Pushing White Guys Rightward on the Political Spectrum

I think Lindsey Graham said it best 2 weeks ago

So republicans only won because nobody voted, do why did the Democrats go from nearly a super majority, to on the outside looking in, after just a few years?

Double post...I hate it when that happens!

a reply to: Onslaught2996

Well, let's be honest here. Most Americans are not as firmly entrenched as you are concerning political ideology. I remember back in 2008 after the elections the MSM and many others were celebrating the death of the GOP. How's that working out for ya these days? I'm all for people being optimistic, but frown upon people being willingly delusional just because they wish it.

I think the push back when it concerns media entertainment and advertising reflects this. People of all stripes hate being labeled.

My opinion is that most Americans are a lot like me and vote at the local and State level across the board, meaning (R), (D), (I) parties for whoever that is running and their record and how they have affected where the individual lives. In other words, the political party really doesn't matter.

You say that there will be another Democrat in office come 2016. I wish I had your crystal ball.

I'm not predicting anything for a bit myself because a lot can happen in two years.

But I would wager that if Obama continues refusing to work with Congress and continues to rule by executive orders, chances are that it will be a GOP guy assuming the mantle of POTUS come 2016.

Even his own party are distancing themselves from him.

a reply to: feldercarb

Interesting supposition there OP. I can see the point in the article, but I'm not sure I agree that it is as widespread as the writer believes. Sure I can think of a few examples of this, but I can also think of examples of white males being portrayed differently. I think this may be a mix of selective bias and a bit of truth.

originally posted by: solongandgoodnight
Eh. Might be over thinking this one a bit.

That or its a clever attempt to "white out" and "redneck" the republican party. I mean the basic unsaid premise is that white males brought in the republicans for the trite reason that white males are having an identity crisis and then by conclusion the republicans are simply a white male interest.

Don't anyone buy into this.

originally posted by: Onslaught2996

originally posted by: xuenchen
as the Democrat Party crumbles....

Yeah because that is what is happening..

You think with only 1/3 of America voting this November that the Democrats should worry?

It is Republicans who should be worried because the people who didn't turn out, will be the ones turning out come the 2016 Presidency elections. Sure the Democratic voters did not turn out...but what does that say about the Republican party...people would rather not vote than vote Republican.

This low dem voter turnout needs to be seen as a warning to the party from their own voter base. You don't turn out and the other party wins then your no show was really a vote for the other party.

originally posted by: Onslaught2996

originally posted by: xuenchen


Well if 2/3 had voted, the damage would have been twice as bad.

The Democrats are in the beginning of a 10 year recovery program.

A name change is necessary now.

It's their only way out after the Obama devastation.

Nope..come 2016...it will another democratic president.

Now they have to weed out the traitors who turn tail and ran from Obama.

The Dems started losing ground back during the last midterm. And then a little more 2 years ago and losing the house. Now this. Nope this is a train coming down the track with some waking up 4 years ago and then more on down the line.

a reply to: Logarock

I don't agree with this rationale. I didn't vote, because I didn't like any of the candidates. I figured we'd be f'ed no matter who I voted for. So I didn't. I'm only going to support someone I actually like and think is worth voting for. I don't like it when other people tell me that my no vote (or even my support for a third party candidate) is really support for whatever party that won.

a reply to: xuenchen

Well if 2/3 had voted, the damage would have been twice as bad.

Where is your proof of this? Let me guess Breitbart?

A name change is necessary now.

You mean like how the Republicans should start calling themselves the American Taliban? oops I mean Tea Party.

It's their only way out after the Obama devastation.

Wall Street numbers are twice of what they were when he took office.
The deficit is dropping like a rock.
Was able to avoid another depression and the economy is starting to recover despite a party that was nothing but obstructionist and did nothing for the America people because their parties agenda came first.
Yeah that's what I call devastation.

originally posted by: Logarock

originally posted by: Onslaught2996

originally posted by: xuenchen
as the Democrat Party crumbles....

Yeah because that is what is happening..

You think with only 1/3 of America voting this November that the Democrats should worry?

It is Republicans who should be worried because the people who didn't turn out, will be the ones turning out come the 2016 Presidency elections. Sure the Democratic voters did not turn out...but what does that say about the Republican party...people would rather not vote than vote Republican.

This low dem voter turnout needs to be seen as a warning to the party from their own voter base. You don't turn out and the other party wins then your no show was really a vote for the other party.

Dream on. The midterm voting turnout has always been low and when it is as low as it was it always favors the Republicans. The if you didn't vote then you voted for the other party is just nonsense.

a reply to: Krazysh0t


Yea I know you don't. The idea does have logic however. As far as third parties I voted for some this election.

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: Logarock

originally posted by: Onslaught2996

originally posted by: xuenchen
as the Democrat Party crumbles....

Yeah because that is what is happening..

You think with only 1/3 of America voting this November that the Democrats should worry?

It is Republicans who should be worried because the people who didn't turn out, will be the ones turning out come the 2016 Presidency elections. Sure the Democratic voters did not turn out...but what does that say about the Republican party...people would rather not vote than vote Republican.

This low dem voter turnout needs to be seen as a warning to the party from their own voter base. You don't turn out and the other party wins then your no show was really a vote for the other party.

Dream on. The midterm voting turnout has always been low and when it is as low as it was it always favors the Republicans. The if you didn't vote then you voted for the other party is just nonsense.

Turn out was very low 2 years ago and we got a dem POTUS and a republican house. Those facts are enough to make any rational person sh**can this idea about turn outs.

a reply to: buster2010

The republican and tea party infighting was noticed by voters. It was a clear signal the conservatives were trying to check themselves, hash it out, clean up the house.

The Dems now more than ever look like the unbending monolithic block of wax. You cant trust a fast hardening substance. Looking fluid is the name of the game as the Republicans have just demonstrated.

originally posted by: Onslaught2996

originally posted by: xuenchen

The Majority of American voters do not want a republican dream of the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer. Not too mention the blatant racism, bigotry and sexism that party exudes.

Not true. Republicans want EVERYONE to do better. Who promotes charter schools / school choice? Republicans. Dems want poor people stuck in the same schools. Who wants the Keystone Pipeline, cheaper gas, and the subsequent jobs and economic growth? Republicans. Dems toady to their rich eco-nut donors.
Racism/bigotry/sexism? Tell that to Michael Steele, Dr. Ben Carson, Mia Love, Joni Ernst and Tim Scott. The dems and their slavish media toadies present that falsehood and sheeple believe it. cmon, you, DENY ignorance, don't promote it.

a reply to: Logarock

The only logic it has is for people looking to keep the two party paradigm. That if you aren't for us, you are for the other side. That is only logical for dualistic paradigms. Except time and again it has been shown that human thought isn't dualistic in nature. We aren't so simple.

Now, men are seeing what women have been dealing with for MANY years. Men aren't portrayed as any stupider than women are. No matter the race.

Representation of Women in Commercials

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Logarock

The only logic it has is for people looking to keep the two party paradigm. That if you aren't for us, you are for the other side. That is only logical for dualistic paradigms. Except time and again it has been shown that human thought isn't dualistic in nature. We aren't so simple.

The idea that you are for us or against us....I don't like it any more than you do. Really don't. I am pointing out the simple default position in not voting.

Folks bitched about Obama getting elected last time but apparently the ever dire consequences of him getting elected were no noticed by what 75% of the non-voting registered republicans? And I recall not hearing near the amount of two party fallout talk two years ago. But still where were they?

It simply looks to me like much the complaining about the two party system now is coming from folks that are really saying...."wow wouldn't it be great if we didn't have the republicans to worry about. Just one party. Our Party". Like some countries.....several candidates but all from the same party.

And folks talking about 3rd parties.....knowing that 3rd parties effect the republican ticket the most. Result....strong 3rd parties means democrats get elected. And like the Green Party, Communist Party, Socialist Party, Constitutional Party are not partisan.

I do not know if I agree with the whole pushing white guys to be more conservative, but I do see and understand your point that white men can still be portrayed as dullards.

Where is my white history month?

Where is my prostate cancer awareness month?

Where is my National Association for the Advancement of White People?

To me it seems that white men are the only majority left, thus they don't get any special treatment.

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

I do agree that women are objectified also. Sex sells. And when you see those cheesy internet lines, "Women want to be told they're beautiful, not sexy," my wife calls BS on it and says if women didn't want to be told the look sexy they wouldn't wear all those skimpy outfits.

originally posted by: Logarock

originally posted by: Onslaught2996

originally posted by: xuenchen
as the Democrat Party crumbles....

Yeah because that is what is happening..

You think with only 1/3 of America voting this November that the Democrats should worry?

It is Republicans who should be worried because the people who didn't turn out, will be the ones turning out come the 2016 Presidency elections. Sure the Democratic voters did not turn out...but what does that say about the Republican party...people would rather not vote than vote Republican.

This low dem voter turnout needs to be seen as a warning to the party from their own voter base. You don't turn out and the other party wins then your no show was really a vote for the other party.

This. It is just as telling that one party couldn't muster their base to bother to go out to vote as they other party could. This year, the Dems really didn't have anything to run on and the whole "war on women" meme fell flat. That's what happens when your entire political platform depends on identity politics and you don't have enough "identity" that year.