I wrote that it would likely only be the people "on the fence" and I have no idea what % of people vote along party lines, what % know who they are voting for years before the election, or any other numbers.

Lincoln and hypotheticals aside

I am interested to see where immigration in the GOP goes. It's the easiest major issue to flip flop on and it has quite a bit of long term upside. The GOP is getting tugged on from what seems like every direction, even though the majority of the nation doesn't support quite a few of their tugs. They just can't be on the wrong side of this many major issues and expect to be gaining national support(even without a dying base). Something has got to give.

Again fly, you need to read my posts. The bet was on valid if he ran against the next white male presidential candidate. Hillary does not qualify as a man.

How is that a code? What is the code? Who cracked it?

...and I'm lost.

That's racist, bro.

Wait so black people would vote for Hillary but against Biden? Now I'm really confused about what you think drives black voters.

Black people love Joe Biden. I bet some black people might stay home for Hillary if there is any lingering butthurt over the way some Hillary supporters went hard in 2008. Biden would take >45 states against Cain.

That is also racist no one loves Biden.

bahbahmickey- I don't think you realize how much of the liberal media(and I mean the actual, honest-to-god liberal media, not the scare quotes "liberal" media) is focused on laughing at how Republicans are racist.

The voter ID is a good example. The message that black people got from that was that the GOP wanted to suppress the black vote. Right now the black liberal twitter/blogosphere is blowing up about the Virginia congressional district electoral vote scheme.

They know you don't like black people.

The GOP needs to be the fiscal conservative party and take no official positions on any social issue.

This is, for example, an actual solution. If you do that, you're going to lose some social conservatives. Not to the Ds, but they'll stay home or vote third party.

Basically, the story of 2008->present is the GOP made a calculated(hopefully calculated, at least) attempt to capture the right wing fringe at the expense of the center. That can work. It worked in 2010, but failed in 2012.

So they can try to pivot back to the center. But it will cost them. Rather than trying to steal a D constituency, I think they need a way to reach out to some group of non-voters. One very real issue that the Tea Party left is that by branding the GOP as the angry white male party, Latinos and Asians have learned that they are Democrats and are going to adopt D views on social issues.

Remember when everybody briefly concern trolled about how Obama coming out in favor of gay marriage was gonna cost him black votes? Instead it went the other way. People form their own opinions on their top priority issues, but on ancillary stuff that doesn't affect them as personally they LEARN what their opinion is from the tribe.

That's not particularly racist.

So, ok, the only black people who vote along racial lines are those on the fence. Fine. But you still think black people will line up at >50% for Cain. Why would they do this for Cain specifically against a white guy, but not for Cain against a black guy? If Cain is such a good candidate, shouldn't he at least be able to pull 45% of the black vote were he to run against a black candidate? I mean, only a small amount of black people vote based on race, right? It certainly sounds like you're only talking about a small portion of the black vote.

And similarly, why wouldn't a white GOP candidate be able to get 40ish% of the black vote against a white candidate? We have lots of recent examples of this (Kerry, Gore, Clinton, Dukakis), and you know that their opponents couldn't get even 30% of the black vote. But somehow you think Cain will be the one to convince black voters en masse? Why is that? is Cain a much more compelling candidate than George W. Bush was in 2000? What about his ideas and policy proposals makes him able to gain 20 points or more of the black vote?

"Whatever it takes to distracts them" is the motto isn't it?

Don't try to insinuate that I don't like any race.

Agreed!

Taking no position on any social issue will not fly in the GOP primary process, nor will it fly during the presidential debates, nor will it fly when what few Dem special interests are left start running their anti right wing ads, because their only recouse then would be to stand silent.

Thing is, with almost every well known GOPer out there now, who is a conceivable candidate, they've all already put their feet in the mouth on one issue or another, usually within the context of demagoguing against Obamacare, or Obama's reelection, or the debt ceiling. So they can't just take "no official position now", because their previous words will be used against them as a cudgel.

Ah yes, racism from the GOP is a "distraction." People taking away your right to vote is a "distraction." Listen up, black people. Stop listening to these noise machines talking about taking away your right to vote. Focus on the real issues here: taxes on rich people might go up unless you do something.

Nope. That is NOT what I said. I said that the only people that would vote because of race or sex is a person that is on the fence. That is NOT the same as saying everyone on the fence will vote by his race or sex.

Yes, I think if Cain runs he wins. I think the black vote will be closer against another black guy, but Cain wins either way no matter the race of his foe. However, I am more willing to bet if he is against the next white male dem candidate.

OK, why will Cain get so much more of the black vote than Bush did against Kerry?

What?!?

I am not saying GOPs being racist is a distraction I am saying labeling all GOPs as racist was a (very successful) distraction.

When 5 people, who claim to be from a party of 150,000,000, say racist or near racist things I don't think it is responsible journalism to spend 80% of your time talking about those 5 people for the 6 months leading up to the election.

I think he has the charisma and I think he will be well liked in the black community. I can't give exact examples of why he will I can just give you my prediction. This coming from the same guy that predicted that Tim Tebow would do very well in the catholic community.

It's not just 5 people saying racist things. And yes, it was the GOP actually being racist. When a Democrat says racist things, he gets rebuked. When Bill O'Reilly goes on the air on Fox and says that lazy minorities wanting free stuff from the government was the reason Obama won, everyone just nodded in agreement, and he still has a job. Furthermore, the actions of entire state governments in FL, OH, PA, AZ and others to marginalize non-whites and limit their capacity to vote was blatant racism by more than just a few specific individuals.

Republicans don't seem to get it. The financial elites that run the party don't endorse bat**** insane social views because they agree with them, its because a large majority of the country does not endorse right-wing economic policy and so they have to pull voters in from somewhere else. Social crazies are the best such group because of the intensity of their craziness (they'll by and large ignore other policies they don't like or that are against their interests) and the sheer number of people (there are a **** ton of really religious white people). Now, the number of such people is shrinking in relative terms, but as others have said you can't just abandon them because, well, without them you get like 20% of the vote.

Basically, the GOP is trapped. It can't win nationally with the crazy wingnut teabagger contingent, but it can't win without them either. And it is a huge long term negative that in GOP strongholds, primaries are crazy-offs. Because when these clowns get to Washington normal people are like wait, what, no way in hell am I voting GOP for anything.

Herman Cain didn't have enough charisma to survive a Republican primary filled with nothing but deeply flawed candidates. Rick Santorum performed better than Herman Cain.

Here is a good explanation of why the GOP is not going to win over a majority of the black community, no matter who their candidate is (as long as their actual policies and governing philosophy are what they have been for the last couple of decades):

http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/01/opinio...ves/index.html

It's because the conservatives actually believe that blacks, as a class, are stupid enough to vote based on who they see someone "mingling with", in the face of what they already know about those candidates. Just another case of plantation pandering, like trying to convince blacks in Virginia that their radical, unconstitutional attempt at back door redistricting is all designed for the benefit of black people, since it will result in one district (of 14) that is gerrymandered to ensure Virginia has one black congressman (and only one, ever).

GOP needs to completely alter the way they decide nominees in order to be a contender in 2016 and after.

Iowa being the first contest in the nominating process is self-sabotaging, a bible thumper who alienates non-evangelicals is always gonna win there.

They need to come up with something where people like Jon Huntsman have a shot. Could be a new order of contests, could be some other idea.

Well, it seems to me they should have way more open primaries, and vote in open primary states first. Surely someone in charge realizes the degree to which they are totally ****ing themselves with the current nominating process.