This article oddly gives no attention to how Republicans should win votes. Cooperating with Democrats would assist the other party in retaining its current seats and could easily lead to primaries in which representatives are displaced.

Consider, many representatives come from very conservative districts. If they vary much from the politics of those who elected them, they can be pushed out in a primary or defeated by Democrats who run as Republicans. That's happened many times before; even a Democratic President managed to do so.

And agreeing that Democrats have great ideas which need only a little modification will appeal to no one as a reason to displace Democrats. Better to heighten the impression that Democrats have bad, damaging ideas.

Especially now. President Obama has continued many ideas originated during President Bush's terms, and those ideas are unpopular even though they work. He has attempted to differentiate himself by raising liberal ideas, hoping to approve some sort of compromise, and in every case those ideas have aggrieved or frightened people.

Health care is mainly a threat to what people have now, in the view of many. Global warming, in which people do not believe (with justification) is being used as a reason for apparently costly and damaging government efforts. The stimulus didn't put out enough money fast enough to make a good impression. In foreign affairs, the President has been the opposite of assertive, aggravating people who believe in the righteousness in the US and encouraging those the US might be expected to oppose. All without any successes.

With the President falling flat on every effort, why should Republicans announce they are coming to the rescue or to share in his rejected beliefs? Why not expect that people will return to the viewpoints which elected Republicans in the past? Those views that led to consideration of a permanent Republican majority undermined only by a financial cataclysm.

I suggest the way to consider what the best Repulican strategy should not include whether you agree or disagree with Republican ideas, or with the people who accept them. Instead, look at it from the standpoint of advantage/disadvantage. From that angle, aren't Republicans now doing the right things?

From that angle, aren't Republicans now doing the right things?

Well from my angle, the Republicans are doing all the right things. Mainly they're falling off the planet.

The country is getting more liberal, younger, and less white. OTOH the Republicans are turning into a ridiculous party of ancient Colonel Mustards, saber rattling Confederate hat wearing freaks rooting and tooting around a musty attic on their way to the nursing home. By withdrawing from the health care debate, they've simply made themselves irrelevant. The health care bill that finally passes will be far more liberal and likely more effective than it would have been otherwise. They will have neither stopped it or modified it, and that's just not going to help them in elections. Their radicals will be angry, and will challenge in the primary, and their moderates will blow them off.

And as far as Obama 'falling down,' it's a bit early to count him out. Even if he falls down, it's hard to imagine a Palin or a Gingrich replacing him.

"You can't beat something with nothing, and the other side has something" – Jeb Bush

<link>

The most effective voting bloc in the country is likely seniors. They're self-interested and they vote in large numbers. Even though health insurance reform (health care reform is forgotten, no?!) does not affect them directly because they have Medicare, they're suspicious and will defend Medicare against those in government who will try to use it as a source of money to pay for other goals.

Any guesses what Republicans have to say about Medicare these days?

Yes, the elderly will disappear from the voter rolls some day. And 15 years from now, when they have, perhaps significant health care / insurance reform can be tried again. Though a new group of seniors who can see more clearly that Medicare and Medicaid are bankrupting governments will fight even more desperately.

People who grow up and have children and jobs and responsibilities tend to be less interested in extravagantly helping others. Money matters more.

And critiquing conservative voters as you do is reminiscent of the What's the matter with Kansas mentality. That's a self-justifying explanation for defeat. Eventually leads to the view once expressed on Slate that people shouldn't be allowed to vote because they are deluded, they have no intelligence, no knowledge, and too little interest. Are you already finding comfortable reasons for the Democrats losing their majority and the Presidency?

Yes, the other side has something: humiliating failure.

More seriously, remember Republicans holding up copies of their bills to reform the medical system?

The we-do-have-ideas defense hasn't worked yet. But the terms of the debate are still being set by Democrats, who are counter-acting their own proposals.

The Republicans might eventually be able to argue that their proposed legislation makes bigger changes than the Democrats' bills moving through Congress at that time.

Wouldn't that be something?!

Are you already finding comfortable reasons for the Democrats losing their majority and the Presidency?

The mid term elections are a whole year and one month from now. Obama isn't up until 2012. Health care reform hasn't been passed yet. The Republicans are still a minority in the Congress and have uphill battles for their upcoming senate seats.

You might want to wait just a bit before you start the victory party.

That's funny. I always thought the job of elected officials was to govern effectively and act in the best interest of their city, state, region, or nation. If your purpose in seeking an elected position is simply to get reelected and you deliberately tear down and hinder good ideas through dishonest rhetoric and cynical stalling efforts in order to gain political advantage you shouldn't run. In fact, your a traitor to your country, selling out its future for your own narrow ends.

Would you be surprised to learn that most politicians consider their re-election to be good for their "city, state, region, [and] nation"? That's why campaign money is needed and why districts are so closely correlated to party loyalty.

And would you be surprised to learn that most politians consider the opposing parties ideas to be wasteful and ineffective, while their own party's ideas are models of efficiency and cost-saving?

Those who "hinder ... ideas through ... rhetoric and ... stalling efforts" often believe they are doing their best work. That's called, being in opposition.

This is a government built to allow one faction to counter-balance another and produce ... nothing. That's part of the reason why Mr. Hershberg at the New Yorker is advocating a re-write of the Constitution. What he wants isn't happening.

You have to feel proud of a 230 year old document which can still frustrate people, no?!

Check the numbers for generic Republican vs generic Democrat in Congressional races. Check Obama's popularity.

Not bad for a party which had lost so much in the last two elections.

That's why it seemed reasonable to think your criticism of Republicans as demented was preparing for defeat. Best to wait, of course, but you'll agree there is suspense.

Dont' speak in generalities Philie. I and my wife, along with most of our friends, are "seniors" and we all support Obama's plan.

I bet that come the 2010 elections, the dems will pick up more seats as Americans are getting tired of the "Just say no" party of the republicons.

I remember them holding up blank pages and maybe a few of them showing off their checks from the insurance lobbyists, but I still have seen one singl republicon with a bill in his hand. If they have a bill why don't they publish it?

The generic dems or the generic repugs haven't decided any elections for quite some time. It has been the independents that elect people and so far they are still leaning in the democrat's way.Your 26% isn't going to win you anything.

Independents now favor Republicans.

The Wall Street Journal, September 24th:

For the first time, independent voters -- who delivered Mr. Obama the White House and Democrats control of Congress -- disapprove of the job he is doing, by 46% compared with the 41% who approve. In July, 49% of independents approved of the president, against 38% who disapproved.

New doubts about the president have coincided with new hopes for Republicans, who appeared flattened by the election nearly a year ago.

As the 2010 election cycle heats up, independent voters now favor Republican control of Congress by four percentage points.

Changing demographics: Some of the fastest growing ethnic groups do not have a vested interest in traditional American values such as self-responsibility and capitalism. It is much easier to vote to take others’ wealth than to earn their own. Democrats are simply pandering to those envious groups by showering them with money stolen from successful earners.

Both Aristotle and Plato thought that these actions will eventually make democracies unstable. When socialist greed, economic envy and class warfare replace sound economics and self-responsibility, the USA will be destroyed.

The Democrat solution to every problem is (1) More Government, (2) More Spending and (3) More Taxing.

White independents and moderates are moving to the right, so Obama is essentially racially polarizing the US, where the majority of white people support the Constitution and free markets, while Blacks, Latinos and Natives support redistributive taxation and the Nanny Welfare State.

Once Asians and realize that Affirmative Action is actually an all out assault on cultural success and individual work ethics, the majority of Asians will probably move to the right once they see how their earnings are assaulted by left-wingers.

Successful Anglos/White will be pitted against less successful Black/Latino; and Obama is bringing class and racial warfare to the forefront. Marxist equality is his goal, not liberty.

Of course I’m not saying all of any group. For example, 25% of whites are ignorant ideological socialists, Marxists and environmental (anti-human) redistributionist. So it’s all a mater of percentages, and democrats need to spread class warfare, economic envy and left-wing racial hatred to stay in power.

If you don't want to accept the results of the election, then there's no way in hell you support the Constitution.

As far as your thesis about who votes for Obama, you are full of shit--as you are with everything else. Check the NYT exit polls and you will see that Obama either won or tied all groups of voters making over $50,000. In fact, a careful comparison of the exit polls against the 2004 election will show that Obama likely won because of a surge of voters making over $100,000. Low income voters actually had lower turnout in 2008 than in 2004. So your notion that Obama's majority is based on low income voters is just the purest nonsense.