Skip to main content

Goposaur Bug
Time headline: Republicans in the Wilderness: Is the Party Over? Answer: Yes.

The article is devastating, even if it occasionally tries to soften the blow.

Sure, it can be comical to watch Republican National Committee (RNC) gaffe machine Michael Steele riff on his hip-hop vision for the party or Texas Governor Rick Perry carry on about secession or Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann explain how F.D.R.'s "Hoot-Smalley" Act caused the Depression (the Smoot-Hawley Act, a Republican tariff bill, was enacted before F.D.R.'s presidency), but haplessness does not equal hopelessness. And yes, the Republican brand could benefit from spokesmen less familiar and less reviled than Karl Rove, Dick Cheney and Newt Gingrich, but the party does have some fresher faces stepping out of the wings.

Fresher faces? Like who? Beats me. The only Republican they mention that could be construed as a "fresher face" is Rep. Paul Ryan. And he doesn't exactly come off great.

House Republicans, eager to shed the Party of No label, recently unveiled an alternative to Obama's 2010 budget. It was the kind of fiasco that shows why Washington thinks Republicans are in trouble — and why they really are in trouble.

The disaster began when GOP leaders, after calling a news conference to blast Obama's numbers, released a budget outline with no numbers — just magic assumptions about "reform." The mockery was instantaneous. Then Republicans began blaming one another for the stunt, which generated only more mockery about circular firing squads. And when they finally released the missing details on April 1, the notion of an April Fools' budget produced even more mockery; the substance was ignored. "The President's dog got more attention," recalls Paul Ryan, the top Republican on the House Budget Committee.

But if you pay attention, the GOP alternative is not just a p.r. disaster. It's a radical document, making Bush's tax cuts permanent while adding about $3 trillion in new tax cuts skewed toward the rich. It would replace almost all the stimulus — including tax cuts for workers as well as spending on schools, infrastructure and clean energy — with a capital gains–tax holiday for investors. Oh, and it would shrink the budget by replacing Medicare with vouchers, turning Medicaid into block grants, means-testing Social Security and freezing everything else except defense and veterans' spending for five years, putting programs for food safety, financial regulation, flu vaccines and every other sacred government cow on the potential chopping block.

Ryan is one of the smart, young, telegenic policy wonks who have been hailed as the GOP's future, and his budget includes relatively few the-Lord-shall-provide accounting gimmicks by D.C. standards. He knows its potential cuts could sound nasty in a 30-second ad, but he wants Republicans to stop running away from limited-government principles. "We've got to stop being afraid of the politics," he says. "At this point, what have we got to lose?"

The piece has several misfires, such as this unfounded data point slipped into the story to try and create false "balance":

President Barack Obama is popular today, but Democrats in general are not, and they will all face a backlash if they can't reverse this economic tailspin now that they own all the Washington machinery.

The reality, from last week's national poll:

FAVORABLEUNFAVORABLENET CHANGE
PRESIDENT OBAMA70 (68)25 (26)+3
PELOSI:38 (37)45 (44)+0
REID:35 (34)49 (48)+0
McCONNELL:21 (22)60 (58)-3
BOEHNER:16 (17)62 (61)-2
CONGRESSIONAL DEMS:44 (43)49 (50)+2
CONGRESSIONAL GOPS:14 (15)71 (70)-2
DEMOCRATIC PARTY:54 (53)40 (41)+2
REPUBLICAN PARTY:22 (23)68 (67)-2

I'd say a 54-40 favorability rating for the Democratic Party is pretty good. Sure, Pelosi and Reid don't do so hot, but Time is talking about "Democrats in general", and in that front, Democrats look fairly popular to me.

And compared to Republicans, it's not even close. the 68 percent unfavorability rating of the Republican Party is astonishing, as are the favorability ratings of MConnell, Boehner, and Congressional Republicans.

But really, that's nitpicking. This piece is horrid for the GOP. Such as:

Hispanics, Asians and blacks are on track to be the majority in three decades; metropolitan voters and young voters who skew Democratic are also on the rise. This is why Rogers recently decided to quit being a talking head: "I had a meeting with myself, and I said, Do we really need more white lobbyists with gray hair on TV?" But it's not clear that more diverse spokesmen or better tweets can woo a new generation to the GOP; support for gay rights is soaring, and polls show that voters prefer Democratic approaches to health care, education and the economy. "The outlook for Republicans is even worse than people think," says Ruy Teixeira, author of The Emerging Democratic Majority. "Their biggest problem is that they really believe what they believe."

And...

"The people's desires have changed, but we're still stuck in our old issue set." [Sen. Olympia] Snowe recalls that when she proposed fiscally conservative "triggers" to limit Bush's tax cuts in case of deficits, she was attacked by fellow Republicans. "I don't know when willy-nilly tax cuts became the essence of who we are," she says. "To the average American who's struggling, we're in some other stratosphere. We're the party of Big Business and Big Oil and the rich." In the Bush era, the party routinely sided with corporate lobbyists — promoting tax breaks, subsidies and earmarks for well-wired industries — against ordinary taxpayers as well as basic principles of fiscal restraint. South Carolina Senator Jim DeMint's Republican alternative to the stimulus included tax cuts skewed toward the wealthy; at this point, the GOP's reflexes are almost involuntary.

And lots more. Seriously, go read it. It'll give you enough warm fuzzies to last a day or three.

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Thu May 07, 2009 at 12:50 PM PDT.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Half the respondents... (25+ / 0-)

    ...dinging Pelosi and particularly Reid are probably progressive Democrats anyways.

    Sure, Pelosi and Reid don't do so hot,

    "The country we carry in our hearts is waiting." Bruce Springsteen

    by Davis X Machina on Thu May 07, 2009 at 12:52:17 PM PDT

  •  No! No! (5+ / 0-)

    "Load up on guns, bring your friends, it's fun to lose and to pretend" Kurt Cobain-1991

    by Jeff Y on Thu May 07, 2009 at 12:52:23 PM PDT

      •  Bananas come in bunches....... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        JekyllnHyde, Matt Z

        Unless they think this describes a functioning political party:

        GOP alternative is not just a p.r. disaster. It's a radical document, making Bush's tax cuts permanent while adding about $3 trillion in new tax cuts skewed toward the rich. It would replace almost all the stimulus — including tax cuts for workers as well as spending on schools, infrastructure and clean energy — with a capital gains–tax holiday for investors. Oh, and it would shrink the budget by replacing Medicare with vouchers, turning Medicaid into block grants, means-testing Social Security and freezing everything else except defense and veterans' spending for five years, putting programs for food safety, financial regulation, flu vaccines and every other sacred government cow on the potential chopping block.

        A Hoover Institute scree ???

        Maybe. Not a serious competitive position paper for a political party.

        BTW: the GOPers misread EVERYTHING when they got Bush re-elected in 2004. They discounted the Beslan school terrorism, the one-time edge their anti-gay marriage amendments drew in, and the hold-over from 9/11.

        2010 could leave them with 37 senators. Bye-bye.

        Droogie is as Droogie does....

        by vets74 on Thu May 07, 2009 at 01:39:14 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  The biggest GOP obstacle (10+ / 0-)

      is that they continue to push the same old (bad) ideas:  

      tax cuts for corporations

      tax cuts for rich people

      privatize everything

      spend massively on defense programs as if spending much more than every other country combined isn't enough

      deny basic rights to everyone who isn't a white male

      enable dynasties to control everything from wealth to politics

      create a Dickensonian America where there are the few wealthy and a massive number of peasants who fear to rise up because they might lose those few crumbs thrown their way

      They sell their bag of shit by covering it with a shiny veneer and a lot of perfume, but it's the same bag they've been peddling since Reagan.  No matter how they package it or present it, it's still just a bag of shit.

      People aren't buying it anymore because they've had a look inside, a good whiff of the contents, and are dealing with the consequences of their previous purchases of this product.

      Those who yell do so because their arguments are so weak they can only be supported by massive amounts of hot air. Sue, West Allis, Wisconsin

      by Puddytat on Thu May 07, 2009 at 01:10:51 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Rep leaders have surprisingly high name rec (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Jeff Y

      Up in the 80s for both of them, seems pretty high for congressional leaders. And not for the better in this case...

      The Enemy ('08): McCain/Palin........The Enemy ('09): Geithner/Summers

      by slaney black on Thu May 07, 2009 at 01:40:00 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  The question is: What will replace it? (9+ / 0-)

    Obama's election really was a relaigning moment in our politics.  The same old culture war divide will not decide our politics any more.

    But there will be an opposition party.  The question is, what will th enational debate be?  I suspect a rise in libertarianism is in the works - though perhaps not in the guise of the libertarian party.  

    "What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them" Pres. Obama 1/20/09

    by snout on Thu May 07, 2009 at 12:54:09 PM PDT

  •  My big fear is that (9+ / 0-)

    the Democrats -- as we know they are generally spineless -- will become arrogant and more spineless without real competition.

    The GOP is not destined for long term minority status; rather, imminent irrelevance status along the lines of the "Gun Rights for Psychopaths" Party.

    They tortured people to get false confessions to fraudulently justify our invading Iraq.

    by gchaucer2 on Thu May 07, 2009 at 12:54:55 PM PDT

    •  The Democratic party... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      NM Ward Chair, AndersOSU

      ...has been fissiparous since its inception. As soon as it gets within hailing distance of one-party rule, it'll split, and provide its own opposition. Dixiecrats becoming Southern Republicans, e.g.

      Hell, it began life as a split party, the Democratic Republicans, back in the days of Jefferson and Adams.

      "The country we carry in our hearts is waiting." Bruce Springsteen

      by Davis X Machina on Thu May 07, 2009 at 01:00:56 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  John Adams was a Federalist (0+ / 0-)

        Mostly by default (it was the first party to get organized). Jefferson's party formed in opposition to the Federalists - they originally called themselves the "Anti-Federalists", just to make that clear.

        John Quincy Adams (son of John) started as a Federalist, jumped ship to the Democratic-Republicans circa 1808 (when it was clear that the Federalist ship was foundering), and managed to get aboard the second-largest chunk of the D-R party when it broke up in the 1820's (it eventually merged with a couple of other factions to form the "Whig" party - that's the short version anyway).

        Change WHO can believe in?

        by TheOtherMaven on Thu May 07, 2009 at 03:09:55 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  a fresh face means a new face. (5+ / 0-)

    An old party of old men with old ideas will not have fresh faces.  Even Jindal flamed out fast.
    Looks and acts old for his age.

    come and get your Evolution goove on... http://www.danottesymposium.com/ be there or be square.....

    by TexMex on Thu May 07, 2009 at 12:55:38 PM PDT

    •  A fresh face (5+ / 0-)

      means a younger white guy face.  That is about it.

      They tortured people to get false confessions to fraudulently justify our invading Iraq.

      by gchaucer2 on Thu May 07, 2009 at 12:56:45 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Nothing personal, but I could go for a party (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        fizziks, BlueInUtah

        where people didn't give a damn about the color of the face or gender of the representative, and didn't use epithets based on ANY identity - even the nasty old white male.

        The GOPers so discredited (by association) the notion that identity politics could be disposed of by sensible people that it flourishes lushly in otherwise "liberal" locations.

        Too bad.

        "I do not choose to run for President in 1928" Calvin Coolidge

        by dabize on Thu May 07, 2009 at 01:12:15 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I don't take (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          TexMex, NM Ward Chair

          your comment personally.  I agree with your assessment.  Fact is -- looking at the dying GOP, I'm blinded by white guy faces.  Even when I look at Young Republicans.

          They tortured people to get false confessions to fraudulently justify our invading Iraq.

          by gchaucer2 on Thu May 07, 2009 at 01:17:47 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  OK (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            BlueInUtah

            I guess I'm just tired of the casual use of whiteness and maleness as pejoratives. There are few things as illiberal as assuming that the contents of your brain and the value of your POV must be divided by either pigmentation or plumbing. I've really grown to detest this in "progressives", because it makes trusting their judgment (if not their intentions) very difficult. Also, it's blatantly hypocritical.

            I realize that most people do this almost unconsciously at Kos and similar sites. But its high time that we stopped it.

            To me, the GOPers show many overt signs of dysfunctionality. Why use stand-ins?

            "I do not choose to run for President in 1928" Calvin Coolidge

            by dabize on Thu May 07, 2009 at 01:35:16 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Perhaps it is because (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              TexMex

              the overwhelming majority of stand-ins are white guys.  The GOP uses women, AAs, Latino/as, Asians, etc. as props.  Look at their "Leadership."  Steele has been emasculated in a matter of months.  Palin is a joke and has a target on her forehead.  Snowe and Collins are marginalized.  

              I have lots of white guy friends -- but they include me -- the old broad, our gay and lesbian friends, and folks of all colors and ethnicities.  

              They tortured people to get false confessions to fraudulently justify our invading Iraq.

              by gchaucer2 on Thu May 07, 2009 at 01:44:40 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  i am married to a white guy (0+ / 0-)

              but

              I guess I'm just tired of the whiteness and maleness for driving this country into the ground!

              come and get your Evolution goove on... http://www.danottesymposium.com/ be there or be square.....

              by TexMex on Thu May 07, 2009 at 02:37:18 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  Yeah. Five years younger than the old face. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ssgbryan, TexMex, NM Ward Chair

           For them, the "new guy" (must be male) is the 55 year old.

      •  Like Sarah Palin? n/t (0+ / 0-)

        Free speech? Yeah, I've heard of that. Have you?

        by dinotrac on Thu May 07, 2009 at 01:23:42 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Would it kill the media to admit Dem popularity? (8+ / 0-)

    Even now, MSM (include their often pathetic barometer Time)can't admit Dems are popular.  I guess they never will.  At least some truth is coming out about the Republicans.  I wish I could ask these same MSM institutions with these articles now, "So do you admit you were pompous condescending idiots towards Dems a few years ago when you were all about how regular salt-of-the-earth folks should flock to the GOP for some good ol Jesus-lovin, car-racin, aw-shucks authenticity?"

    The only place where Republicans are anywhere close to responsible is in the dictionary.

    by DemDachshund on Thu May 07, 2009 at 12:56:57 PM PDT

  •  That's gonna leave a mark. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ssgbryan, blueyedace2, NM Ward Chair

    "Then a man dripping with Vitalis said I looked like Joe Namath." - Vic Chesnutt

    by turnover on Thu May 07, 2009 at 12:58:23 PM PDT

  •  Their message is still bad. People LIKE the (6+ / 0-)

    government when it works for them.

    A policy wonk who wants to make the rich richer at the expense of the middle class and the environment doesn't sound like a good idea.
    They had much better luck lying like Bush, Rove, Gingrich and Reagan.

    "Half of my life, I spent doing time for some other fucker's crime. The other half's found me stumbling 'round drunk on burgundy wine." -R. Hunter

    by mungley on Thu May 07, 2009 at 12:58:36 PM PDT

    •  The GOP had the bad luck to have (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mungley, Matt Z

      a string of disasters visited upon them (natural and self made in nature) so that their inability to govern was illustrated for the American people. The next GOP POTUS candidate will have the same job that Pharaoh had convincing his people that his standing up to Moses was really a very good thing for them.

  •  People thought that the GOP might survive Bush be (10+ / 0-)

    cause of the institutional nature of parties. But no. Bush was the worst president of all time and all their ideas failed again (look at the 30's) enough is enough. the GOP is the party of disaster. they empowered Bush he was the worst president of all time and the party deserves to end. The Republican brand is crap, it should be crap. Are their conservatives yes but they need to start a new party.

    Sorry I have to run to the Senate floor to abolish torture.

    by bten on Thu May 07, 2009 at 12:59:14 PM PDT

  •  This is getting embarrassing. (6+ / 0-)

    I know this is funny and all, but for the sake of the nation's political health, we need at least two viable parties. Not one viable party and a bunch of mouth-breathing lunatics.

  •  Time as usual is wrong and Luce with the facts (8+ / 0-)

    Republicans are no closer to extinction now than Democrats were in 2004.

  •  The GOP probably won't control Washington (3+ / 0-)

    again till 2016, if then.

    In the meantime, the only thing that can save them is a military coup.

    i can't watch [Obama] speak on tv for more than 5 minutes or else what he's saying starts to make sense to me. It's very scary.

    by Kimball Cross on Thu May 07, 2009 at 01:02:07 PM PDT

  •  Ruy Teixeira nailed it (18+ / 0-)

    .....says Ruy Teixeira, author of The Emerging Democratic Majority. "Their biggest problem is that they really believe what they believe."

    That's exactly it. Whatever the issue, wingnuts cannot be moved. The remaining diehards have been  been distilled down to an 'essence of wingnut'. It's incredible to witness.

  •  Nono says: At least we prove (4+ / 0-)

    that evolution is a false theory.

  •  It's great when a mainstream journal like Time (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    givemhellHarryR, BrighidG

    sorts through the details and comes to the conclusions some of us have been discussing for the last months. I smile inside.

    Listen up, guys! It turns out that if we don't hurry up and change the world, later it's the world that changes us. --Mafalda

    by forester on Thu May 07, 2009 at 01:05:07 PM PDT

  •  It should be called the Goposaurus, pronounced (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Hillbilly Dem, Crashing Vor, BrighidG

    Gop-o-sore-ass.

    "Those who cast the votes decide nothing. Those who count the votes decide everything." -Joseph Stalin

    by Taxmancometh on Thu May 07, 2009 at 01:06:16 PM PDT

  •  Using frog DNA to fill in the gaps, (11+ / 0-)

    We can bring them back.

    I'm gonna start my own blog! With whiskey and hookers! In fact, forget the blog!

    by droogie6655321 on Thu May 07, 2009 at 01:07:37 PM PDT

  •  Paul Ryan thinks (7+ / 0-)

    means testing Social Security is a winning idea?  That's is a non-stop express trip to total irrelevancy.

    Do give this man a bully pulpit.

    Après le thé, le déluge. -- Glenn Beck, aka Napoleon XIV

    by mspicata on Thu May 07, 2009 at 01:07:43 PM PDT

  •  Hoot-Smalley (4+ / 0-)

    I think I saw him being interviewed once by Guy Smiley.

    And remember: If you don't like the news, go out and make some of your own. - Scoop Nisker, the Last News Show

    by North Madison on Thu May 07, 2009 at 01:08:23 PM PDT

  •  Dump the christoban. NOW! (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    stevemb, NM Ward Chair, CoExistNow

    Stop pandering to their hatred of teh gays and all but fundy churches. Stop denying science. Stop trying to impose moral absolutes. In fact, stop with the whole morality bullshit anyway. Its not your job to tell me how to behave or raise my children or deal with my sick, elderly parents.

    Until they decide to do that, they will continue to be toxic to those like me who will never vote for a GOPer again as long as they take their direction from the Dobson's, Falwells, and Robertsons.

    The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not "Eureka!" but "That's funny..."

    by sizzzzlerz on Thu May 07, 2009 at 01:09:07 PM PDT

  •  There are so many people I could mock now (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    givemhellHarryR, NM Ward Chair

    for their defense of Bush and his policies in 2004 from my daughter's father-in-law, to a cousin, to a neighbor, to friends who own small businesses - but I refrain and keep "I told you so" to myself.

  •  Here's Your Republican Fresh Face (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Matt Z, RickMassimo

    Hard to get much fresher!

    Some people are intolerant, and I CAN'T STAND people like that. -- Tom Lehrer

    by TheCrank on Thu May 07, 2009 at 01:12:04 PM PDT

  •  The Republicans need ideological cohesion (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ogre, island in alabama

    There are many candidate ideologies:

    -Falangism

    -Corporativism

    -Fascism

    -National Socialism (probably not...it has "socialism" in the name!)

    -Integralism

    Maybe RedState could do an online poll.

    Al que no le guste el caldo, le dan dos tazas.

    by Rich in PA on Thu May 07, 2009 at 01:12:48 PM PDT

  •  Paul Ryan is wrong (11+ / 0-)
    "Conservatism" is unpopular and if put into practice would lose every election. Sure it sounds nice and people love it - as long as the stuff the government is cutting doesn't affect them. NIMBY in its finest form. There's a reason military contractors have bases in every Congressional district. You think those old wingnuts that went to college on the GI Bill, started a business with a SBA loan, and are living off Social Security and going to the doctor on Medicare are gonna let Congress cut those programs? Hell no, but when David Broder flies into "the heartland" to talk to him he's gonna talk about how big the damn government is and how it should leave him alone and how taxes are too high.

    So the Republican solution the past 2 decades has been to talk up conservatism, not actually do it (since if they did, they'd lose), and come up with fancy names for the same old fake agenda they're not gonna implement. Contract with America. Compassionate conservatism. The only difference between those and Ryan's "budget" is that the budget is actually telling it straight. Which is why it won't fly.

    •  Conservative ECONOMICS is Unpopular (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ssgbryan, NM Ward Chair

      Combine semi favored parts of conservative economics like tax repeal with militarism, racism and sex control, and they had a winning coalition for a generation and a half.

      They still poll competitively with Dems on militarism, so there are ways to put together a winning message in the coming years especially as damage continues to unfold from a generation and a half of conservative economics, which in some important elements the Dems don't oppose.

      I dunno about the demographic problems though. I think their only hope is a new wave of Christianism, which is a distinct possibility.

      We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

      by Gooserock on Thu May 07, 2009 at 01:23:57 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Not just their economics. (0+ / 0-)

        What would you say IS popular with a majority in conservative ideology?  Their social issue stances have become as unpopular as their economic issue stances or are headed that way (gay marriage?) as the baby boomers shrink in influence.  

        I fail to see how they are going to make a comeback with militarism once the troops start getting home from Iraq.  As the aftermath unfolds, I believe that militarism will wane and America's taste for war porn and empire will plunge.  What will be left then?

        Identification with religion is also waning in the US, though it remains a strong thread through all groups, liberal and conservative.  What do you think would fuel this new wave of christianism?  Because I can't really see where you are coming from there.

        The GOP will be back, but they need to wipe the slate clean and start anew with some realists and some diversity of opinion.  Not counting on that anytime soon, so I think we just need to self-police until the GOP reassembles as a real opposition party.

        "When people show you who they really are, believe them." - Maya Angelou

        by Pennsylvanian on Thu May 07, 2009 at 01:36:01 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  they blew it (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Matt Z, mherms

        On the new wave of Christianism. Why? Because Hispanics are religious folks, especially Hispanics from South America and from Mexico. Problem is, the GOP can't do anything but call these people names and blame them for every problem.

        And yes I was speaking of conservative economics. I think the GWB administration was so fucking toxic though, the GOP quite simply lost their credibility on virtually every issue. However that's not to say that the GOP can't come back on wedge issues - however there I think the demographics come into play!

  •  and the Democrats? (0+ / 0-)

    how are they going to look after they fail to deliver health-care reform?  After they fail to deliver  a public option to counter death by spread sheet?  After they have given umpteen trillion of OUR dollars to the banking and finance industry?  After they fail to prosecute war crimes?

    Shall I list more failures?

    Sure, laugh at the Republicans, while Max Baucus laughs at single payer advocates speaking out at a hearing where only the for-profit industry is represented? And Salazar hands out uranium leases in the Grand Canyon? And American mortgage holders lose their homes? And American manufacturing turns to rust?

    Just who is inept here? The Republicans?  Laugh all you want, but we've been had.

    don't always believe what you think...

    by claude on Thu May 07, 2009 at 01:14:10 PM PDT

  •  The Problem as I see it. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    forester, chin075, FreeStateDem

    The problem is that the vast majority of issues that Republicans claim to stand for, have long been exposed as BS.  Back when the public was uspet with Democrats, the Republican agenda sounded great.  But now that the public has seen living proof that the Republican agenda is BS, and nothing more than a PR campaign of lies, they have nothing.

    At least when the Dems were given the boot, they could see that they no longer represented their own values.  Values the public still believed in.  

    What do Republicans have to fall back on?  Tax cuts? Not only does that continue down the road of favouring the rich and wealthy while doing NOTHING for the lower classes, it only furthers that issue of pro-corporatization of public services.  "Family Values?"  That's laughable considering the multiple-divorced, in the closet, sex in airport bathrooms, molest underage paiges, that seem to permeate the right.  

    The American public supports equal rights for gays.  SO this is an issue the Republicans no longer have any connection to.  The American public supports a certain level of government services, so constantly saying they will drown government in the bathtub hurts them.  As does the old Reagan quote of the scary government.  Guns?  The majority of AMericans support the constitution, but don't really give a shit about guns the way the crazy  militant right-wingers do.  It is one thing to have the right to bear arms...and something completely different to want to stockpile weapons, including semi-automatic, automatic, assualt weapons, 50 callibre anti-aircraft guns, etc.

    Seriously...what issues do Republicans stand for that the majority of people don't look at like something so old fashioned it is paleolithic?  Maybe smaller government, but that is hardly an issue that will win elections, and something REpublicans have NEVER EVER delivered on anyway.  

    Meanwhile the Democrats may be mostly useless and spineless, they are still the party of social issues, looking after one another, helping the less fortunate, supposedly health care and cleaner energy, etc.  

    The Republicans made their choice LONG ago that they sided 100% with the rich, wealthy and powerful minority.  EVERYTHING they do reflects that.  There is no way for them to change without becoming Democrat-light.  Because the only way for them to become more relevant, is for them to start accepting and adopting issues that were typically considered left-wing, democratic issues.  Because those are issues the majority of Americans care about and support...and that support is even greater in the younger voters who are the future of the country.

    •  Yes tax cuts are not a winner for the GOP... (0+ / 0-)

      ...any more.  People aren't really out there clammoring for tax cuts, what they want is more for what they already pay - more as in affordable health care, safe food, safe drugs, good schools, infrastructure and jobs.  The GOPers aren't interested.

      "When people show you who they really are, believe them." - Maya Angelou

      by Pennsylvanian on Thu May 07, 2009 at 01:23:15 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Most people don't make enough now to (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Pennsylvanian, Eternalise

        pay significant taxes while the middle class is being deconstructed (remember Stalin shipping the Kulaks to Siberia?). Then the GOP meisters such as Rush and Hannity are decrying those who don't pay taxes as layabouts and lazy. The problem is they cut off their callers who try to point out that their audience is among the ones suffering while the talking heads are being insufferable.

  •  James Carville threw out a data point (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bwintx, Hillbilly Dem, FreeStateDem

    on Talk of the Nation this afternoon.  Apparently if you took the voting of six major demographic groups in the 2008 election -- college educated white men, non-college educated white men, college women, non-college women, African Americans, and Hispanics -- and you applied to the electorate that voted in 1992, John McCain would have won the election.

    His point is that the demographics of the US electorate have changed, and that's why the Dems stand to hold the majority for the next forty years.

  •  The Emerging Democratic Majority (6+ / 0-)

    I read that book after Kerry lost in 2004 and I thought it was wishful thinking, but it's almost prophetic at this point where Texiera pointed out that minorities will soon be the majority.  He also pointed out that well educated professionals would be alienated by the GOP's social conservatism.  He assumed the GOP wouldn't be able to adapt to a changing electorate, a correct assumption thus far.

    Strength and wisdom are not conflicting values--they go hand in hand. - Bill Clinton

    by skidrow on Thu May 07, 2009 at 01:15:42 PM PDT

  •  "White lobbyists with gray hair" (4+ / 0-)

    In a way, that's what it comes down to. The Republicans - at least, the ones we've got now - may not all be active, conscious racists, but they will never understand why "more white lobbyists with gray hair" is a problem. I think they really think that's just a coincidence and can't understand why people can't look past it.

    Fight until we win. Then we can begin arguing about the details. - Kwickkick (RIP) 2009

    by RickMassimo on Thu May 07, 2009 at 01:15:56 PM PDT

  •  Hmmmm. Maybe Time can declare itself next. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    NM Ward Chair

    I guess "It takes one to know one" is the order of the day here.

    Free speech? Yeah, I've heard of that. Have you?

    by dinotrac on Thu May 07, 2009 at 01:17:36 PM PDT

  •  Nice catch on the "balance anxiety". Dems are (0+ / 0-)

    doing fine./

    "Four seconds is the longest wait " -Sleater-Kinney

    by delphil on Thu May 07, 2009 at 01:18:44 PM PDT

  •  The sane Republicans are coming. (10+ / 0-)

    Utah Gov. Jim Huntsman. Ahhhnold. Andrew Sullivan. (Much as I like and respect Sullivan, when torture and gay rights and the recession recede to the back burner, he'll find more in common with sane Repubs.) These and people like them will lead the Repubs out of the wilderness. It's just a question of how long it will take. Long enough, I hope, for the Dems to get some good policies into place first.

    We should not forget the fickleness of the American public. We must learn from the Repubs' destructive addiction to ideological purity. And Obama has shown that if you treat the voters like adults, you can actually win elections. That's something the Repubs were never willing to do before, but the Huntsmans and Schwarzeneggers out there are learning from Obama, too.

    Our clock is ticking. We're in a sprint, not a marathon.

    "The true strength of our nation comes not from the might of our arms or the scale of our wealth, but from the enduring power of our ideals." - Barack Obama

    by HeyMikey on Thu May 07, 2009 at 01:19:07 PM PDT

    •  I'd like to believe that's true (0+ / 0-)

      but with the current crop of GOP 'leaders', it's hard to see. It wouldn't surprise me to see Ahhhnold bolt the party, or even a Snowe or a Collins leave.

      Limbaugh and Newt are the GOP leaders, and they're driving the GOP bus right over the cliff IMHO.

      I would truly like to see some rational GOP leaders who can present cogent solutions to some of our  problems. It would be healthy for our Democracy. I'm just not seeing it on the near horizon.

      •  I'd like to be optimistic about moderate R's (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        island in alabama

        But if the recalcitrant wingers get their way, they'll cast the moderates out of the party, if only just so they can call themselves the only true Republicans. Needless to say, for the fewer, more rabid wingers to isolate themselves only makes them even more vulnerable.

        Republicans: Wrong About Everything.

        by chin075 on Thu May 07, 2009 at 03:28:50 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Wow. With numbers like those... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ssgbryan, NM Ward Chair

    does Boehner's own mother even like him?  I kinda think not.

    They tortured people to get false confessions to fraudulently justify our invading Iraq.

    by Kaili Joy Gray on Thu May 07, 2009 at 01:21:14 PM PDT

  •  Oddly enough . . . (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    NM Ward Chair, island in alabama

    There is not a single mention of Sarah Palin in the article. I don't understand how you could write an article like this and not mention Sarah Palin.

    A laughing stock to us, she is (fortunately for Democrats) seen as a savior to many conservatives, such as Rush Limbaugh, as the future of the GOP.

  •  Wingers (3+ / 0-)

    Polls show that most Republicans who haven't jumped ship want the party to move even further right; it takes vision to imagine a presidential candidate with national appeal emerging from a GOP primary in 2012.

    Because it's about values.

  •  Serious Possibility of a Third Political Party (0+ / 0-)

    With Rush inviting McCain to leave, Snowe and Collins uncomfortable, and Specter already having jumped ship, with the GOP continuing to shrink beyond its base to its hard-core, alienating voting groups that would formerly have been thought of as the GOP base, it seems the field is ripe for the disenfranchised moderate wing of the GOP to form a third political party.  I dare say such a party might attract more voters than the current GOP does.

    •  Nah. (0+ / 0-)

      Too many hurdles constructed by the Two Parties for a third party to get going.

      Hey, Glenn, I'll give you something to cry about.

      by The Creator on Thu May 07, 2009 at 01:30:26 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Historically, True (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        BrighidG

        Third political parties crop up from time to time and then get co-opted by one or the other major party.  I'm just saying that with such a large segment of voters politically homeless, it could very well happen.  One of two things will happen:  The new party will finish off the GOP (quite unlikely), or the new party will convince the rump GOP to change its stripes and the two will re-merge after 10 years or so.

        I just think Democratic strategists should be thinking about such an eventuality.  It might siphon off some moderate Dems.

        •  that has been the pattern; (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          island in alabama

          a third party that is vigorous enough to siphon enough votes from the majority parties gets itself noticed eventually so the party moves to re-accommodate them and reabsorb them. Makes perfect sense based on historical perspective.  Third parties supplanting established national parties died as a practice in the 1800s

          •  In the 1850's, to be exact (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            entlord1

            when the Republican Party formed out of the remnants of the Whig Party and other disaffected voters.

            But just because it hasn't happened since then doesn't mean it can never happen again.We had not had a successful run by a Vice-President for a Presidential term of his own since Martin Van Buren in 1836 - and then Poppy Bush managed to skid in on Reagan's departing coattails in 1988....

            Change WHO can believe in?

            by TheOtherMaven on Thu May 07, 2009 at 03:23:23 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Irony (0+ / 0-)

          Except the last major shift was with the formation of the Republican party itself. There was no co-opting, as I understand the term, involved. The Whigs, the other major party prior to 1860, just ceased to exists with the defection of its members to either the Democratic or Republican parties after the Civil War. The Civil War represented seismic change on many levels.

          We can not remain a great nation by taking in each others wash.

          by nomorerepukes on Thu May 07, 2009 at 02:26:20 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  What about Blue Dogs? (0+ / 0-)

      You presume too much when you presume a new party would only attract moderate Republicans. Right wing Democrats would probably feel comfortable with left wing Republicans. If memory serves me correctly although the Democrats are the largest party, they are not the majority party. Although I am a registered Democrat and have been since becoming eligible to vote, Al Gore was the first Democratic party candidate for whom I voted. If you presume this means I voted for Republicans you would again be presuming too much.

      We can not remain a great nation by taking in each others wash.

      by nomorerepukes on Thu May 07, 2009 at 02:14:31 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  But what about (0+ / 0-)

    the Freedom Tents?

    Hey, Glenn, I'll give you something to cry about.

    by The Creator on Thu May 07, 2009 at 01:29:44 PM PDT

  •  I never get tired... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    chin075, BrighidG

    of reading stories like this.

    Never.

    my opinions are objectively superior to yours.

    by djughurknot on Thu May 07, 2009 at 01:32:46 PM PDT

  •  I can only speculate (0+ / 0-)

    on who those 22% are that actually suport the GOP. Joe the Plumber - a perfect proxy for how low they have fallen - doesn't even support them any more.  

    "It's like these guys take pride in being ignorant." Barack Obama August 5, 2008

    by thefretgenie on Thu May 07, 2009 at 01:41:05 PM PDT

  •  "Nobody likes Dr Doom", Sanford says with a smile (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Matt Z, Rosebuddear

    Someone should tell the governor that Dr Doom is a villain.

    Your tax dollars pay for black helicopters

    by Orbital Mind Control Lasers on Thu May 07, 2009 at 01:46:00 PM PDT

  •  so why did Time have to clean up after Bachmann? (0+ / 0-)

    She said "Hoot-Smalley Act", she never mentioned Smoot OR Hawley.

    DailyKos: the "Free Ice Cream for Everybody" crowd!

    by louisev on Thu May 07, 2009 at 01:47:05 PM PDT

  •  Hoot Smalley (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    dclarke, island in alabama

    I think he runs the feed store in Slapout, Oklahoma.

    Yes, we really have a town named Slapout. . .

    "It's been headed this way since the World began, when a vicious creature made the jump from Monkey to Man."--Elvis Costello

    by BigOkie on Thu May 07, 2009 at 01:49:21 PM PDT

  •  They're not dead yet... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    chin075

    Republicans are like vampires, they won't be dead until you drive a silver stake through their hearts.

  •  Yeah, they believe what they believe (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Rosebuddear, island in alabama

    but they can't live up to it themselves!

    The GOP doesn't need rebranding. They need to show people that they can govern!

    But how are a bunch of reactionary authoritarians and limited government libertarian types led by a gang of war criminals and corporate pirates going to govern coherently?

    Remember back in 2000/2004 when the conventional wisdom was that Democrats didn't believe in anything? That we were a coalition of special interest groups, but had no unifying philosophy?

    Well, joke's on them. Or rather, on all of us.

  •  New Paradigms (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Rosebuddear, island in alabama

    Posting on another site earlier today, I poked at the typical conservative who made that time-worn slur: liberals are the same as socialists are the same as communists. The Republican base is stuck with the hard-right zombies it created with 100-years of anti-socialist scare tactics. In communicating with that base it has lost the ability to realistically assess problems and develop practical solutions. The problem is that many Democrats have not evolved much further.

    I feel that words like "Capitalist" and "Communist" have lost all meaning in this post-Cold War international economy. We as a society have a limited understanding of what is happening and why. Without an understanding by a broader range of the public, Democrats will be unwilling or unable to make fundamental changes needed to make the U.S. competitive in the global marketplace. Single-payer health care? Too radical, blue Dems will say "no." End off-shore tax havens? Not likely, same reason.

    Progressive Democrats (does that include Obama, I can't tell yet) need to expand the intellectual understanding of the modern world economy, and its linkages to envrionmental, labor, and economic cyclical issues. Maybe that has occured, but not that I've seen yet. This understanding then needs to be broken down and taught at the lowest level possible. Barring that, the Democrats will remain Republican light, fail to improve the country, and undergo a similar cycle of corruption and rejection (compare to Democrats in 1994, Republicans in 1976 and 2006-08), and no real changes will take place. It was not that long ago that Dems were left for dead.

  •  I just wish the elephant (0+ / 0-)

    was not the symbol of the Republican Party. It's so inappropriate. Elephants are compassionate, intelligent animals, they behave in altruistic ways, take care of their own and others, and in general, are completely the opposite of everything the Republican Party stands for at this point.

    Amazing, isn't it? In just eight short years, Bush II managed to thoroughly discredit 30 years of Reaganomics (not in our eyes of course-it was already discredited-but in the eyes of your average voter).

    Maybe we (ulp) owe Shrub a debt of gratitude. His Dad called Reaganomics "voodoo economics" (when it was St. Reagan running, and before he had a shot at the Presidency himself), and now the son comes along and proves the truth of Dad's words. Hahahah. Somehow, I don't think Dad is very grateful to Junior for that.

  •  They're so clueless (0+ / 0-)

    The only way back into the majority for them is to compete with Democrats on improving America for Americans (and not that 2% of Americans they've been pandering to for my entire lifetime). Certainly there is a fairly exploitable, ignorant segment of our population whose votes can be counted on by merely mentioning abortion or "states rights" but those are now (and hopefully, will forever be) the minority.

    At this point, what do they have to lose? They could completely rid themselves of big money. It's not like they're winning any competitive elections. They could rebrand themselves as a party for the people while Democrats struggle with blue dogs, moderate politics and bipartisanship. But what Republican is willing to buck the status quo?

    Some say we need a third party. I wish we had a second party. -- Jim Hightower

    by joe m on Thu May 07, 2009 at 02:01:49 PM PDT

  •  as far as I am concerned as an ex-repub (5+ / 0-)

    ...the Republican party was DOA in 2000 and its remains hijacked by the Bush/Cheney cabal with its remaining constituents becoming zombies hoping for eternal power.

    What we're seeing today is the discarded skin of the corporate snake that slithered out of the GOP when Bush/Cheney and their coherts left Washington.

    The Republican legislators left standing can dance around in their reptilian skins, shaking their prized party rattlers, they're not going to raise the dead.

    Rush Limbaugh is an organizing force of exactly nothing.  It continues to surprise me that he gets so much attention from anyone, let alone from progressive websites.

    Maybe people are just morbid.

  •  My favorite part of the article (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    entlord1, Rosebuddear

    On South Carolina's ineffective government:

    I'm a conservative, but this could be the most devastating thing our state has ever seen.
    ...
    Republicans control everything around here. It would be nice if we could accomplish something.

  •  Great numbers! (0+ / 0-)

    With Dems like these, who needs Republicans after all?  

    Dems have taken the Security State bit and are straining to complete the good works of Bushco.  In Iraq, Afghanistan and soon Pakistan, fascism... er... American Exceptionalism rides erect and proud under today's Dems!

    On home front, watch Dems do the dirty on all fronts.  Watch them hand out trillions to corporate fat cats in a wealth transfer upwards that Ronald Reagan could only dream of.

    Watch Dems make of a kind with Bushco torture.  Move on, folks.  Nothing to see here.

    Watch powerful Dems block single payer healthcare.  EFCA.  

    You name it.  The list will go on.

    In short, watch Powerful, Big-Boy Pants(tm) Dems hold the line against progress in ways that old, white, male GOP slackers like McCain could only dream of.

    Clearly, the American electorate has recognized a major sea change in all things hot-house "politic".  

    Dinosaurs going extinct all over the place.

    To be replaced by weasels.

    Partisanship is not the heart of politics.  Partisanship is the abdication of politics.

  •  Given Time's track record (0+ / 0-)

    I would regard the piece as a moderately bad contrarian sign.

    How long before the media morons get tired of the "GOP is going extinct" story and start ginning up the "GOP comeback" stories?

  •  I've got three words for the Goposaur "budget": (0+ / 0-)

    F*ck that sh*t.

    Change WHO can believe in?

    by TheOtherMaven on Thu May 07, 2009 at 02:54:22 PM PDT

  •  The Rs need to reorder their priorities (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    island in alabama

    The problem the Rs have, and I used to be one, is that they continue to attack the Ds on every issue and that puts them in a horrible position on virtually every civil liberty issue.  Not every D agrees with every D position, but on balance, any intelligent person today will choose the Ds as the lesser of two evils.  If I have to choose between having the federal government tell me whom I can marry, when I can have children, and then threaten my family by denying them health care, I will not vote for them even if I believe the federal budget should be balanced.  End of story

    Why are there no R candidates who are willing to take the following positions? Put Medicare Parts A,B, and D on a sound basis by raising taxes.  Extend Medicare to younger age groups over time or provide a single-payer alternative. Provide low cost daycare to two-earner families and provide a public college education to anyone that can achieve a 50th percentile on the SAT.  Ban assault rifles and automatic pistols, but only those weapons.  Legalize drugs coupled with a substance abuse program requirement instead of jail time. Demand the government that respects all of the Constitution and the civil liberties it protects  

    With those issues off the table, we could then have
    a legitimate debate about how big the federal government should be versus how much we are willing to pay for it.  

  •  Republicans should be grateful to Obama (0+ / 0-)

    We're back to enforcing the Endangered Species Act, so at least there's a chance they won't all die out.

  •  They are truly in the land of the lost... (0+ / 0-)

    DARTH SPECTER: I am altering the deal! Pray I don't alter it any further!
    LANDO REID: This deal keeps getting worse all the time!

    by LordMike on Thu May 07, 2009 at 03:15:36 PM PDT

  •  Lemme help you there, Sen. Oly... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    island in alabama

    "I don't know when willy-nilly tax cuts became the essence of who we are," she says.

    ...1978: California Proposition 13.

    That's my vote, anyhoo.

  •  "Near Extinction" (0+ / 0-)

    Yeah right.  Keep dreaming.  I guess putting up a cartoon dinosour on a blog 99.9% of swing voters will never see is easier than holding the all-Democrats government to its (so far sadly unkept)promises.
    Easier too than realizing half of New England governors are already Republican (not to mention the Democrat in NH is further right fiscally than Grover Norquist).
    Easier than looking at the Senate and governor polls from NE , NY, DE  and PA which show Democrats losing more then winning.
    Meanwhile the wars expand, the economy contracts, the corruption continues unabated and the Kool-Aid drinkers keep whistling past the graveyard nervously repeating their pathetic "Regional Party" meme.

  •  And this is why they're out of favor (0+ / 0-)

    "In the Bush era, the party routinely sided with corporate lobbyists — promoting tax breaks, subsidies and earmarks for well-wired industries — against ordinary taxpayers as well as basic principles of fiscal restraint."

    Not to mention an immoral war of choice and an unregulated financial industry!

  •  I'm enjoying the bad press of the (0+ / 0-)

    GOP right now, but it would be fun to play the Vegas odds game on how long it will take them to turn this around. I FEAR sooner than we think. The Tories in Britain were in extremely bad shape in the late nineties and now, eleven years later, they are becoming viable again. Eleven years for the GOP would of course be much too soon. I'd LOVE forty frickin' years with them in the wilderness but politics can surprise.

  •  I love this quote from the TIME article: (0+ / 0-)

    "Republicans never really left the idea business, but Americans haven't been buying what they're selling, and their product line hasn't changed. They're starting to look like the Federalists of the early 19th century: an embittered, over-the-top, out-of-touch regional party en route to extinction, doubling down on dogma the electorate has already rejected."

    What is valued is practiced. What is not valued is not practiced. -- Plato

    by RobLewis on Thu May 07, 2009 at 06:18:00 PM PDT

  •  The Party of Primal Ooze (0+ / 0-)

    When a species goes extinct, it doesn't make a comeback.
    Even assuming there are un-hatched Lincoln Chafee eggs out there, once cracked, from whom will they suckle?
    Sooner or later, the swan-headed "ducks" (the Moderate Republicans) will abandon the duck heads (the Intemperate Republicans) - or more accurately, the Republican Duck Heads will abandon the surviving swans.

    It's no longer a stretch to suggest the possibility that those surviving Chafee/swan eggs will evolve into a brand new species.  Based on their own science, Republican Duck Heads are incapable of Evolution and will face certain extinction. But God has an Intelligent Design for the Repelicans and here is what I believe will emerge from the Primal Ooze.

    The surviving flock of Republican Dodos is small enough to fit in a canary cage, but they've migrated South and few stragglers remain to be hunted for their electoral feathers.  Having no natural enemies or working birth control, the species is likely to unabatedly propagate. Like a over-crowded shrew population (or a Starshipful of terrifying, puppy-eating tribbles), they will eventually eat their own and die off.

    But those shell-shackled little Chafee Chicks must survive the 4-year long Northern winter before shedding their yolks. Should they hatch (sans Orrin) they will once again become the Party of Lincoln.

    In the meantime their doomed Kissimee Cousins (not to be confused with the Dixie Chicks) should consider a total rebranding.  Being counter-Evolutionaries, the name "Whig Party" would be a perfect fit.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site