Over three years ago on this blog (actually it was my other blog on here) I wrote about my belief that the modern Republican Party looked to be fading away into one of the parties of the past. I have changed my mind on that to an extent.
While the Republican Party is still a viable and strong political party at the state level the national party is, simply put, in shambles.
One only needs to look at the last four elections to see the trend. In the 2000 and 2004 elections Latino support for George W. Bush was relatively high, mostly because of his stance on immigration which was similar to the stance of Democrats. Since that time the Republican Party has taken a much tougher stance on immigration (both candidates of the Republican Party in 2008 and 2012 favored the tougher stances). In both elections that was met with Latinos voting for Obama.
Latinos are not the only group that Republicans have to worry about going on from here. Over the last four years they have managed to alienate the African-American voting block, the Asian voting block, the women voting block, the LGBT voting block, and young voting block. It should be telling that the only voting block that Romney won (when looking at age and race) were white Americans aged 49 and up. He lost every other single category. Romney won (with about 7%) men but the majority of that voting block was the older white males.
There is a very serious disconnect between the national Republican voter and the American population. I wondered, on Facebook, before Hurricane Sandy made landfall whether or not this would be the October surprise. National Republicans tend to think that Sandy threw Romney off his momentum. But those who look at averages and trend lines (yes I am one of them) knew that Romney's momentum had actually stopped shortly after the Vice-Presidential debate.
The national Republican Party has a serious issue. Instead of looking inward at themselves as to why they lost what should have been a cake walk Presidential election they are blaming anyone and anything outside the party for their loss. That is extremely short sighted on their part.
If they can not figure out a way to play to the minority groups in this country they are looking at very possibly losing not only the 2016 election but several elections into the future.
I am not suggesting that they should completely abandon all of their social causes and beliefs but they need to figure out a way to convince voters that their views are the correct ones without looking like wingnuts.
Case in point. During this year's run up to the election, five different Republicans voiced their opinions concerning rape and abortion. The common thread for all of them was that even in cases of rape women should not be allowed to have abortions. All five candidates lost their races. Two of them, Akin in Missouri and Mourdock in Indiana, were in races long considered to be easy pick ups for the Republicans. Both candidates lost by large numbers.
The Tea Party contingent of the Republican Party lost all but one of it's candidates this election, with Michelle Bachmann barely holding up in a strong Republican leaning district.
The one thing that should be noted about election day. Every time one of the Obama campaign staffers was interviewed they were confident. They knew they had the numbers from a very early point. The Romney team, however, were hopeful. The Obama campaign could possibly one of the best teams ever assembled. They took a president that hovered around fifty percent approval, weak but improving employment numbers and guided him to a victory.
The bottom line here is Obama should not have won this election or at the very least should have won by very few electoral votes. Instead he won by a landslide (Remember that Karl Rove predicted a landslide for Romney with 325 Electoral Votes and
if Florida ever gets finished counting the votes and the state goes for Obama, he will top that number with 332 Obama won with 332).
As I stated several times in many blogs I never thought publicly that this was going to be a close election (privately, however, I had let myself believe the media theme that it was not only going to be close but there was a high likelihood that Obama would win the Electoral College while Romney would win the overall). The averages and trend lines just did not support that media claim. In the end, one of the most lambasted and raked over people, Nate Silver, got it 100% correct. He missed one race this year. He picked the Republicans to win the House seat in North Dakota (92.5% probability) and the Democratic candidate ended up winning.
Now, of course, it is time to move onto the next presidential election in 2016. The two front
leaders runners for the Democrats are Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton. I have a strong feeling that one of them will run but not both. The Republican field will be extremely wide open once again in 2016. Two things are for certain Romney will not be there and neither will John McCain. So that leaves a few early candidates: Jeb Bush (who by all accounts has no interest in running for political office), Marco Rubio (Bush's protege), Mike Huckabee, Chris Christie (assuming he wins re-election in 2014), Bobby Jindal, and Rand Paul. At this point I am not convinced that Paul Ryan will seek the nomination.
As an aside I would very much like to pat myself on the back for correctly saying that Obama would get 332 Electoral Votes (of course I am assuming that Obama will win Florida).