GOP's new diversity push

[qrayjack]

GOP's new diversity push - By ALEXANDER BURNS, POLITICO

After two successive elections that have exposed the Republican Party to ridicule for its lack of diversity and narrow demographic appeal, the GOP suddenly finds itself with an unexpected bounty.

From the West Coast to the East Coast, in some of the smallest and largest states in the nation, the party is currently fielding an unusually diverse crop of serious statewide candidates drawn from the seemingly endless list of constituencies the GOP lost in 2008—notably women, Latinos, African Americans, Asian Americans and young people.

Electing just a few of these prospects would give the party a dramatic facelift and go a long way toward addressing its long-running diversity deficit, though it may not alter any of the underlying ideas that may be contributing to the gap.

MORE (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0909/26787.html)

Diverse, yes. Conservative? Hmmm.

[Charie]

Electing just a few of these prospects would give the party a dramatic facelift and go a long way toward addressing its long-running diversity deficit, though it may not alter any of the underlying ideas that may be contributing to the gap.

Emphasis mine

This sounds to me like a slap at Republicans for their bigoted, sexist, racist, homophobic ways.

Can't these :jacka: sses ever just report news without getting their personal opinions in? Politico ought to just print at the top of their articles "OPINION PIECE" by a Lefty.

After two successive elections that have exposed the Republican Party to ridicule for its lack of diversity and narrow demographic appeal, the GOP suddenly finds itself with an unexpected bounty.

Only in San Francisco, New York and Washington was ridicule heard and from who? I leave it to your imagination.


Other candidates, such as prosecutor Susana Martinez, who is running for governor in New Mexico, must navigate potentially crowded primaries.

I'm sure the Democrats would push her to the front of the line in the name of diversity instead of having her fight her own way through so we can make sure we have the best candidate. It's why the Dems end up with Charlei Rangle, that paragon of virtue, and Gwen Moore, that shining light of logic.

Way down towards the end of the article they do mention Lynn Swan, Michael Steele and Ken Blackwell. No mention of Bobby Jindal. OR Michelle Bachman!

"Every event we go to, the event organizer tells us it's the biggest event they've had, but I have to close the deal," Penry said. "I think Sarah Palin created tremendous enthusiasm because she was new and didn't necessarily close the deal with a lot of people."

Please someone, translate for me. I hate politicspeak. What deal is he closing and what deal didn't Sarah Palin close?

I hear echoes of the Democrat party in this statement. Penry is falling all over himself saying that we need new faces, young, female, different ethnic backgrounds and how wonderful he, himself, is, then comes out and takes a back-handed slap at Palin. Way to go, guy! I hate hearing this from a viable Republican candidate right away. It sounds as though they're buying into Democrat beliefs and lies.

Or is he insinuating because she ran for VP she's now old hat?

Looking at all the O.F.s in Congress now like Robert Byrd, Arlen Specter and others Sarah , by comparison, couldn't be old hat until she was in for at least 20 years.

Extremely biased article, not that I actually expected anything else from Politico.

[Terri]

Penry is running for governor of Colorado. He seems like a nice young conservative, 33 yrs. old, State Senate minority leader, but so far I'm going with the guy I know best, former Congressman Scott McInnis. They are both caucasian, btw.

Penry could still convince me though.

I'm also watching a new guy for Senate. He is young and and has a real world record of experience as well as some minor political experience. He's very conservative and happens to be black. I say happens to be, because it is of no importance to me either way.

What matters is where he stands on issues. So far, he he seems to believe in limited government, financial responsibility and a few other important issues. If he convinces me he believes those important things MORE than the other guys do, he will get my vote in the primary.

If, he can teach more minorities about conservatism because of the color of his skin, that is good, but first we have to be sure that whoever we choose to run for the Senate seat has the right stuff.

Btw, I think close the deal means convincing enough people that you have what it takes.

Once in awhile Politico does some decent reporting but most of it has a noticeable leftwing bias.

[Charie]

Terri, can you find out if he really thinks Sarah Palin is out of contention because he thinks she can't convince enough people she has what it takes?

I'm sorry, but hearing that makes me think he's paying too much attention to the Dems and bigwigs in the Republican Party.

[Terri]

I don't think I've heard him mention Sarah.

Would it put me on your horror list if I tell you I'm not sure Sarah Palin can convince enough people? Probably will, but so be it. I'm not at all sure she can overcome what has been done to her, so I'm not going to penalize a candidate who isn't sure either.

I can tell you that Josh Penry said he would follow Jindal and Palin's lead in refusing stimulus money for Colorado if he were governor.

He's running on limited government, lower taxes and personal responsiblity.

That's more important to me than what he thinks of Palin's chances to be president.

[qrayjack]

"I think Sarah Palin created tremendous enthusiasm because she was new and didn't necessarily close the deal with a lot of people." This sentence doesn't make sense to me, unless he meant to say 'but didn't necessarily close the deal'.

But I agree that is sounds like the liberal version. If he really means 'Sarah Palin created tremendous enthusiasm because she was new' then he doesn't know his butt from a bass fiddle. It wasn't her 'newness,' Sarah Palin conveys that special realness, honesty and charisma that resonates with conservatives.

[Terri]

"I think Sarah Palin created tremendous enthusiasm because she was new and didn't necessarily close the deal with a lot of people."
Sarah was new and generated excitement. Penry is new and also generating excitement in this state. Sarah didn't get elected. Penry intends to get elected. Pretty simple stuff. If that offends you, that's just silly.

Any logical conservative voter would give more weight to his desire to emulate Palin and Jindal on the stimulus money, than they would to an acknowledgment of the fact that Palin isn't currently VP, but there you go.

But it doesn't matter.

Penry is running for governor of Colorado and Colorado Republicans will decide between him and McInnis, two good conservatives, either one of whom will be far better than the inept Bill Ritter.

[qrayjack]

Pretty simple stuff. If that offends you, that's just silly.I don't know where I gave the impression that I was offended. I was just trying to figure out where Penry was coming from. Frankly I know next to nothing about these candidates, and would only hope that they have principles as strong as Palin's.

[schillerbjr]

The Politico is a "lefty" website. The GOP should stick with "CONSERVATISM".

Reagan won landslides in 1980 & 1984. Let us return to that model!

[MamaCat]

Reagan won landslides in 1980 & 1984. Let us return to that model!

:yes:

[feniangirl]

Sarah didn't get elected. Actually McCain didn't get elected. She was his running mate and very likely one reason he got as many votes as he did. If we could have voted for her alone, things might have been different!

BTW, I've never really noticed the problem with that type of diversity in the GOP. The problem I notice is the $$$ diversity. Sure there are fund raisers and that's the purpose of $2500 a plate dinners. However, there's never access if you are the ones giving all those little $100, $50 or $25 contributions. All they do is wear out your phone line asking for more - on a daily basis. They only care what you think when they are trying to get their candidate for POTUS elected.

I'm over that. The RNC can forget it. Just like Congress, they forgot who they work for (or maybe not). Anyway, no more money from me. I do not answer my phone. And if I have money to give away, I give it to the individual candidates I believe in. Penry may prove to be one of those.

Otherwise, idiots like Olympia Snowe end up sharing in my hard earned money and I am having none of that! Prior to supporting anyone, I am vetting them myself.

[Terri]

McCain/Palin was not elected. If you can somehow explain what national office Palin now holds then maybe I can agree with you that it was only McCain who didn't get elected.

Remember, Sarah knew as well as we did, who and what John McCain was and is, and she chose to say yes. No one twisted her arm and forced her to run with a RINO. Had they won, she would be his VP now and she would be upholding his RINO policies. That's what VPs do and it's something to think about. She was obviously willing to do it when she accepted the spot on the ticket.

I may well vote for Sarah Palin someday, IF she runs for something, IF she holds the most conservative position on the most issues and IF she is electable. I like her, I recognize her strengths but I'm not blind. I know what she would have had to support as McCain's VP and I know she was willing, or she would have said no thanks. Think about it.

I will not be joining a personality cult for any candidate.

That's what Obamnites do, not thinking conservatives.

[greg]

I will not be joining a personality cult for any candidate.

That's what Obamnites do, not thinking conservatives.

Absolutely.

And that thinking being about our conservative stances and why, whether they be social, economic, constitutional, defense, or any other, and about the liberal stances as they are defined by practice nowadays and why, as well as why the liberals keep changing their single word descriptive, e.g., "progressive."

Then we conservatives teach the teachable "liberals" about the thinking that leads to responsible freedom over their emoting that leads to dependent slavehood to those who are no better.

Parentage and degree of suntan would be irrelevant (except to the emoting thoughtless ones).

The demonstrated ability to think along with character and holding accountable those willing to represent us in republican government is relevant.

[RiverKing]

Terri:

Is there an idea for a poll somewhere in this thread? The questions would be:

1. Did you vote for McCain/Palin because McCain was on the ticket?

2. Did you vote for McCain/Palin because Palin was on the ticket?

You could also cast those questions in the negative as:

1. Did you vote for McCain/Palin in spite of McCain being on the ticket?

2. Did you vote for McCain/Palin in spite of Palin being on the ticket?

No, because of the small sample, these questions wouldn't determine anything or be indicative. But the results might be interesting.

[Bob Honiker]

McCain should just go away, and take his dizzy daughter with him!