Quantcast
Opinion

Kathleen Parker: This year's elections could be brutal for GOP

Comments

Return To Article
  • canvas1 San Tan Valley, AZ
    Jan. 7, 2014 1:55 a.m.

    Awe...Kathleen, well, it looks like you are another beltway republican who still does not understand why McCain and Romney both lost and why the 2010 midterms were such a republican success. Democrats win because they focus on issues. They NEVER try for victory portraying themselves with an arm stretched out to the other side saying, "See we are nice and we can get along."

    Lets see, oh that's right, that's how McCain and Romney campaigned, and I think they lost Kathleen. And you lecture us on putting up losing candidates! The tea-party is who helped win the House back; singularly due to campaigns across the country focused on the issue of the alarming growth of government and the loss of our freedoms.

    And if I am not mistaking, it was Bush's true colors showing through as a NOT true conservative that gave the Senate and the House to Polosi and Reid. We see and understand the dangerous direction our country is headed and we have the winning strategy. Open your eyes!

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Jan. 7, 2014 5:41 a.m.

    "What smart Republicans are aiming for are candidates who can win both a primary and a general election, actual human beings who can appeal to a wide swath of the electorate, not just the purity-proof hard-liners on the right"

    Yup. And when the GOP stops pushing the Crazy, birther types, I am happy to pull the "R" lever again.

    While some do see the light, I fear that there are still too many (evident on this board daily) who would rather lose with their perfect candidate than win with someone who gives them most of what they want.

  • azreader1 tucson, AZ
    Jan. 7, 2014 6:35 a.m.

    I find it a bit odd, and even disingenuous, when a writer predicts doom and gloom for the Republican party if it doesn't follow his or her prescription for success (often summed up as "dump the tea party"). The problem is that until someone else demonstrates even a glimmer of conscience on issues like abortion and actually does something about runaway spending, fiscally-conservative and socially-conscious candidates will continue to win Republican primaries, especially in down-stream elections.

    And, lest pundits not appreciate the distinction, strictly tea party-only members don't generally get into the tall grass of social issues such as abortion, so it isn't just the tea partiers who have a stake and influence in Republican primaries. For instance, I doubt that the previously much-maligned Religious Right has faded into oblivion; it's just that pundits now like to focus all of their attention and ire on the "tea party."

    I suspect there are many others like me who will continue to focus their attention and support on candidates who truly represent what we consider to be the most important issues of the day: sound fiscal management and a strong moral compass.

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 7, 2014 8:06 a.m.

    'The tea-party is who helped win the House back…'

    Ok.

    Let's look at this statement.

    The GOP did take 'take America back' by winning the House in 2010.

    Before our current President took office, the GOP has been seen quoting as their only priority was to make him a…

    'one term President.'

    Not jobs.

    400 Filibusters in the Senate. More than any other congress in history.

    47 failed attempts to repeal the Affordable care act at the cost of $50 million dollars.

    82 judicial blocks. 86 for every other president…combined.

    The GOP refused to talk with Dems x18 times before….

    they forced a government shutdown. That also cost tax payers $24 billion dollars.

    Least productive congress, in 60 years.

    Utah:

    1.3 Utahns cut off public assistance.

    The state spending $2 million dollars to fight gay marriage.

    Why would I vote someone into government, that wants 'limited government'?

    That is sabotage politics.

    And if you are upset about the debt?

    Reagan tripled the debt.

    George W. Bush doubled the debt.

    You cannot say either about Obama.

    The message, seems pretty clear.

    The Republican party has offered no actual solutions in 30+ years.

    Vote Democrat.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Jan. 7, 2014 8:11 a.m.

    "it was Bush's true colors showing through as a NOT true conservative"

    Just Bush? How about Mitch McConnell? How about Paul Ryan? How about John Boehner?

    These guys all voted FOR Medicare part D, No Child Left Behind, the Auto Bailouts and TARP.

    Proving, in the end, the GOP is not really any different than the Dems.

    Just Bush? Hardly.

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    Jan. 7, 2014 8:37 a.m.

    That's OK.

  • airnaut Everett, 00
    Jan. 7, 2014 8:44 a.m.

    canvas1
    San Tan Valley, AZ

    That's proving Kathleen Parker's article to a tea (party).

    You realize the last election was Obama's to loose, don't you?
    You do realize that Romney was a North East moderate Republican (similar to Reagan) who could have easily won the Center Right, Moderates, and Independants - but morphed into an ugly "ultra-conservative" during the primary, only to then be publically spanked and smacked down in the General Elections, don't you?

    You do realize that the House and Senate, and 3 State Governorships were lost due to GOP Tea-Party extremeism?

    Nah, you don't.
    And THAT is what Ms. Parker is trying to tell you.

    Let the GOP-eat-GOP gladiator games begin...

  • andyjaggy American Fork, UT
    Jan. 7, 2014 8:54 a.m.

    I would love to vote republican this time around, but I fear that Republicans will make that impossible for me. Someone like Chris Cristie whom I would actually vote for will probably be run out by the tea party.

  • airnaut Everett, 00
    Jan. 7, 2014 9:48 a.m.

    Least we all remind ourselves that Saint Reagan --
    [whom the Tea-Party worships and sees as sinless]

    banned assault and hand guns,
    signed abortion legislation,
    granted amnesty to illegal immigrants,
    increased Government size and Federal Spending,
    raised the debt ceiling 17 times,
    and forced all hospitals to admit people regardless of insurance or ability to pay.

    President Obama has done none of that,
    so should be considered Ronald Reagan-LITE.

    Today's GOP would have had Reagan publically executed.

  • JoeCapitalist2 Orem, UT
    Jan. 7, 2014 9:51 a.m.

    Once again, the liberals are pushing the story that only "moderate" Republicans have a chance of winning in the general election. They want to convince us that anyone who is truly conservative doesn't have a chance so we might as well vote for someone in the primary who has at least one foot across the aisle already.

    Why is this logic only applicable to conservatives? Hard core leftists in the Democratic party run and win all the time. Obama, Clinton, Reid, Pelosi, Schumer, etc. are all left wing extremists. There is no effort on the other side to promote "moderate" Democrats.

    I'm sure plenty of liberal commentors will insist that everyone associated with the Tea Party are "crazy birther types", but they give all the left-wingers a complete pass.

    Don't fall for the propaganda. Elect true conservatives who will actually fight for smaller government and fiscal responsibility. Otherwise the party will shift even further left.

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 7, 2014 10:09 a.m.

    'Once again, the liberals are pushing the story that only "moderate" Republicans have a chance of winning in the general election.'

    False.

    With it's track record…

    I doubt any Republican has a chance of winning general election.

  • There You Go Again Saint George, UT
    Jan. 7, 2014 10:39 a.m.

    "...The problem is that until someone else demonstrates even a glimmer of conscience on issues like abortion and actually does something about runaway spending...".

    A glimmer of conscience?

    The end all...be all...Patron Saint of the republican Party...Ronald Wilson Reagan signed an abortion bill which led to the murder of over 2,000,000 babies.

    "...and actually does something about runaway spending...".

    RWR raised the debt ceiling 17 times...

    "...fiscally-conservative and socially-conscious candidates will continue to win Republican primaries...".

    There must be some other reason why fiscally-conservative and socially-conscious candidates will continue to win republican primaries.

  • one vote Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 7, 2014 10:52 a.m.

    Senator Lee started the landslide.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Jan. 7, 2014 10:55 a.m.

    "Hard core leftists in the Democratic party run and win all the time. Obama, Clinton, Reid, Pelosi, Schumer, etc. are all left wing extremists. There is no effort on the other side to promote "moderate" Democrats."

    You detail out the issue perfectly. Obama and Clinton are by no stretch "left wing extremists". Its like being in a boat leaving an island and thinking the land is moving farther away.

  • JoeCapitalist2 Orem, UT
    Jan. 7, 2014 11:35 a.m.

    JoeBlow:

    Obama and Clinton are as far away from the center line as Ted Cruze and Mike Lee. Liberals refuse to acknowledge that because they agree with their politics. To them, Obama is just a regular guy who has perfectly normal views.

    To conservatives, his policies are very radical.

    I happen to agree with many true conservatives in Congress, but at least I will recognize that they are not "moderate".

    If you want to try and prove me wrong, please name some people in Congress that you think are farther left than the ones I named. (Oops I should have mentioned Al Franken in my original post but even he is not THAT far left of Obama).

  • T.Jefferson Concord, MA
    Jan. 7, 2014 11:54 a.m.

    JoeBlow -

    You are absolutely correct. Obama, Bush, Clinton and Reagan all are relatively moderate by comparison to members of the Teaparty movement. The Teaparty would have refused the TARP program and the accommodative Fed programs. The result would have been a 2nd Great Depression.

    This article is spot on. In fact what is happening is deja vu all over again. Teaparty candidates are the main reason the Senate has a Democrat majority, despite the fact that the apportionment according to two senators per state gives a great overweight to the less populous smaller and more conservative states.

  • demz taters Flagstaff, AZ
    Jan. 7, 2014 12:11 p.m.

    JoeCapitalist2 wrote: "If you want to try and prove me wrong, please name some people in Congress that you think are farther left than the ones I named. (Oops I should have mentioned Al Franken in my original post but even he is not THAT far left of Obama)."

    Raul Grijalva
    Keith Ellison
    Maxine Waters
    Linda Sanchez
    Alan Grayson
    Bernie Sanders (not a Dem but caucuses with them).

    That was too easy.

  • evansrichdm west jordan , UT
    Jan. 7, 2014 12:52 p.m.

    I will admit limited government is winner with getting my vote. Less government means taking care of myself and family, less government getting into my own busieness and real winner is less taxes needed to run it.

    All those that think government can take care of everything please read the history of Europe in the late 80s and early 90s.

  • FT salt lake city, UT
    Jan. 7, 2014 12:58 p.m.

    Bungalow
    One other fact about Reagan, that Congress actually spent less money than he requested in 5 out of the 8 years he submitted a budget. Reagan was not a fiscal conservative, he actually was a propenent of deficit spending.

  • Open Minded Mormon Everett, 00
    Jan. 7, 2014 1:32 p.m.

    bungalow
    SALT LAKE CITY, UT

    FT
    salt lake city, UT

    =========

    Shhh,
    Don't rattle them up,
    That's like telling children that there really is not a Santa Claus, Easter Bunny or Tooth Fairy.

    FYI --
    As a much younger moderate, center right Republican,
    Ronald Reagan was the last Republican I voted for as a Republican.

    [I wrote in and voted for Jon M. Huntsman Jr. last election,
    he was by far the most like Reaganesque....and look what the GOP did to him!]

  • snowyphile Jemez Springs, NM
    Jan. 7, 2014 1:41 p.m.

    It's about time.

  • Schnee Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 7, 2014 1:43 p.m.

    @canvas1
    "it looks like you are another beltway republican who still does not understand why McCain and Romney both lost and why the 2010 midterms were such a republican success. "

    You are totally correct, the Republican party needs to be even more conservative if it's going to win elections. I'm certainly not just saying that because I'm a progressive and want you to nominate more Akin/Mourdock/Angle/O'Donnell types.

  • heavyhitter Lehi, UT
    Jan. 7, 2014 2:44 p.m.

    This is one of the most slanted, biased articles I've ever written in the DesNews. Stop publishing articles from this so-called writer, Kathleen Parker.

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    Jan. 7, 2014 3:08 p.m.

    On word "OBAMACARE". As 2014 rolls along and people begin to get cancellation notices from their employers dropping their insurance by the millions you are going to see a volcano of anger toward Democrats. There is no escape. No cute little jingle on the radio. No snappy campaign slogan. Nothing can save the Democrats from Obamacare. The reason - Obamacare is reaching into the wallets of all classes of people and cutting their work hours to boot. Because of Obamacare families will not be able to aford that new car or take that vacation or perhaps even keep their home period. Because of Obamacare people are going to be losing their doctors and getting denials for needed surgery. Because of Obamacare both parents will have to return to work and the list goes on... This is ONE reality that the Democrats can't escape from ...not this time. Barack the liar will be on everyones mind especially when they remember what good insurance they used to have. Yes a large number of registered Democrats are dumb and ignorant but the young ones now are feeling the pain of Obamacare which is a game changer....the 800lb gorilla in the room.

  • JoeCapitalist2 Orem, UT
    Jan. 7, 2014 3:09 p.m.

    @demz taters

    Anyone can throw out names like Maxine Waters or Bernie Sanders and say "too easy". That doesn't mean that Obama and the others don't mostly agree with their leftist positions on important policy matters.

    Since that was so easy for you...please name a couple of policies that those on your list have tried to promote and Obama said something like "Nope. Can't support that. It is just too left for me."

  • KJB1 Eugene, OR
    Jan. 7, 2014 7:27 p.m.

    Joe Capitalist2 3:09 p.m.

    *Single-payer health care
    *Immediate withdrawal from Afghanistan and Iraq
    *Prosecuting Wall Street for their part in the economic collapse
    *Raising the income cap on Social Security

    As he said, all too easy.

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    Jan. 7, 2014 9:48 p.m.

    @KJB1... let me join in too.... Obama has....

    * Allowed the carrying of loaded personal weapons in 30 national parks
    * Extended the war on terrorism to Somalia and the African continent
    * Expanded use of drones to to go after terrorist in the middle east
    * Kept Guantanamo Bay open
    * included tax cuts in his stimulus package
    * temporarily extended Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthy two years
    * there are currently more active producing oil leases on federal land now (23,306) than there were even under any Republican administration.
    * Obama administration is approving over 4,300 new oil leases a year, second only to Bush and double the average of all previous presidents.
    ..... the list continues on.....

    So either Joe Capitalist just isn't paying attention.... or just doesn't want to see this stuff because it doesn't match the constant blathered rhetoric from the media. I do not agree with all Obama has done, but the level of false and frankly outlandish claims by some make it hard to not look like you are defending him.

  • RichardB Murray, UT
    Jan. 7, 2014 10:13 p.m.

    Interesting. Another article I read pointed out that 7 out of the eight democratic senators that were venerable are in states won by Romney.

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 7, 2014 10:36 p.m.

    'Another article I read pointed out that 7 out of the eight democratic senators that were venerable are in states won by Romney.'

    Did Romney win the 2012 election…?

  • canvas1 San Tan Valley, AZ
    Jan. 8, 2014 1:20 a.m.

    When TARP was first voted on there was not one republican who voted for it and the dow jones went down 500 points because market felt if it passed that was money that would end up in wall street's hands (exactly what the market has been doing with QE1, QE2 and QE3) and they didn't get it. They arm-twisted a few republicans and voted again and passed it. Market down over 3000 in a week. Why? Next day Jim Cramer, a democrat even, put up a sign on his show on CNBC and said we are now communist because he knew what this government intrusion and huge shift away from free markets really meant to the economy.

    Our economy would collapse if the fed immediately stopped its program of 85 bil (QE3) per month of bond purchases. There is no recovery if we still need that lifeline. In the meantime, we go further in debt and our currency becomes worth less and less

    Bush started the bailouts with our tax money and Obama who, by the way, has been surrounded by communists and far-leftists his whole life quadrupled down on that pathway to Greece.

    Hello Tea Party!

  • high school fan Huntington, UT
    Jan. 8, 2014 6:49 a.m.

    It is true, this year could be brutal for Republicans. But what word could we use to describe what it is going to be for Democrats. Disastrous comes to mind.
    More than anything, this year could and should be bad for incumbents. This country would probably be far better off without professional politicians. Sometimes term limits looks really good.

  • m.g. scott clearfield, UT
    Jan. 8, 2014 8:58 a.m.

    What year is she talking about. Did Parker run across some piece from 2008?

  • JoeCapitalist2 Orem, UT
    Jan. 8, 2014 9:44 a.m.

    KJB1 and UtahBlueDevel:

    Just because Obama has not been successful in pushing through every single left-wing agenda item that he is in favor of, does not mean he doesn't still support them.

    Take single-payer for health care. Obama has publicly stated many times that he is in favor of such a system. Liberals insists that the reason we have Obamacare instead of full-blown government health care (single-payer) is because the GOP opposed it and the current disaster was some kind of "compromise" with conservatives.

    In reality, the reason we don't have single-payer is because too many DEMOCRATS opposed it. Obamacare did not need or get a single GOP vote. There was no one to compromise with except members of his own party. If Obama had the support of all the Democrats that voted for Obamacare to also vote for single-payer, we would have it now.

    The same goes with most of the other tax and war policies you described. If Obama had the votes within his own party when the Democrats controlled both houses of Congress, those things would have happened already.

  • Mexican Ute mexico, 00
    Jan. 8, 2014 9:43 a.m.

    Here is how I see the 2014 and 2016 elections shaping up, considering we are still a long way away from November...

    The Democrats will win anywhere from 25 to 50 seats in the House of Representatives (my best guess is 40), and from 2 to 5 seats in the Senate (my best guess is 3).

    There will be several current Republicans seen as too moderate by the base, that will be sacked in the primaries, and replaced with Tea Party favorites. Even leaders like Boehner and McConnell are quite vulnerable.

    The media will look at the Tea Party candidates who will almost assuredly say some stupid stuff like O'Donnell and Akin. There might be another Ted Cruz or two that do get elected but they will be from deep red states. I don't see a Tea Partier winning ANY states that are blue or purple or even moderately red...to be continued

  • Mexican Ute mexico, 00
    Jan. 8, 2014 10:28 a.m.

    Another reason I see the Democrats winning is while the Democrats have been hit by Obamacare, the Republicans are also going to get hit over the government shutdown. Gallup polling confirms this in the fact that though the number of Democrats has fallen, the number of Republicans has fallen even further, to its historic low in the polling. Independents however are climbing, nearly at 50 percent in the last quarter.

    The Republicans have messed up governance and that is the reason why the Democrats are in power. The Democrats are messing it up even worse than the Republicans did under Bush, though this won't be evident until 2015 when the economy takes a nosedive.

    So to recap: My predictions for this election are DEM +35 to +40 in the House and DEM+3 or +4 in the Senate in 2014.

    This will set up a very interesting 2016 in which a Third Party will have the chance of replacing the Republican Party. The Republicans will become as the Whigs...

  • happy2bhere clearfield, UT
    Jan. 8, 2014 2:11 p.m.

    Mexican Ute

    Polls already show most Americans do not even remember something called a government shutdown. And that will only get worse for you guys in the coming months. Meanwhile, Obamacare will continue to be the gift that keeps on giving to the Republicans.

    My prediction, Republicans easily hold the House, and pick up a couple in the Senate, though probably not a majority.

    No one is going to replace the Republican Party. What will be replaced is more of the Republican door mats who bow down to the Democrats like they are suffering from Stockholm syndrome. The Republicans are now finding some who will fight for their principles, like Democrats do, instead of give in and call it a victory. Those are the Republicans who are scaring the mainstream media and Democrat Party the most. Kind of like Reagan did back in the 1970s.

  • canvas1 San Tan Valley, AZ
    Jan. 8, 2014 2:39 p.m.

    Mexican Ute, a little bit of history. When Reagan and Congress deadlocked they shut down the government multiple times and the democrats led the charge. Did it damage the democrats politically? No!

    When Gingrich drew the line in the sand against Clinton and neither budged the government was shut down. Did it hurt the republicans this time? No! Though you would have thought it had by the media's take on it, but in the next election the republicans lost a few seats in the House and and GAINED two senate seats. Then we got Clinton to finally come to the table on welfare reform. Again, how did it hurt the republicans? Again, it didn't.

    You have bought in to the media tactic, that unfortunately the republican establishment have as well, that shut downs are bad. Yes, it hurts a few people for a short period, but politics is a game of poker and the democrats have gotten the republicans to blink and fold even before they sit down at the table because they are conditioned to worry more about what the media might say about them.

    In the meantime, we lose our country

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    Jan. 8, 2014 6:56 p.m.

    @joe Capitalist... you argument is flimsy at best. For example you state "Take single-payer for health care. Obama has publicly stated many times that he is in favor of such a system." If that were the case - who stopped him? It surely wasn't the Republicans because what was passed was done without any "conservative" support. If he wanted single payer... we would have pushed for it... and gotten it because he didn't need to have across the isle support. How many times have we heard he didn't compromise..... from the conservative side? If he didn't compromise, then he got what he wanted. You can't argue it both ways.

    You are seriously saying the plan he has undertaken in the war in the middle east is because he was compromising to moderate liberals? Talk about creating a narrative to match ones one beliefs. That the drone attacks were to appease moderate liberals?

  • canvas1 San Tan Valley, AZ
    Jan. 8, 2014 8:06 p.m.

    UtahBlueDevil, you are not thinking like a politician as Obama did. He hast the end game of a single payer, but stated several years ago in a speech to a union group it will take several years. Because to push for it up front he never would have got all the democrats to bite into it.

    In the meantime, I would like anybody to tell me what good Obamacare has done so far. And for anyone who answers your answer has to outweigh the negative it has caused so far. Because we at least know the bullet selling points Obama sold it on we're not only not right but were knowingly lied about. Anyone...help me out here. I am all ears.