It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


GOP's "Changing of the Guard."

page: 1

log in


posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 10:11 AM
Okay, all, now that the election is over, the talk of polls and projections dying down, and the reality of the loss settling in for the GOP, I have to wonder something. Is Romney's loss, regardless of one's feelings about him, a good thing for the future of the GOP.

John Rocker at WND (link at the bottom) wrote an article a couple of months prior to the election that I, just recently, became aware of. In it he mentions that the GOP (and, yes, the Democrats too) seem to be more concerned about their own political futures than about the future of the country. He talks about the newer batch of GOP contenders that are making their way up in the ranks of the party, up in popularity, and up in national attention. Most of these new contenders seem to be a break from the standard "old, rich, white man with a huge stock portfolio" that the GOP has put forward for so long.

As well, the folks at The Daily Caller put out a list of 13 potential GOP nominees for 2016. Again, many on the list show signs of being a break from the standard operating practices of the party. Among them, the include:

1.) Marco Rubio — Considering the GOP just lost the Hispanic vote by a very large margin, Rubio is suddenly an even more appealing potential 2016 presidential contender than he already was due to his Cuban-American heritage. Many wanted Romney to pick the first term Florida senator as his running mate. Rubio is arguably the most exciting Republican politician on the national stage today, able to give speeches that are as electrifying as they are inspiring. But there are concerns that he may have been more enmeshed in a Florida Republican Party ethics scandal than people know, even if a complaint against him was tossed out by the Florida Ethics Commission in July.

2.) Chris Christie — The bombastic New Jersey governor rebuffed an effort by Republican donors and commentators to get him to run for president this cycle, saying he wasn’t yet ready. But in 2016, he just may be. Christie is most popular for boldly taking on the budget problems in his state, as well as his YouTube videos confronting questioners in New Jersey about the necessity to make hard decisions, which have attracted millions of views. But Christie has recently taken heat from Republicans for the effusive praise he heaped on President Obama for his leadership during Hurricane Sandy in the waning days of the presidential race. Nonetheless, he has to be considered a very real contender for 2016, especially if he wins a second term as governor next year.


4.) Rand Paul — Paul could carry on the legacy of his father, Ron Paul, by making a run in 2016. But though the Kentucky senator seemingly shares many of his father’s views, he packages them in a more palatable way and is seemingly more interested in working inside the Republican Party. Just as an example: While Ron Paul refused to endorse Romney, Rand did after his father dropped out of the race.

5.) Paul Ryan – As Romney’s running mate this cycle, the House Budget chairman is automatically a top contender for 2016. Ryan remains an intellectual leader in the Republican Party and many conservatives were far more excited with him as the VP candidate than Romney as the presidential candidate.


7.) Bobby Jindal – It is difficult to believe that Jindal is just 41 considering all he’s done. Before being elected governor of Louisiana at 36 in 2008, Jindal served as secretary of the Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals (at 24), president of the University of Louisiana System (at 28), an assistant secretary of Health and Human Services during George W. Bush’s presidency and a U.S. congressman. Oh yea, he was also a Rhodes Scholar who turned down offers to attend Yale Law School and Harvard Medical School. That’s quite a resume, though some suggest a poorly performed national Republican response to President Obama’s first address to Congress in 2009 is disqualifying. But that one speech is unlikely to damn his candidacy. Jindal will be completing his second term as governor as the Republican primary heats up.

This thread isn't about whether or not ATS thinks these would be GOOD candidates, or even if they believe the elections are real (as I know many here don't). Rather, this is about whether or not the new contenders for 2016, even if it is just projection at this point, truly represent a "changing of the guard" within the Republican Party. Many seem to think so, with people like Rubio, Christie, Paul, Ryan, and Jindal having their names tossed around quite easily by political followers.

Personally, I tend to be of the opinion that Romney's candidacy was a last-ditch effort by TPTB in the GOP to field a candidate that represented their standard line of thinking. When they realized Tuesday night that the country doesn't want that line of thinking, it seems they are going to be handing the reigns over to a new generation of conservatives. I think they realized that the status quo of the Republican Party doesn't work anymore and that, if they want to stay relevant in American politics, they need to change with the time.

Thoughts, anyone?

posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 10:19 AM
By looking at the list, I would say that it's more of the same old garbage.

None of them represent a significant change to the standard Republican ideology. One could argue that Christie may be a step in the right direction, but he is still not the change we need to see.

As a side note: The GOP does not need to find "new blood" to throw at the elections, they need a change in ideology and platform. Until that happens, it will not matter whom they chose to run.

posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 10:29 AM

Marco Rubio — Considering the GOP just lost the Hispanic vote by a very large margin, Rubio is suddenly an even more appealing potential 2016 presidential contender than he already was due to his Cuban-American heritage.

Sigh. Will they never learn. Having a Hispanic candidate does not erase the need to address the issues that concern Hispanics. The party needs to change it's message not the faces.

posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 10:36 AM
Reply to post by sheepslayer247

I'm with you 100%, SheepSlayer.

The current GOP is completely too far right for any rational American to even take seriously. From their stance on science vs religion to the straw man about Dems only wanting free stuff. It's reached a laughable level which needs to be addressed or the party is going to collapse.

The Tea Party crazies like Akin are going to ensure that Dems continue to gain seats. How can a modern nation honestly have people like this man in government?

The GOP was on borrowed time as it is, and now it's time to not overhaul, but just change with the times. This is 2012, guys. It's not 1850 or 1950. Voters have more exposure to news than ever before and if you don't alter your message to fit with reality, you aren't going to be part of reality.

Posted Via ATS Mobile:

posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 10:39 AM
oh now they are changing the guard

after ignoring their best candidate in Ron Paul
they made sure to ignore all his delegate
and choose unfairly Romney because the rich and greedy
already choose Mitt a long time ago

even Sarah Palin was better then Mitt Romney

even Mccain and Bush are better then Romney

but the best of them all from both party was RON PAUL !!

posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 10:53 AM
What the GOP needs to do is move away from the Neocons and embrace the message of constitutionalism and liberty. Obama won by a small margin. That hardly represents a large shift to the left. And with republicans gaining seats in the house it is unlikely that the country will realize Obama's' change in the next 2 to 4 years.

Some of these candidates are a step in the right direction some are just more of the same. I like Marco Rubio. I really like the notion of Rand Paul running for POTUS.

But right now I'm more concerned about midterm elections. Putting a stop on Obama's' anti gun agenda and his economic policy is goal number one.
edit on 9-11-2012 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 11:26 AM
reply to post by projectvxn

But right now I'm more concerned about midterm elections. Putting a stop on Obama's' anti gun agenda and his economic policy is goal number one.


The midterms is just as important as the election was for those who still have problems with the current adminstration one last battle is to be fought.

And it needs to be fought.

posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 11:32 AM
The only way your guns will be taken is if the Republicans in congress go along with it. Which we know will not happen.

So don't worry about guns...they are safe.

new topics

top topics


log in