Would a party split benefit the Republicans?

[merithyn]

But it isn't just Republicans as in the elected officials but rather anyone who is voting for said officials.  The wider base aren't the ones who would do any of the things that you outline but are the reason that we have officials who are so uncompromising.

I disagree. I would argue that those in the base who are demanding it, are doing so because their leaders - the Republicans in office - aren't putting a stop to it. If a prominent, popular Republican came forward and said, "Look. In order to bring this country back to the top of the world economy, we need to work together to make it happen. We can't have a stagnant government anymore. We stand with our elected leader - whoever he or she is - and we will work together to make sure that we are fiscally responsible while we meet the needs of those who most need our help." then the base would balk at first, but it wouldn't take long for them to come around. Especially not if the majority of Republicans came forward and said, "Yeah, we agree."

For all of the gnashing of teeth about how Obama hasn't been a good leader by smashing into the Republican House, the Republicans use their party base as an excuse not to be useful leaders themselves. Quite frankly, while I disagree with how things have gone under Obama, at the end of the day, he did a lot of things his base didn't love but was the right thing to do under the circumstances. I just haven't seen that from the Republicans.

[garbon]

But it doesn't need to be a prominent position that were discussing but rather Republicans picked for smaller positions like state rep or members of state legislature (who might then go on for positions in senate or presidency).  After all, base has opportunity to pick good/better candidates during primary phase but it seems like they are not.

Additionally, if the base has a problem with the current leadership, why do they keep electing back the same individuals?

[lustindarkness]

A GOP split would bring a few too many Demo controled election cycles, but if the demos don't destroy the country completely in that time, we may get a more moderate three party system. I can always dream right?

[Neil]

Some RedState.com post-mortem frothing

Blame social conservatives if you must, but (A) you are lying to yourself and (B) if this is a fight you want to have, I'm happy to see you in the primaries in 2014. I like my chances.

So RedState is taking the stance that it is better to nominate ideologically pure candidates who lose by larger and larger margins every time?

Well, I guess if that's how they want to do it.

[Neil]

In fact, if you pull out black female voters, the Democrats and Republicans are tied among women. Are black women voting Democrat because they are women or in a consistent pattern with black voters in general.

And if you pull out black male voters, Republicans are well ahead among men. This is a pretty feeble attempt to explain away the gender gap.

Not really.  The Republicans can only get the votes that it is possible for them to get.  It is not possible for the Republicans to get the votes of racist blacks.

[Neil]

I disagree. I would argue that those in the base who are demanding it, are doing so because their leaders - the Republicans in office - aren't putting a stop to it. If a prominent, popular Republican came forward and said, "Look. In order to bring this country back to the top of the world economy, we need to work together to make it happen. We can't have a stagnant government anymore. We stand with our elected leader - whoever he or she is - and we will work together to make sure that we are fiscally responsible while we meet the needs of those who most need our help." then the base would balk at first, but it wouldn't take long for them to come around. Especially not if the majority of Republicans came forward and said, "Yeah, we agree."

And then they're all defeated in primaries.  No, maybe they shouldn't take your advice.

[merithyn]

I disagree. I would argue that those in the base who are demanding it, are doing so because their leaders - the Republicans in office - aren't putting a stop to it. If a prominent, popular Republican came forward and said, "Look. In order to bring this country back to the top of the world economy, we need to work together to make it happen. We can't have a stagnant government anymore. We stand with our elected leader - whoever he or she is - and we will work together to make sure that we are fiscally responsible while we meet the needs of those who most need our help." then the base would balk at first, but it wouldn't take long for them to come around. Especially not if the majority of Republicans came forward and said, "Yeah, we agree."

And then they're all defeated in primaries.  No, maybe they shouldn't take your advice.

I'm talking about the ones who were just elected, not those campaigning. They've got a good two years to make it work before the next election.

[garbon]

I disagree. I would argue that those in the base who are demanding it, are doing so because their leaders - the Republicans in office - aren't putting a stop to it. If a prominent, popular Republican came forward and said, "Look. In order to bring this country back to the top of the world economy, we need to work together to make it happen. We can't have a stagnant government anymore. We stand with our elected leader - whoever he or she is - and we will work together to make sure that we are fiscally responsible while we meet the needs of those who most need our help." then the base would balk at first, but it wouldn't take long for them to come around. Especially not if the majority of Republicans came forward and said, "Yeah, we agree."

And then they're all defeated in primaries.  No, maybe they shouldn't take your advice.

I'm talking about the ones who were just elected, not those campaigning. They've got a good two years to make it work before the next election.

But that gets at what I said - it's clear that the base wants those intractable individuals.

[Eddie Teach]

Not really.  The Republicans can only get the votes that it is possible for them to get.  It is not possible for the Republicans to get the votes of racist blacks.

Fact remains, they're doing better among white men than white women. Black women have nothing to do with that.

[DontSayBanana]

But it doesn't need to be a prominent position that were discussing but rather Republicans picked for smaller positions like state rep or members of state legislature (who might then go on for positions in senate or presidency).  After all, base has opportunity to pick good/better candidates during primary phase but it seems like they are not.

Additionally, if the base has a problem with the current leadership, why do they keep electing back the same individuals?

Lack of other options?  There were pretty slim pickings across the playing field, even during the primary phase.  I seem to recall some commentary about the lack of viable contenders leading disenfranchising moderate voters prior to the nomination, e.g. Romney wasn't picked because he was the best candidate, but because he was the least bad.

[Eddie Teach]

Lack of other options?  There were pretty slim pickings across the playing field, even during the primary phase.  I seem to recall some commentary about the lack of viable contenders leading disenfranchising moderate voters prior to the nomination, e.g. Romney wasn't picked because he was the best candidate, but because he was the least bad.

Huntsman and Johnson were less bad.

[garbon]

I'm not sure I buy that as we're not just talking presidential. To what you said, people could have picked Huntsman if they wanted - and also Romney isn't really an example of the type of Republicans being discussed here.

[Neil]

I disagree. I would argue that those in the base who are demanding it, are doing so because their leaders - the Republicans in office - aren't putting a stop to it. If a prominent, popular Republican came forward and said, "Look. In order to bring this country back to the top of the world economy, we need to work together to make it happen. We can't have a stagnant government anymore. We stand with our elected leader - whoever he or she is - and we will work together to make sure that we are fiscally responsible while we meet the needs of those who most need our help." then the base would balk at first, but it wouldn't take long for them to come around. Especially not if the majority of Republicans came forward and said, "Yeah, we agree."

And then they're all defeated in primaries.  No, maybe they shouldn't take your advice.

I'm talking about the ones who were just elected, not those campaigning. They've got a good two years to make it work before the next election.

Do you think that people go through the abject humiliation that is a congressional campaign because they only want one term?

[The Minsky Moment]

Mitt Romney was not the problem here.
Mitt Romney having to say ludicrous things in the primary to get a nomination and then turn on a dime and run from those things was a problem.

[The Minsky Moment]

.  I disagree that the Republicans have been writing off the Latinos for the last ten years.  Bush made a real effort to get Latinos and made some good headway. 

That was 8 years ago, and the party (as you say) repudiated it.