Is the GOP still haunted by the 1992 Convention?

[bobloblaw]

This is the truth: I was a registered Republican from 1984 to 1992, and considered myself a "Rockefeller Republican." I aligned myself with the eastern industrialist/internationalist wing of the GOP in the Willkie/Dewey/Stassen/Eisenhower/Rockefeller mold.

I lukewarmly supported Bush Sr. in  the CA primary. I was disgusted by much of the tenor and dialogue in the GOP convention that year. I re-registered as an Independent (aka "Decline to State" in CA) and haven't voted for a Republican for president since.

So I, at least, am still haunted by the 1992 convention.

Amen. I undoubtedly would've been among that group

Other than Ike, youve aligned yourself with LOSERS

Reagan was a moderate conservative

He was a conservative and the most conservative since Goldwater in 64

George W Bush was certainly more conservative

"Compassionate Conservatism" arent words that ever crossed Reagan's lips.

Reagan's 81 tax changes were revolutionary. Bush's 2001 and 2003 tax cuts were tiny percent rate reductions.

[OSR stands with Israel]

This is the truth: I was a registered Republican from 1984 to 1992, and considered myself a "Rockefeller Republican." I aligned myself with the eastern industrialist/internationalist wing of the GOP in the Willkie/Dewey/Stassen/Eisenhower/Rockefeller mold.

I lukewarmly supported Bush Sr. in  the CA primary. I was disgusted by much of the tenor and dialogue in the GOP convention that year. I re-registered as an Independent (aka "Decline to State" in CA) and haven't voted for a Republican for president since.

So I, at least, am still haunted by the 1992 convention.

Amen. I undoubtedly would've been among that group

Other than Ike, youve aligned yourself with LOSERS

Reagan was a moderate conservative

He was a conservative and the most conservative since Goldwater in 64

George W Bush was certainly more conservative

"Compassionate Conservatism" arent words that ever crossed Reagan's lips.

Reagan's 81 tax changes were revolutionary. Bush's 2001 and 2003 tax cuts were tiny percent rate reductions.

Reagan raised capital gains tax from 15% to 28% while Bush cut them back to 15%. Bush never gave amnesty like Reagan. Bush also deregulated more of the economy then Reagan and  Bush was far far more hawkish then Reagan

[hopper]

This is the truth: I was a registered Republican from 1984 to 1992, and considered myself a "Rockefeller Republican." I aligned myself with the eastern industrialist/internationalist wing of the GOP in the Willkie/Dewey/Stassen/Eisenhower/Rockefeller mold.

I lukewarmly supported Bush Sr. in  the CA primary. I was disgusted by much of the tenor and dialogue in the GOP convention that year. I re-registered as an Independent (aka "Decline to State" in CA) and haven't voted for a Republican for president since.

So I, at least, am still haunted by the 1992 convention.

Amen. I undoubtedly would've been among that group

Other than Ike, youve aligned yourself with LOSERS

Reagan was a moderate conservative

He was a conservative and the most conservative since Goldwater in 64

George W Bush was certainly more conservative

"Compassionate Conservatism" arent words that ever crossed Reagan's lips.

Reagan's 81 tax changes were revolutionary. Bush's 2001 and 2003 tax cuts were tiny percent rate reductions.

Reagan raised capital gains tax from 15% to 28% while Bush cut them back to 15%. Bush never gave amnesty like Reagan. Bush also deregulated more of the economy then Reagan and  Bush was far far more hawkish then Reagan

I thought it was Clinton that cut the Capital Gains Tax and not Bush W.

Bush never gave amnesty like Reagan-Well Bush W. did attempt an "Immigration Reform Bill" which failed mostly because of the "Conservative Talk Radio" crowd.

Bush W. was more hawkish than Reagan-Yes, I do think Reagan would have gave orders to go into Afghanistan but not Iraq.

[hopper]

This is the truth: I was a registered Republican from 1984 to 1992, and considered myself a "Rockefeller Republican." I aligned myself with the eastern industrialist/internationalist wing of the GOP in the Willkie/Dewey/Stassen/Eisenhower/Rockefeller mold.

I lukewarmly supported Bush Sr. in  the CA primary. I was disgusted by much of the tenor and dialogue in the GOP convention that year. I re-registered as an Independent (aka "Decline to State" in CA) and haven't voted for a Republican for president since.

So I, at least, am still haunted by the 1992 convention.

Amen. I undoubtedly would've been among that group

Other than Ike, youve aligned yourself with LOSERS

Reagan was a moderate conservative

He was a conservative and the most conservative since Goldwater in 64

George W Bush was certainly more conservative

Not by much(he wasn't more conservative.)

Reagan's DW-Nominate Score- +0.703
Bush W.'s DW Nominate Score +0.723

Just for fun-George H.W.'s DW-Nominate Score was +0.580

[OSR stands with Israel]

This is the truth: I was a registered Republican from 1984 to 1992, and considered myself a "Rockefeller Republican." I aligned myself with the eastern industrialist/internationalist wing of the GOP in the Willkie/Dewey/Stassen/Eisenhower/Rockefeller mold.

I lukewarmly supported Bush Sr. in  the CA primary. I was disgusted by much of the tenor and dialogue in the GOP convention that year. I re-registered as an Independent (aka "Decline to State" in CA) and haven't voted for a Republican for president since.

So I, at least, am still haunted by the 1992 convention.

Amen. I undoubtedly would've been among that group

Other than Ike, youve aligned yourself with LOSERS

Reagan was a moderate conservative

He was a conservative and the most conservative since Goldwater in 64

George W Bush was certainly more conservative

"Compassionate Conservatism" arent words that ever crossed Reagan's lips.

Reagan's 81 tax changes were revolutionary. Bush's 2001 and 2003 tax cuts were tiny percent rate reductions.

Reagan raised capital gains tax from 15% to 28% while Bush cut them back to 15%. Bush never gave amnesty like Reagan. Bush also deregulated more of the economy then Reagan and  Bush was far far more hawkish then Reagan

I thought it was Clinton that cut the Capital Gains Tax and not Bush W.

Bush never gave amnesty like Reagan-Well Bush W. did attempt an "Immigration Reform Bill" which failed mostly because of the "Conservative Talk Radio" crowd.

Bush W. was more hawkish than Reagan-Yes, I do think Reagan would have gave orders to go into Afghanistan but not Iraq.

Clinton cut them to 20% and Bush cut it to 15%

[hopper]

It's the economy stupid.

Bush lost in 1992 because he was out of touch regarding the economy.

That is true, but many point to that Culture Wars speech as the official time of the Christian Right's hijacking of the GOP and the moment that moderates started voting Democratic, especially in the suburbs, where Republicans have lost serious support since '90.

Moderates didn't overwhelming vote for Reagan/Bush H.W.

1980: Reagan wins Moderates by 6 points-48-42%
1984 Reagan wins Moderates by 8% 54-46%
1988 Bush H.W. wins Moderates by 2 points 51-49%
1992 Clinton wins Moderates by 17%-48-31%

I don't think the suburbs as a whole is the GOP's problem I think its the Northern Suburbs that has been the GOP's problem(The Northeast and the Upper Midwest: IL, MI, and some South Central Wisconsin Suburbs.) The GOP has lost a lot of ground in California as well since 1988. Just look at a Presidential Trend Map 1988-2012 and you will see that. The Washington D.C. suburbs of Virginia have been a problem of late in 2008 and 2012 as well as "The Research Triangle" in North Carolina. I might as well include the Virginia Suburbs as part of the Northeast now because its close to a Northern State(Maryland.)

[DS0816]

Re: Is the GOP still haunted by the 1992 Convention?

This current Republican Party?!

They are thoroughly corrupt and are whoring themselves for the oligarchs.

That's their present…and their future.

They don't have time to reflect on 1992.

[Rockefeller GOP]

Re: Is the GOP still haunted by the 1992 Convention?

This current Republican Party?!

They are thoroughly corrupt and are whoring themselves for the oligarchs.

That's their present…and their future.

They don't have time to reflect on 1992.

Democrats have been claiming that Republicans are corporate stooges for SEVERAL decades, even if that doesn't jive with your fantasy about the parties "switching places" every so often.

[Sumner 1868]

Of the states you marked as red, seven voted for Dukakis in 1988, and he was competitive in three more. On NH swung radically between 1988 and 1996.

Young people, upset that the GOP hates their gay friends, vote overwhelmingly Democratic.

That is not why they vote Democratic:









All of the above were brutal for the GOP's reputation for Millennials. Their position on gay issues certainly doesn't help, but it is not the root of their problem.

[Fuzzy Bear]

The 1992 convention drew some battle lines that enabled the GOP to make huge gains in the South and Border States over the years due to their cultural conservatism.  It has hardly been all bad for them.

Pat Buchanan wasn't the only "culture war" speaker at the 1992 convention.  William Bennett discussed these issues in his nominating speech for Dan Quayle, correctly stating that these "cultural" issues were not "wedge issues", but choices that have consequences.  This is a fact that the majority of America is in deep denial over.

[Ebsy]

Can't believe no one has mentioned Mary Fischer's "A Whisper of AIDS" speech, which is probably one of the most significant convention speeches ever given, in a thread about the 1992 convention.

[DS0816]

The 1992 convention drew some battle lines that enabled the GOP to make huge gains in the South and Border States over the years due to their cultural conservatism.  It has hardly been all bad for them.

Yes, the "South" has historically excellent voting records…if you're counting backwards. (Seven of those eleven Old Confederacy states rank between Nos. 41 and 50 with picking presidential winners.) So, sure thing, it's best to be the political party which carries Texas (which has voted for presidential winners at about 60 percent compared to this historical percentage of carried states being about 70 percent) than to carry California (which is about 85 percent).

[Oldiesfreak1854]

Before the 1992 Republican Convention in Houston the GOP had won 5 of the previous 6 Presidential elections.  At the convention Pat Buchanan made his now famous speech basically declaring Holy war and the rest of the Religious right seemed to do all they could to scare moderate Americans away from the party.

Since then the Democrats have won the popular vote in 5 of 6 elections.  These are the states the Dems. have won 6 out of 6, totaling 242 Electoral votes. Just 28 short of 270.

Women, once a swing vote, now vote mostly Democratic. Young people, upset that the GOP hates their gay friends, vote overwhelmingly Democratic. And Religious minorities, and those of no religion, are also very unlikely to vote for the GOP.

Even people who only 'Occasionally' go to Church backed Obama in 2012 55-43.

So is this my secular queer bias? Or is there something here?

Basically, yes.  But I wouldn't say the GOP hates homosexuals; rather, people merely think they do.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Add NM & NV to that and Dems approach 260. As the Latino corridor is rapidly growing Democrat.

[DS0816]

Before the 1992 Republican Convention in Houston the GOP had won 5 of the previous 6 Presidential elections.  At the convention Pat Buchanan made his now famous speech basically declaring Holy war and the rest of the Religious right seemed to do all they could to scare moderate Americans away from the party.

Since then the Democrats have won the popular vote in 5 of 6 elections.  These are the states the Dems. have won 6 out of 6, totaling 242 Electoral votes. Just 28 short of 270.

Women, once a swing vote, now vote mostly Democratic. Young people, upset that the GOP hates their gay friends, vote overwhelmingly Democratic. And Religious minorities, and those of no religion, are also very unlikely to vote for the GOP.

Even people who only 'Occasionally' go to Church backed Obama in 2012 55-43.

So is this my secular queer bias? Or is there something here?

Basically, yes.  But I wouldn't say the GOP hates homosexuals; rather, people merely think they do.

You’re out of touch with your preferred party.

[pbrower2a]

Before the 1992 Republican Convention in Houston the GOP had won 5 of the previous 6 Presidential elections.  At the convention Pat Buchanan made his now famous speech basically declaring Holy war and the rest of the Religious right seemed to do all they could to scare moderate Americans away from the party.

Since then the Democrats have won the popular vote in 5 of 6 elections.  These are the states the Dems. have won 6 out of 6, totaling 242 Electoral votes. Just 28 short of 270.

Women, once a swing vote, now vote mostly Democratic. Young people, upset that the GOP hates their gay friends, vote overwhelmingly Democratic. And Religious minorities, and those of no religion, are also very unlikely to vote for the GOP.

Even people who only 'Occasionally' go to Church backed Obama in 2012 55-43.

So is this my secular queer bias? Or is there something here?

Lets see-women once a swing vote, now vote mostly democratic-The GOP loses the women vote because Hispanic and Black Women vote Dem overwhelmingly.

Young People, upset the GOP hates their gay friends  vote Dem-You mean the GOP is for not being for gay marriage and yes young people can't understand why the GOP takes that position.

Minorities regardless of affiliated with or without a religion vote Dem-Minorities have always voted Dem and its been that way for decades except for Asians who used to vote GOP and now have voted Dem in the last 4 Presidential Elections.

The white female vote is still slightly R. Married white women still vote strongly R.

But there are black and Hispanic men, right With that your argument collapses.

The Republicans used to benefit from any tendency of any ethnic group other than blacks or Jews (the latter practically an ethnic group) becoming increasingly R as it gains economically. That is over. Although there are large middle classes among Hispanics, those have had trouble with the pervasive anti-intellectualism of the GOP. Middle-class Hispanics, like middle-class blacks and Asians, are as a rule well educated and attribute much of their success to formal education.  A Party that shows its hostility toward learning might have an appeal to people who resent what they see as 'educated  elites'  even if those elites are 'only' schoolteachers.

In the 1950s, the level of formal education was a good proxy for Republican voting. The Democrats largely had the anti-intellectual demagogues other than Senator Joseph R. McCarthy (who was an embarrassment to well-educated people). Democrats still had the white racist populists of the South. Today the white racist populists are Republicans. 

In 2008, the level of formal education was a good proxy for how one voted in the Presidential election. But that year, the level of formal education correlated positively to voting for Barack Obama.   

       

[Rockefeller GOP]

Before the 1992 Republican Convention in Houston the GOP had won 5 of the previous 6 Presidential elections.  At the convention Pat Buchanan made his now famous speech basically declaring Holy war and the rest of the Religious right seemed to do all they could to scare moderate Americans away from the party.

Since then the Democrats have won the popular vote in 5 of 6 elections.  These are the states the Dems. have won 6 out of 6, totaling 242 Electoral votes. Just 28 short of 270.

Women, once a swing vote, now vote mostly Democratic. Young people, upset that the GOP hates their gay friends, vote overwhelmingly Democratic. And Religious minorities, and those of no religion, are also very unlikely to vote for the GOP.

Even people who only 'Occasionally' go to Church backed Obama in 2012 55-43.

So is this my secular queer bias? Or is there something here?

Lets see-women once a swing vote, now vote mostly democratic-The GOP loses the women vote because Hispanic and Black Women vote Dem overwhelmingly.

Young People, upset the GOP hates their gay friends  vote Dem-You mean the GOP is for not being for gay marriage and yes young people can't understand why the GOP takes that position.

Minorities regardless of affiliated with or without a religion vote Dem-Minorities have always voted Dem and its been that way for decades except for Asians who used to vote GOP and now have voted Dem in the last 4 Presidential Elections.

The white female vote is still slightly R. Married white women still vote strongly R.

But there are black and Hispanic men, right With that your argument collapses.

The Republicans used to benefit from any tendency of any ethnic group other than blacks or Jews (the latter practically an ethnic group) becoming increasingly R as it gains economically. That is over. Although there are large middle classes among Hispanics, those have had trouble with the pervasive anti-intellectualism of the GOP. Middle-class Hispanics, like middle-class blacks and Asians, are as a rule well educated and attribute much of their success to formal education.  A Party that shows its hostility toward learning might have an appeal to people who resent what they see as 'educated  elites'  even if those elites are 'only' schoolteachers.

In the 1950s, the level of formal education was a good proxy for Republican voting. The Democrats largely had the anti-intellectual demagogues other than Senator Joseph R. McCarthy (who was an embarrassment to well-educated people). Democrats still had the white racist populists of the South. Today the white racist populists are Republicans. 

In 2008, the level of formal education was a good proxy for how one voted in the Presidential election. But that year, the level of formal education correlated positively to voting for Barack Obama.   

       

Your bias is so clear.  Why do you keep using 2008, a Democratic wave year?  2012 happened, ya know, with exit polls.  Democrats won the least educated along with the most educated.  Romney won college graduates and won White post-graduates, too.

[YaBoyNY]

Romney won college graduates and won White post-graduates, too.

I find that hard to believe, but I'd be interested in seeing the exit polls that show such. They'd be more interesting to look over than the same 4 categories you see everywhere else.

[OSR stands with Israel]

http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/results/president/exit-polls

Romney won college voters but not post grad

[sg0508]

http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/results/president/exit-polls

Romney won college voters but not post grad

Yep. It's the 22-35 year olds that essentially won it for Obama...twice. 

1) Most 22-35 year olds identify "Clinton" as their president growing up, the last truly successful economic president.  Then, they contrasted eight years with GWB.  Yikes.

2) The real young voters didn't really know the Clinton years, but many have gotten poorer under Obama. 

[hopper]

Before the 1992 Republican Convention in Houston the GOP had won 5 of the previous 6 Presidential elections.  At the convention Pat Buchanan made his now famous speech basically declaring Holy war and the rest of the Religious right seemed to do all they could to scare moderate Americans away from the party.

Since then the Democrats have won the popular vote in 5 of 6 elections.  These are the states the Dems. have won 6 out of 6, totaling 242 Electoral votes. Just 28 short of 270.

Women, once a swing vote, now vote mostly Democratic. Young people, upset that the GOP hates their gay friends, vote overwhelmingly Democratic. And Religious minorities, and those of no religion, are also very unlikely to vote for the GOP.

Even people who only 'Occasionally' go to Church backed Obama in 2012 55-43.

So is this my secular queer bias? Or is there something here?

Lets see-women once a swing vote, now vote mostly democratic-The GOP loses the women vote because Hispanic and Black Women vote Dem overwhelmingly.

Young People, upset the GOP hates their gay friends  vote Dem-You mean the GOP is for not being for gay marriage and yes young people can't understand why the GOP takes that position.

Minorities regardless of affiliated with or without a religion vote Dem-Minorities have always voted Dem and its been that way for decades except for Asians who used to vote GOP and now have voted Dem in the last 4 Presidential Elections.

The white female vote is still slightly R. Married white women still vote strongly R.

But there are black and Hispanic men, right With that your argument collapses.

The Republicans used to benefit from any tendency of any ethnic group other than blacks or Jews (the latter practically an ethnic group) becoming increasingly R as it gains economically. That is over. Although there are large middle classes among Hispanics, those have had trouble with the pervasive anti-intellectualism of the GOP. Middle-class Hispanics, like middle-class blacks and Asians, are as a rule well educated and attribute much of their success to formal education.  A Party that shows its hostility toward learning might have an appeal to people who resent what they see as 'educated  elites'  even if those elites are 'only' schoolteachers.

In the 1950s, the level of formal education was a good proxy for Republican voting. The Democrats largely had the anti-intellectual demagogues other than Senator Joseph R. McCarthy (who was an embarrassment to well-educated people). Democrats still had the white racist populists of the South. Today the white racist populists are Republicans. 

In 2008, the level of formal education was a good proxy for how one voted in the Presidential election. But that year, the level of formal education correlated positively to voting for Barack Obama.   

       

I do wonder if Obama would have won in 2012 even with Black and Hispanic Men voting. Romney did win the male vote too. Without Latino and Black Women Obama might have lost since Obama did lose with White Women although he did really good with White Women under 30 basically breaking even with Romney.

The GOP doesn't object to learning at all since they are in favor of school choice/vouchers.

The Black, Asian, and Hispanics vote the way do for different reasons.

Blacks-They vote for the Dems at the same rate regardless of income.

Asians-Used to vote GOP until "The Gingrich/Republican Revolution" happened in 1994. Still  Bush W. was getting 40%-45% of the Asian Vote in the 2000 and 2004 Presidential Elections and even John McCain got 35% of the Asian Vote in a terrible GOP year of 2008. Mitt Romney was a terrible candidate for minority voters to vote for in 2012.

Hispanics-Actually their vote is more tied to income than even Black or Asians. The more money they make the more GOP they vote except for a downslope at the 50,000-100,000 dollar mark.

The Republicans white racist populists are Republicans? Racists against who exactly? If you say Mexicans I might agree with some of their rhetoric coming out of their mouths.

[hopper]

http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/results/president/exit-polls

Romney won college voters but not post grad

Yep. It's the 22-35 year olds that essentially won it for Obama...twice. 

1) Most 22-35 year olds identify "Clinton" as their president growing up, the last truly successful economic president.  Then, they contrasted eight years with GWB.  Yikes.

2) The real young voters didn't really know the Clinton years, but many have gotten poorer under Obama. 

Yeah but in my opinion Obama is nowhere near the President that Clinton was. Obama might even be a tad worse than Bush W. was.

[jaichind]

Using Sean Trende's data, could not one argue that 1992 was the turning point for the revival of GOP?

[pbrower2a]

I do wonder if Obama would have won in 2012 even with Black and Hispanic Men voting. Romney did win the male vote too. Without Latino and Black Women Obama might have lost since Obama did lose with White Women although he did really good with White Women under 30 basically breaking even with Romney.

Practically all adults can vote for the President (aliens and in most states convicted felons). President Obama won a majority of the popular vote in 2012 and got enough electoral votes. He won fair and square, so nobody has a complaint on that ground. 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

They had no problem with for-profit educational institutions like Corinthian Colleges which offered overpriced vocational schooling for which students got huge student loans and very poor job prospects. Vouchers exist largely to promote fundamentalist Protestant schools that push educational nonsense like young-earth creationism  and the pseudohistory of David Bartlett (that America was founded on religious principles identical with Christian fundamentalist teachings).

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Arkansas blacks voted heavily for the liberal Republican Winthrop Rockefeller in 1966.

ww.encyclopediaofarkansas.net/encyclopedia/entry-detail.aspx?entryID=122

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Republicans used to win heavily among some Asian groups with anticommunist appeals. That is over. China and Vietnam have abandoned Marxism. Koreans would likely be satisfied with North Korea becoming a puppet state of the People's Republic of China. 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Because of so many Mexican-Americans in Texas who are more conservative on social issues and economics than Mexican-Americans elsewhere, and any group of Hispanics other than Cuban-Americans. Two differences between Mexican-Americans in Texas and Mexican-Americans elsewhere are (1) that Mexican-Americans in Texas are more likely to own homes, and (2) they avoided becoming victims of the subprime lending scandal that financed the Dubya-era housing bubble that hit Hispanics hard. Texas had major reforms of its financial sector after a smaller-scale scam in the 1980s and precluded an analogous scam in the Double-Zero decade in Texas .

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The language emanating from Donald Trump about 'illegal aliens' is particularly ugly.

Most know enough to avoid using the word that rhymes with the name of Roy Rogers horse. Using the racial n-word in public is about as uncouth as using the f-word in public, and either indicates a lack of impulse control more than anything else.    I think we all know how the white population in the Mountain and Deep South vote... blacks basically have the Democratic Party and whites have the Republican Party in some states, and the results are ugly.   

[DS0816]

http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/results/president/exit-polls

Romney won college voters but not post grad

Yep. It's the 22-35 year olds that essentially won it for Obama...twice. 

1) Most 22-35 year olds identify "Clinton" as their president growing up, the last truly successful economic president.  Then, they contrasted eight years with GWB.  Yikes.

2) The real young voters didn't really know the Clinton years, but many have gotten poorer under Obama. 

Yeah but in my opinion Obama is nowhere near the President that Clinton was. Obama might even be a tad worse than Bush W. was.

You're dismissed.