known for having turned his judicial experience into several seasons hosting the television courtroom reality show Texas Justice.
I found myself in the peculiar situation of promoting Republican candidates while being reluctant to enthusiastically endorse the party establishment. I took the tack of emphasizing local candidates with a strong reputation for supporting reform and individual liberty, trying to push the message that our local party is different from the national GOP and lay some groundwork for the new and better Republican Party of the future. While I can't take too much personal credit for the outcome of the election, I did have the consolation of seeing the TV Judge lose to our Republican incumbent, who won over a lot of voters by staunchly opposing the government's recent massive bailout of irresponsible banks.
Turnout in our precinct was surprisingly low. Apparently about 47% of the registered voters had voted early, reducing election day crowds. Poll workers reported some short lines early in the morning and at the end of the day, but basically crowds were small and there was little waiting. When I showed up after lunch there was no wait at all. Voting on the electronic ballot machines was quick and efficient, marred only by the inability to get a detailed printed record of my vote.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Zedd
Dave,
The Republicans can rebuild if they become a party of the goal oriented. This is the most cross cultural, universal trait of the successful. Pettiness, googoo eyed patriotism and other emotional concepts need to be set aside. You have to redefine who the Reps really are. Sell the party as a place for those with aspirations and have a REAL formula for helping people reach them. You will have a crossover like you've never seen one. Keep the message simple and enough with the judging everyone. Mind your own business and focus on building an America that can sustain the determined.
Right now Reps seem mean, dense, petty, and without a plan.
2 - Dave Nalle
Zedd, as usual you display gross ignorance about Republicans and what they believe and who they are. Talk about judging everyone - you're the past master.
I agree that republicans need a plan, but it needs to be based n principles, not some opportunistic goal or power grab.
Dave
3 - Zedd
Did you read my post?
The fake principles that Reps are now known to "stand for" ARE the failed opportunistic grab for power that they need to move away from. The mean, divisive ideas have killed this party and turned it into a gathering of the superstitious, bitter, vacuous and ga ga.
What you keep missing is that I vote Republican a lot. I did not however in this election. The party is no longer a party. I don't see any real goals. I also vote Libertarian. Only voted for one this time around…. I keep telling you this and you seem to choose to ignore it and put me into the simple category of Republican hater. I suppose it makes your world neat and tidy. I'm not so can we move on. Regardless of the party, what is intolerable in my eyes is meaninglessness; wasting my fervor and commitment, my desire to succeed in my short lifespan. Republicans have been playing, pretending to be earnest just to grab power. If you still haven't caught on to that, it is you who has a misguided understanding of the Republicans and are part of the problem. You can’t fix something if you don't know what ails it.
The Reps DO need to change. Right now they don't know WHO they are. My thinking is that a relevant party that addresses a huge vacancy today AND is conservative would be a party of aspirations. In the past the conservative message got foggy because of the use of vague symbolism. Saying you want to ensure the American dream is less clear than being a party that clears the path for your aspirations.
You see if you want to win in the future, know that you HAVE to get minorities on board. Immigrants like clear ideas. They didn't grow up on MGM so they don't get all fuzzy inside when the imagery is invoked. They came here because they thought America was PRAGMATIC. They know propaganda. They can smell it a mile away. The Reps have to walk away from their addiction to manipulative concepts. Also, there are more conservative Black people than liberal ones. Talk about aspirations, everyone will get it. Saying you support those who work hard is LOADED. It really says that there are lazy Americans out there. Reagan threw Blacks under the bus to get ahead and created a false notion that we don’t want to work, that we don’t work hard. So you need to walk away from labeling (us against them) and just focus on creating a path for success.
You’ve got to get the youth vote. For those in my generation and younger, we are inspired by simple ideas that work. Don't forget gen X is the tech generation. We want to know, "what does it do", bottom line. We were also raised with commercials being a part of entertainment. We can spot a P.R. job a mile away. Walk away from the habit of propaganda. It’s stale.
I'm not sure if you are saying that loving the flag is a principle or "family values" is a principle. For a lot of people Dave, those concepts are vague and don't make their world and their lives better. People will love America for being smart and providing them opportunity. They don’t have to commit to a flag. They will be proud of the fact that America is a great place and will be proud of it as a whole, swinging the flag to demonstrate their pride.
By the way, I know just as much about Republicans as I do Democrats. There is no mystery. Reps are not a secret society. You do know that we get to look up any information we want to and read to our hearts content? Yep, we can. Amazing right? I'm guessing you are still stuck on that silly idea that the Reps are not represented accurately in the media and are misunderstood. Wake up, THAT was a political ploy to get the media to back off. It worked. “Media bias” was among the first talking points. It seems as if it is you who doesn’t know Republicans.
Republicans have been claiming to be about aspirations and they haven’t done anything that supports that.
4 - MDE
"In Philadelphia the Black Panthers had members posted at the polls to keep Republican voters away."
The propagandist's rimshot.
Your fact-check department needs work: the evidence that Nalle presents to support his claim doesn't. Libel against the Panther organization is inappropriate in a 'respectable' online magazine.
Mark
5 - Shark
Re: Nalle vs facts
Dear MDE,
After November 4, 2008, NOTHING NALLE SAYS MATTERS ANYMORE.
His level of desperation is only matched by his level of marginalization.
Thanks, George!
xxoo
s
6 - Dave Nalle
Zedd, I wonder if you have ever even read anything I've written. Your new comment expresses just as much reliance on stereotypes and ill-informed assumptions as your first one.
I'm sure you do know just about as much about Republicans as Democrats - just about nothing.
And Mark, I linked to a video news article. Perhaps you didn't view the video. The report is what it is. If the BPP has a problem with it they can take it up with the source. I'm just passing it on, as many other news outlets did with little hesitation.
Dave
7 - MDE
I suggest that all readers view the video of the news report-as any fact checking editor should have done prior to publication-and decide whether or not Nalle legitimately draws his conclusion about the involvement of the Panther organization. Clearly, the behavior of an individual does not implicate the BPP.
This is much like Nalle's erroneous report of a mugging by an Obamamaniac that he posted before the election.
Mark
8 - Glenn Contrarian
To all, about Dave -
People, it takes courage and honesty to admit that publicly, especially considering the position Dave holds in this particular section of BC. While I may strongly disagree with him on most things, he's earned my respect.
That said, back to the fray -
Dave -
You've got ONE report of Black Panther intimidation of voters at ONE precinct in the nation. ONE. Do you want me to list the Republican voter suppression efforts (again) that resulted in the disenfranchisement of (at a minimum) tens of thousands of voters? Again, your evidence of election wrongdoing by Democrats is STILL less than ONE-HUNDREDTH of that which was done by Republicans and their supporters.
9 - Zedd
Dave,
Again, you miss it. The day of focusing on good come backs and attacks versus content is gone. Don't be a dinosaur my friend. Let's discuss substance and maybe we can rebuild the Republicans and make this country a better place. Jabbing is not political discourse.
Try.
You yourself acknowledge that the Reps are dead. You yourself acknowledge that the religious right has high jacked the party and sent it down the wrong path. Now focus on solutions. That's what my post was about. It wasn't about Democrats being right. It wasn't about YOU. It was about the future for the Reps. FOCUS.
10 - Dave Nalle
You've got ONE report of Black Panther intimidation of voters at ONE precinct in the nation. ONE. Do you want me to list the Republican voter suppression efforts (again) that resulted in the disenfranchisement of (at a minimum) tens of thousands of voters? Again, your evidence of election wrongdoing by Democrats is STILL less than ONE-HUNDREDTH of that which was done by Republicans and their supporters.
Glenn, read it again. I've got multiple examples of problems at the polls from both sides. The Black Panther one was just particularly eyecatching. The others I reference were more mundane and involved problems for both Republicans and Democrats. Nothing partisan about it, just laying out that there were problems.
As for your supposed tens of thousands of examples of Republican 'vote suppression', spare me. Insisting that people present ID and be registered to vote is not vote suppression. It's the law. Even caging lists are legal, and in some cases actually necessary.
And Zedd, it's just straight out arrogant to try to lecture me or anyone on the GOP when you've been so openly hostile to it in all your comments here. You don't have standing to give a relevant opinion on the subject.
Dave
11 - Lee Richards
Dave says, "It's just straight out arrogant to try to lecture me or anyone on the GOP when you've been so openly hostile to it in all your comments here. You don't have standing to give a relevant opinion on the subject."
HIS stock in trade on BC is lecturing against ideas, opinions, groups and individuals that he is "openly hostile to in all his comments here." The list is practically endless.
Of course, that double standard is OK--his brilliant analysis could never be arrogant or irrelevant or without standing, no matter how openly hostile or doctrinaire-driven.
He really thinks he alone gets to decide which opinions are relevant to everyone else, to hold, express, read, or consider. Being so close-minded is the kiss of death to clear thinking and worthwhile writing.
Someone so wrapped up in himself makes a very small and dull package.
12 - Dave Nalle
Oh please, Lee. As posters and commenters go here on BC I'm the picture of openmindedness. The fact that I don't always agree with you doesn't mean I'm wrong, and I at least consider what others have to say.
I have no power to determine what other people think of each others opinions. I just give my observations and you can take them or leave them as you choose for exactly what they are worth - one person's opinions.
Dave
13 - bliffle
Dave has been outed so many times as a republican party hack that this makes one laugh.
14 - Zedd
Dave,
Again, this dialogue isn't about YOU.
We are supposed to be discussing politics. A critique of the political system is pivotal in ensuring good governance. You keep taking things personally. You are not the Republican party. You didn't set it up to be as it is. I have criticized it because I want it to be better so that our potential as a country and as individuals is enhanced. FOCUS. We are trying to get back to solutions instead of the irrelevant discourse that has hijacked our senses. Will you join us?
Whenever you are ready we can resume.
15 - Dave Nalle
Ah, Zedd and Bliffle. You can always count on them to make it personal.
Zedd, I didn't take discussion off track. There's an article here. Read it. Maybe discuss it.
I'll start another thread for your general bashing of the GOP if you like.
Dave
16 - Les Slater
Zedd,
Dave is too intelligent to believe most of the crap he posts here. He admitted recently that he sometimes plays 'the Devil's advocate'. He's also good at distorting what others say.
Les
17 - Zedd
Les,
I used to think so.
I think he's stuck. He's played this role for so long he doesn't know how to stop. He thinks playing the role is actually creating change. He misses that he is stalling progress.
Dave,
Your article was about how the Reps are loosing ground, in essence, or did I miss something? I addressed how they can regain it.
18 - zingzing
"it's just straight out arrogant to try to lecture me or anyone on the GOP when you've been so openly hostile to it in all your comments here. You don't have standing to give a relevant opinion on the subject."
can you really say such a thing on an open forum? well, of course you can say it, but does it really matter? and zedd is certainly no worse than you are, yet you get your opinion heard and responded to. you should consider doing the same. you've been looking "straight out arrogant" for the past few weeks, and i hope you cut it out.
"As posters and commenters go here on BC I'm the picture of openmindedness."
oh, come on. that's ridiculous. you're better than, say, bambi, and you do have some opinions i can agree with, but you're stubborn and you're pretty well set in your ways and you never accept when you've made a mistake. then again, you have your own definitions for things, so maybe that's part of being openminded in your book...
"I'll start another thread for your general bashing of the GOP if you like."
in case you haven't figured it out yet, many of us here (and a majority of the country) DON'T REALLY LIKE THE GOP. we don't have much nice to say about it. it's been a destructive force in this country and its run by (and populated by) some really disgusting people. there may be some good values tucked deep within the republican party platform, but they've been perverted and distorted by the more reprehensible views until they're unrecognizable or invisible.
so you write anything about the gop, it's going to get a little bashed by those on our side. the beating the gop is taking in this thread is pretty light, especially in light of the last few weeks.
19 - Zedd
"I'm with Clavos and Philip. We just need to start an "Original Values Republican Party" or something like that and quietly replace the current one. And let's take a Bull Moose as the symbol.
Dave"
Yeah, but if the same mindless people join it, simply because the Reps couldn't win, nothing will really change except that we will have two parties of the vacuous.
20 - Dave Nalle
Zedd, the idea would be to organize the good republicans and push the bad ones out of the way.
But you know, the 'good' republicans still aren't going to agree with you or believe in anything like the same things you believe in.
Dave
21 - Cindy D
Dave!
For god's sake! Theodore Roosevelt had "socialist" leanings!
Will your new party promote socialized medicine and attack big business too?
Dave? Are you sure you are okay? This whole election thing gotten to you, has it?
22 - Baronius
Hey, I've got an idea! Let's talk about Dave some more. And then Dave can talk about us talking about Dave, and we'll all really get to the root of the issue.
You might not like the religious right, Dave, but you can win with us. Republican turnout was low, but it wasn't because the religious right is so alienating. It's because we didn't show up. With us on board, the Republican Party gets wins. Without us, the party can get 46%.
Your goals are compatible with the religious right's. We want strict constructionist judges and we oppose political correctness in schools. We oppose Islamic extremism and defend Israel. We don't trust government.
Maybe you can build a coalition with Liberty Republicans, athiests, environmentalists, and anti-Masons or something, but I don't see it happening. Try to build a coalition without social conservatives and you'll end up having to compromise a lot more of your positions than you had to with us. You'll also probably win the same states as McCain did, except for the South and the West.
We're not kooks, but we're portrayed as kooks. We've got a lousy public image. That's really the only baggage that we bring to the coalition. Every group in the Republican coalition has to contend with media bias. Don't fall for media bias by believing that we're all crazed theocrats. Don't fall for the media's recommendation that the party should move to the middle, because they're not just talking about stem cells. They mean taxes, affirmative action, and everything else.
23 - Cindy D
Baronius,
With us on board, the Republican Party gets wins. Without us, the party can get 46%.
Are you implying that the religious right did not vote McCain/Palin?
24 - Dave Nalle
Your goals are compatible with the religious right's. We want strict constructionist judges and we oppose political correctness in schools. We oppose Islamic extremism and defend Israel. We don't trust government.
If that were the extent of the beliefs of the religious right then I'd be okay with them. But it's not. They also believe in denying civil rights to homosexuals, breaking down the constitutional separation of church and state, and the imposition of religious morality in law.
If a new, more focused GOP can win even 40% of the vote without social conservatives, that's quite sufficient to take a number of seats in congress and the senate and have a major say in presidential elections. Social conservatives can come along if they are willing to recognize the basics of individual liberty or they can drift more and more to the extreme right and end up in an alliance with Ron Paul and the Aryans.
Dave
25 - Christopher Rose
"As posters and commenters go here on BC I'm the picture of openmindedness."
WTF?
Dave is clearly channelling somebody else there...