"A black sheriff?!": The Official Topic of Obama and New Era American Politics

[Phoenix Dark]

Bob Dole personally came to congress in a wheelchair to get this passed. UN/globalist conspiracy theories have always existed on the right but this is just another example of things being worse now. Although I will say that I'd imagine that most of the people who voted against this aren't true believers; Rand Paul certainly is though. It was probably out of fear of their base, and being primary'd by some idiot who would accuse them of ceding US independence to the UN.

[Mupepe]

The worst thing about these UN treaty myths is seeing it actually making news here in Texas.  I've seen the small arms trade treaty reported on numerous times on local stations here in Houston and they always report it as restricting certain weapons sold here in the US.  Bleh.

[Joe Molotov]

The UN can barely even work up the courage to politely ask Bashar al Assad if he wouldn't mind not murdering his own people so much, but I'll just bet they're chomping at the bit to storm into America with their mighty UN armies to take all our guns and smother all our downs babies.

[Steve Contra]

The UN can barely even work up the courage to politely ask Bashar al Assad if he wouldn't mind not murdering his own people so much, but I'll just bet they're chomping at the bit to storm into America with their mighty UN armies to take all our guns and smother all our downs babies.

Just the Christian ones. 

[Phoenix Dark]

As a home schooled child I never felt more afraid than when a UN non-cis dominatrix would visit our house and watch me poop to ensure I only used the UN approved amount of toilet paper wipes: 2

[Joe Molotov]

The UN can barely even work up the courage to politely ask Bashar al Assad if he wouldn't mind not murdering his own people so much, but I'll just bet they're chomping at the bit to storm into America with their mighty UN armies to take all our guns and smother all our downs babies.

Just the Christian ones. 

That's because all the non-christian ones already got aborted at the government-funded Abortionasium.

[Steve Contra]

I really don't feel dumber as an American citizen when our elected officials get publicly mad at the UN.

[Mandark]

Bob Dole personally came to congress in a wheelchair to get this passed. UN/globalist conspiracy theories have always existed on the right but this is just another example of things being worse now. Although I will say that I'd imagine that most of the people who voted against this aren't true believers; Rand Paul certainly is though. It was probably out of fear of their base, and being primary'd by some idiot who would accuse them of ceding US independence to the UN.

Yeah.

I think very few Republican Senators care about the treaty, and the path of least resistance is to appease the crazies; there's virtually no chance the disabled lobby will punish them for this, against a small but real chance that it could contribute to a Tea Party-style primary challenge against them if they had voted for it.

It creates problems long term by validating the nutjobs rather than pushing back against the FUD.  Eventually you'll have to govern and make policy, and you'll be boxed in by the craziness you let slide for years.  It'd be like telling people for years that you could cut the deficit with lower taxes, higher military spending, and untouched Medicare spending, and then you have to make a budget proposal...

[ToxicAdam]

Is there any Republican that said the vote was pointless and the UN is pointless? I would respect that stance instead of hiding behind some other wierd explanation that is meant to appease the email forwarding, born-again wing.


--- /// ---


Ted Nugent:

Let's also stop the insanity by suspending the right to vote of any American who is on welfare. Once they get off welfare and are self-sustaining, they get their right to vote restored. No American on welfare should have the right to vote for tax increases on those Americans who are working and paying taxes to support them. That's insane."

http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/358/607/fe8.gif
Woooo

[Mandark]

Is there any Republican that said the vote was pointless and the UN is pointless? I would respect that stance instead of hiding behind some other wierd explanation that is meant to appease the email forwarding, born-again wing.

I think that position was endorsed by the Senate Caucus of Hypothetical Republicans.

[Steve Contra]

Ted Nugent:

Let's also stop the insanity by suspending the right to vote of any American who is on welfare. Once they get off welfare and are self-sustaining, they get their right to vote restored. No American on welfare should have the right to vote for tax increases on those Americans who are working and paying taxes to support them. That's insane."

http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/358/607/fe8.gif
Woooo

It's amazing how the constitution is all sacred and shit until poor people get to vote.

[Mupepe]

I can't understand why Ted Nugent is listened to at all by the right.  He's a tough talking, hypocritical idiot.  You would think his history of draft dodging and hunting violations would bring an end to any legitimacy but alas the persona he's crafted for himself still takes center stage.  Gun nuts and military families should hate him. 

[Great Rumbler]

Rights For The Disabled, Citing Impact On Home-Schoolers
 
December 4, 2012, 2:20 PM 2336The Senate Tuesday fell short of the two-thirds vote required to ratify a United Nations treaty aimed at securing rights for disabled people around the world, when the vast majority of Republican senators voted against the treaty. The final vote was 61-38 vote. All the nay votes were Republican.

The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities essentially makes the 1990 Americans With Disabilities Act a non-binding international standard. It requires no change to U.S. law.

Originally signed by then-President George W. Bush in 2006 and re-signed by President Barack Obama in 2009 shortly after he took office, the treaty has been championed by former Sen. Bob Dole (R-KS), the one-time GOP presidential nominee who suffered a disability while serving in the Army in World War II. Dole was on the Senate floor Tuesday ahead of the ratification vote, in a wheelchair, accompanied by his wife, former Sen. Elizabeth Dole (R-NC).

Longtime Republicans like Sens. John McCain (AZ), Dick Lugar (IN) and John Barrasso (WY) voted for the treaty. But that didn’t stop the party’s more conservative members from warning that it would violate U.S. sovereignty and dictate to parents with home-schooled children.

“I do oppose the CRPD because I think it does impinge upon our sovereignty,” said Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK). “Unelected bureaucratic bodies would implement the treaty and pass so-called recommendations that would be forced upon the United Nations and the U.S. … This would especially affect those parents who home-school their children. … The unelected foreign bureaucrats, not parents, would decide what is in the best interests of the disabled child, even in the home.”

Inhofe was joined by Republican Sens. Jim DeMint (SC), Mike Lee (UT), Marco Rubio (FL) and most of the party’s leadership in quashing the treaty. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (KY), who is up for re-election in 2014, voted against it.

“I and many of my constituents who home-school or send their children to religious schools,” said Lee, “have justifiable doubt that a foreign body based in Geneva, Switzerland, should be deciding what is best for a child at home in Utah.”

Sen. John Kerry (D-MA), a proponent of the treaty, was flummoxed by the opposition.

“I’ve heard some of my Republican colleagues talk many times about making the rest of the world more like America,” he said. “I hate to think that now, when we have an opportunity to do that, they will retreat from the core conviction and oppose a treaty modeled on the United States example which has no recourse in American courts and no effect on American law.”

The conservative Republicans warned that the international community is a scary place.

“I have been an advocate of human rights around the world,” Inhofe said. “However, I do not support the cumbersome regulations and potentially overzealous international organizations with anti-American biases that infringe upon American society.”

UN BLACK HELICOPTERS TAKING MY GUNS AND MY FREEDOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMS

[TakingBackSunday]

I can't understand why Ted Nugent is listened to at all by the right.  He's a tough talking, hypocritical idiot.  You would think his history of draft dodging and hunting violations would bring an end to any legitimacy but alas the persona he's crafted for himself still takes center stage.  Gun nuts and military families should hate him.

Have you seen the episode of...I think it's No Reservations with Anthony Bourdain?  They go to Ted's favorite BBQ place and they sit down and have actually a pretty great discussion.  One super leftie and one super rightie...Bourdain actually convinced Nugent that some of his opinions were bullshit

Love Bourdain.

[Mupepe]

I can't understand why Ted Nugent is listened to at all by the right.  He's a tough talking, hypocritical idiot.  You would think his history of draft dodging and hunting violations would bring an end to any legitimacy but alas the persona he's crafted for himself still takes center stage.  Gun nuts and military families should hate him.

Have you seen the episode of...I think it's No Reservations with Anthony Bourdain?  They go to Ted's favorite BBQ place and they sit down and have actually a pretty great discussion.  One super leftie and one super rightie...Bourdain actually convinced Nugent that some of his opinions were bullshit

Love Bourdain.

Nope.  But now I'll have to check it out. 

[Himu]

Oh god, I may be in DC for Obama's inauguration and I don't want to meet gundam because I'm ugly and fat

ps my favorite beer is blue moon amber spice ale. don't judge me.

[Oblivion]

I can't understand why Ted Nugent is listened to at all by the right.  He's a tough talking, hypocritical idiot.  You would think his history of draft dodging and hunting violations would bring an end to any legitimacy but alas the persona he's crafted for himself still takes center stage.  Gun nuts and military families should hate him.

Those traits actually make him the perfect Republican.

[Oblivion]

The U.N. Convention on the Rights of Persons With Disabilities, for those who've forgotten, is a human rights treaty negotiated by the George H.W. Bush administration, which has been ratified by 126 nations, including China, Russia, Iran, Cuba, Syria, and Saudi Arabia.

Good jon, GOP.

[Joe Molotov]

Gotta keep that 27% happy.

[Great Rumbler]

The Right's fear/obsession with the UN is utterly baffling.

[Oblivion]

 

[Phoenix Dark]

I see that the way we will get the Hispanics and the other groups, the Asians, as part of the Republican Coalition is to get them first part of the great American Coalition. Make them think of themselves, not make but, persuade them to think of themselves primarily as Americans. Restore the overarching, all-encompassing concept of an American identity, which we used to have, which we knew how to bring about and which in the last 20 or 30 years very largely as a result of the democrats wanting to emphasize ethnicity rather than American-ness.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/334562/coming-coalition-peter-robinson

Notice you never hear anyone lamenting the fact that Italian Americans have their own pride and culture, or why Irish Americans have their own holiday, or why non-Polish people can't say Polack. Cultural pride is perfectly fine for white people but is divisive and reverse-racist when blacks or Hispanics partake.

They don't get it, and I'm not sure they ever will.

[Yeti]

Non-Polish people can't say Polack?

[Positive Touch]

cultural pride for them is fine as long as its secondary to being white, and of course the main tenant in being white is to clearly position yourself as "NOT A POC"

[Mandark]

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2012/12/republicans-not-handling-election-results-well.html

49% of Republican poll respondents say that ACORN helped steal the election for Obama.

spoiler (click to show/hide)

ACORN hasn't existed for years.

[close]

[Phoenix Dark]

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2012/12/republicans-not-handling-election-results-well.html

49% of Republican poll respondents say that ACORN helped steal the election for Obama.

spoiler (click to show/hide)

ACORN hasn't existed for years.

[close]

[Brehvolution]

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2012/12/republicans-not-handling-election-results-well.html

49% of Republican poll respondents say that ACORN helped steal the election for Obama.

spoiler (click to show/hide)

ACORN hasn't existed for years.

[close]

[Steve Contra]

I see that the way we will get the Hispanics and the other groups, the Asians, as part of the Republican Coalition is to get them first part of the great American Coalition. Make them think of themselves, not make but, persuade them to think of themselves primarily as Americans. Restore the overarching, all-encompassing concept of an American identity, which we used to have, which we knew how to bring about and which in the last 20 or 30 years very largely as a result of the democrats wanting to emphasize ethnicity rather than American-ness.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/334562/coming-coalition-peter-robinson

Notice you never hear anyone lamenting the fact that Italian Americans have their own pride and culture, or why Irish Americans have their own holiday, or why non-Polish people can't say Polack. Cultural pride is perfectly fine for white people but is divisive and reverse-racist when blacks or Hispanics partake.

They don't get it, and I'm not sure they ever will.

There was about 3 days of handwringing about how the Republican party was going to broaden their base before they said "fuck that, it's because we're not conservative enough"

[Yeti]

It's hard to do soul searching when you've alreay sold those souls to corporate interests.

[Great Rumbler]

"fuck that, it's because we're not conservative enough"

And look how well that worked for them in this latest election!

[Steve Contra]

They lost, proof that they didn't push it hard enough.

[Howard Alan Treesong]

"We have to increase our appeal with minorities by making them understand how right we are! We just haven't done a good enough job of making them understand."

[Steve Contra]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323713104578132940084607864.html

[Phoenix Dark]

"We have to increase our appeal with minorities by making them understand how right we are! We just haven't done a good enough job of making them understand."

"add some 808s and salsa music and we'll be halfway there!"

[tiesto]

"We have to increase our appeal with minorities by making them understand how right we are! We just haven't done a good enough job of making them understand."

"add some 808s and salsa music and we'll be halfway there!"

Add some 303's and even I'll vote Republican... acieeeeeeed!

[Howard Alan Treesong]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323713104578132940084607864.html

"If the GOP is serious about reaching out to minorities, social issues are rich soil for finding common ground."

Yes, because "You Blacks and Hispanics are all really Republicans and just don't realize it yet!" has been working so well so far.

[Olivia Wilde Homo]

The GOP is trapped in its own web of bullshit and because they've enabled the teatards, anytime a Republican wants to even acknowledge the existence of the problem right in front of them, they'll get ousted by some far right freak.  It's why even if he loses a bunch of weight, Chris Christie will never get nominated.  He's praised Obama which really pissed off the far right chain e-mail set who will vote for a Santorum or a Perry in 2016 just to spite Christie.

No worries though, George Prescott Bush will handle it in the 2020 election.

[Phoenix Dark]

I guess the GOP hasn't seen the exit polls from 2012, showing Hispanics heavily favoring abortion access, and being pro-gay marriage.

I don't normally quote Andrew Sullivan, but he made a good point about Obama's gay marriage stance: it's one of the most recent and powerful examples of a president's views changing national views. Black people's views on gay marriage have shifted quite stunningly since Obama came out for it. I don't know how to explain it, and perhaps Obama was just jumping onto a wave that was already bubbling, but still...very interesting stuff.

[Mandark]

In defense of conservatives, all the planks in their platform which might have become electoral losers are also things they believe in and want to see acted on.  If I were in the same position of having to figure out which liberal goals to jettison entirely from the Democratic agenda, the most comforting thought--and the first thing I'd try to convince myself of--would be that we just needed to tweak the message a bit.  Especially after a relatively close loss with a candidate who thrilled nobody in the primaries.

So it's easy for us to say that the GOP would be better served by ditching the reactionary sexual politics, nativism, and devotion to the rich.  But if you're actually freaked out by gay people/immigrants/wealth redistribution?  Giving up on an important priority for a better shot at making progress on others is painful work (remember when the Obama administration had to do some of this lots of liberals convinced themselves that single payer healthcare and 1936 tax rates were there if only they'd try).  Likewise, David Frum can act real brave and buck his party on domestic issues because he was only ever in it for the perpetual warfare.

The GOP, on balance, is crazy and wrong.  But we shouldn't be surprised when they act like they believe in what they believe in.

[ToxicAdam]

Here's a pretty great interactive graph showing the tax rates over the past 30 years.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/11/30/us/tax-burden.html?ref=us


I wish I had this handy when we were talking about the middle income brackets and how they are not paying enough taxes.

[Mandark]

Well I don't think anyone was really disagreeing with that part.

[Phoenix Dark]

Washington state drops the gay marriage bomb tonight

[Mandark]

[Phoenix Dark]

Was wasting time on youtube when I ran across this


Harold Ford Jr v Kos in late 2007. The GOP's power struggles with itself has reminded me (a bit) of the DLC v progressive movement the democrats faced in the mid 2000s, especially after Kerry's loss. The 2008 election certainly looked good for democrats in late 2007, but there was still a pretty open leadership battle between the more centrist Clinton folks and the Howard Deans, John Edwards, and eventually Barack Obamas - enough that you could rightfully wonder whether dems could get their shit together or face a repeat of 2004.

There were plenty of people waiting in the wings to revive the DLC "we were too liberal!" memes if Obama had lost in 2008 (remember Evan Bayh?), or 2012 (Ed Rendell, Andrew Cuomo) for that matter. There still are some center-left think tanks/groups like Third Way, but for the most part the Clintonista DLC structure has been purged. The Joe Liebermans, Harold Ford Jrs, etc have largely been rendered irrelevant. Likewise the Blue Dog coalition has been almost completely annihilated in congress.

While I wouldn't compare the current activist right (tea party, Red State, etc) to the activist left (Daily Kos, MoveOn, etc) of the 2000s, they're certainly in a similar position compared to liberals back then. Being belittled, pushed out, establishment candidates winning presidential nominations over the movement candidates, etc. The biggest difference seems to be that conservatives are historically unable to buck the establishment candidate, whereas democrats constantly do. Traditionally the modern democrat party is composed of enough large groups (labor/unions, liberals, minorities, youth vote, etc) that an insurgent candidate can form successful coalitions, whereas I'm not sure this really happens with republicans anymore. Their coalitions seem more based around pure ideological wings (hawks, religious right, fiscal conservatives, etc) that tend to rally to the establishment candidate. Also in terms of pure numbers, the religious right seems like the only large group able to shift a primary race, whereas there are multiple groups that can do that for democrats.

TLDR: A shitty president, demographics, and coalition building have given democrats a lot of long term electoral advantages, whereas republicans seem to be stuck with a 20th century model; the smoky dark rooms of the 60s conventions may be extinct, but ultimately the establishment still picks the nominee, and the activist base can't do much to stop it because republicans continue to fall in line rather than fall in love.

[Mandark]

Clinton administration vets are very well represented through the Democratic party, and Democrats haven't nominated an "insurgent" since maybe Carter.  Obama was the keynote speaker at the previous convention.

[Olivia Wilde Homo]

I remember back in 2007 that Hillary's nomination was inevitable and it was her turn and we should all fall in line and support her.  Also when I went to the primaries back in 2008, there were very clear demographics who were in favor of certain candidates.  Youth (including myself) and minorities were pretty much all in for Obama.  Hillary's supporters were almost exclusively middle aged white women, who I distinctly recall got pissy that young women were going for Obama instead of Hillary.  Middle aged men, old people, etc. were mostly for Edwards and the other lol candidates like Richardson, Biden, etc.

I suspect that the inevitability argument will come into play when Hillary runs again in 2016 but PD as you point out there are still multiple coalitions and demographics that does not make her nomination a slam dunk.

[ToxicAdam]

I would like to get some kind of action on "Hillary 2016". She is done with politics, no matter what.

[Phoenix Dark]

Clinton administration vets are very well represented through the Democratic party, and Democrats haven't nominated an "insurgent" since maybe Carter.  Obama was the keynote speaker at the previous convention.

I'd argue Obama was somewhat of an insurgent candidate in the sense that he wasn't The establishment choice; Wall Street was supporting him early though, which is a knock against my argument. I'd also say Dukakis was an out of bounds choice too; Gephart and Gore were DLC centrist dems at the time.

[Stoney Mason]

Clinton administration vets are very well represented through the Democratic party, and Democrats haven't nominated an "insurgent" since maybe Carter.  Obama was the keynote speaker at the previous convention.

I'd argue Obama was indeed an insurgent candidate in the sense that he wasn't The establishment choice. I'd also say Dukakis was an out of bounds choice too; Gephart and Gore were DLC centrist dems at the time.

Dukakis was the best out of a bad lot of dems that year. He was very much in the tradition of north eastern liberals of the time though.

Gary Hart was supposed to be the nominee and then he got busted and Mario Cuomo would never run when his brand actually mattered.

[Steve Contra]

In defense of conservatives, all the planks in their platform which might have become electoral losers are also things they believe in and want to see acted on.  If I were in the same position of having to figure out which liberal goals to jettison entirely from the Democratic agenda, the most comforting thought--and the first thing I'd try to convince myself of--would be that we just needed to tweak the message a bit.  Especially after a relatively close loss with a candidate who thrilled nobody in the primaries.

So it's easy for us to say that the GOP would be better served by ditching the reactionary sexual politics, nativism, and devotion to the rich.  But if you're actually freaked out by gay people/immigrants/wealth redistribution?  Giving up on an important priority for a better shot at making progress on others is painful work (remember when the Obama administration had to do some of this lots of liberals convinced themselves that single payer healthcare and 1936 tax rates were there if only they'd try).  Likewise, David Frum can act real brave and buck his party on domestic issues because he was only ever in it for the perpetual warfare.

The GOP, on balance, is crazy and wrong.  But we shouldn't be surprised when they act like they believe in what they believe in.

There you go getting all rational.  The question is however, what can the Republican base give up?  I mean gun control is an important issue for a lot of Dems, but they've all but abandoned because it hurts everything else.  The Republicans on the other hand have simply increased the importance of every single issue (especially in primaries) to the point where it's who agrees with the base the hardest.  And everytime they suffer a setback they simply redouble their efforts.  So what do you think it will be?

[Brehvolution]

[Great Rumbler]

[Steve Contra]

The poor right is crushed that despite Obama being elected jobs were still created.  You get the palpable sense that they honestly wanted people to lose their jobs so they could gloat.

[Great Rumbler]

Fox News was blatantly gloating over the handful of business that were laying people off the day after the election, despite the fact that most of them had planned the layoffs well in advance of the election and had nothing to do with it.

[DCharlieJP]

Man , the Impeach shit is getting hilarious

OBAMA ARMED THE MIDDLE EAST
OBAMA HAS COMPROMISED THE SAFETY OF SECRET AGENT OPERATIVES
OBAMA IS GUILTY OF VOTER FRAUD
OBAMA IS IN LEAGUE WITH THE BIG BANKS
OBAMA IS.... APPARENTLY DOING EVERYTHING THAT THE GOP PRESIDENTS HAVE -ACTUALLY- BEEN DOING !

At this point it's such comedy platinum that i can't stop just Twitter searching "impeach" because the arguments apply sooooooooo much more to the previous Republican presidents that it's untrue.

I can tell you for one - that whole Blackrock shit? There's no god damned way that a non-tendered preferred bid agreement would happen in the UK with a company where the Vice President is a fucking board member. All fucking HELL would break loose

[Phoenix Dark]

The employment data is buried on Drudge today lmao. He's not even focusing on the participation rate decline/people leaving the workforce. It seems like the hurricane had an impact there, and probably cost the month 50k jobs; UE benefit requests spiked heavily immediately after the storm, but have dropped as businesses re-opened.

Next month should be big, and the BLS will add the summer 2012 jobs they miscalculated to Jan/Feb 2013; we could see more than 600k jobs added total in the next three months. Imagine what Fox would be saying if Romney had won lol

[Steve Contra]

I keep telling my friends they don't need to waste time watching Fox News to see intothe mind of a conservative, a quick glance at Drudge headlines once a day does the trick.  they still won't listen. :'(

[Great Rumbler]

I keep telling my friends they don't need to waste time watching Fox News to see intothe mind of a conservative, a quick glance at Drudge headlines once a day does the trick.  they still won't listen. :'(

Eh, you don't even need to go to Drudge. Just check up on Media Matters once a day, they sample the best from a pretty broad range.

[Brehvolution]

[Mandark]

There you go getting all rational.  The question is however, what can the Republican base give up?  I mean gun control is an important issue for a lot of Dems, but they've all but abandoned because it hurts everything else.  The Republicans on the other hand have simply increased the importance of every single issue (especially in primaries) to the point where it's who agrees with the base the hardest.  And everytime they suffer a setback they simply redouble their efforts.  So what do you think it will be?

It feels like the GOP's becoming monotonically more rightwing and insane, but it's shown some flexibility and I expect that to happen again at some point.  GWB campaigned as a compassionate conservative to avoid the stigma of Gingrich and the House GOP and governed as a moderate on domestic policy (NCLB, Medicare Part D, no serious efforts to cut spending).  Republicans accepted all that with very minimal kvetching, and mid/late-90's conservatism was just as batshit as the current strain.

So what issues can they shift on?  Gun control's a really good example from the liberal side: it was big enough that Clinton made it one of his priorities, and within a decade nobody seems to give a crap.  I'd say it was never as central to American liberalism as the big economic/social justice issues, and after 1994 was seen as a sure loser politically (also generally sympathetic liberals gradually saw it as pretty weak policy in its own right).  So the cost/benefit calculation for Dem politicians was pretty clear.

Immigration is the policy that is getting the most attention as an albatross for the GOP, both from neutral pundits and from partisan figures like Gingrich, Rubio, Bush, Perry, etc.  So you'd expect movement there.  But last time, when Bush tried immigration reform, there was a grassroots backlash in the House.  So immigration seems to be pretty central to a lot of conservatives, to the point where they'll buck the party line if they don't like the policy.

But immigration isn't the real problem for the GOP.  It's their failure to win over latino voters.  And black voters.  And Asian voters.  Which isn't due to any one issue.  It's because the GOP has become the party of the white Christian monoculture^{TM Van Cruncheon}.  So much of its issue positions and rhetoric are just ways of saying "we're standing with you, the traditional America, against the encroachment of the new subcultures with the different values, godlessness, weird sex and dark skin."  Romney didn't even embrace that many far-right positions during the primaries; the important thing was for him to say just how awful and terrible and horrible Obama was.  We all have a good laugh at how hypocritical the deficit hypocrisy was, but there's at least a lesson there: tea party types were much more freaked out about Obama (and what he represented culturally) being in charge than they were about any actual program or law or budget number.

And that's the real bind for the GOP.  As long as the party has to cater to freaked-out white folks, whatever new policies or memes it adopts will probably be new ways of conveying the same message, and the swarthy masses that just re-elected Obama will hear and understand that message just as clearly as the conservative base that it's aimed at.  People know when they're not wanted, and all the fake indignation in the world won't change that.

The problem for the conservative movement won't be solved by a changing a few planks in its platform.  Eventually, it's going to have to broaden the idea of the "real America" it represents to include some chunks of the populace that its used to treating as outsiders.  Which isn't impossible or unprecedented, but pretty well shuts the door on a quick fix.