Establishment Repubs have for 30 years used the Evangelicals to win elections, but only in the red states have they enacted the Evangelicals' social programs.
I would like to believe that a Drumpf loss in November, with luck accompanied by a shift from Red to Blue in the Senate, would force a serious reevaluation of tactics, strategy, and overall focus on the part of the Republican party. The problem is that the experience of 2012 fomented a similar if superficial examination and resulted not just no moderation but a move not just to the right but into genuine batshit territory in the nomination of an utterly unqualified candidate for the presidency.
The level of radicalization of the GOP is beginning to make me wonder what kind of cataclysm will cause them to finally wake up and smell the electoral votes ... or whether the party of the right is headed for disintegration and dissolution.
Daniel, what I suspect is happening is that politics has become less about ideology than it has about winning. If the GOP lines up to any degree with Drumpf, it's because they think they can win and unseat the Democrats ... and they are willing to back ANYONE whom they think can accomplish that. That he has no qualifications and increasingly no chance of actually winning almost doesn't matter. Drumpf projects the idea that he CAN win and people follow him because no other viable choice (in their jaundiced opinions) has been presented.
This is the final product of an unwillingness to reach across the aisle, to compromise and acknowledge that "politics is the art of the possible," rather than the demand of getting my way with a cherry on top. What is really frightening is that until we can lose the absolutism and the polarization which has crippled governance in the US and get back to the above-mentioned art, this crap could conceivably go on without end.
When Hillary wins the presidency, just watch all the things the rep will make up. Just like Obama when he first took over , they accused him of everything. I don't think these people have a conscience . The reps get paid for serving the nation and all they do is stand in the way of everything. The big thing is they are infiltrated by the evangelic dead brains and push their paranoid ideas onto all of us. The reps are an attempt to change us all to religious freaks.
They'll decide their problem was that their candidate wasn't conservative enough and go from there.
I hope they implode!
Amen! (In the original sense of "What she said! Hear, hear! I believe it!" No spooks needed.)
I also hope that a powerful truly progressive political party emerges, in whose light current Democrats will be seen as parochial and backwards. Reforming our voting system to eliminate the Republocrat duopoly might be necessary.
GC, I've not heard of range voting before, but so far, I like it.
Grinning Cat, I like you pin! I could happily wear one. As to alternatives Rep. or Dem, I would go for the solvers of problems facing not only the individual but the nation and the Earth.
1. climate change
2. off of fossil fuels
3. conversion to sustainable energy
4. election finance reform
5. food, education, health care for everyone
6. negotiation, compromise, every treaty and legislation a win/win
7. rely on U.N. to take on abuses of peaceful problem-solving and conflict resolution
I know, I am a utopian thinker, and that does not mean to ignore what I think.
I understand that California has changed the rules of primary elections to penalize batshit crazy parties, such as the GOP slowly became after 1960 as it expelled moderate Repubs.
In a primary election, the two candidates who get the most votes will compete in the general election--even when the two are both Dems (or both Repubs).
Several other states may have done the same.
That just happened here in WA. I forget which office, but after the primary the two candidates competing in the general are Rs.