News | Rachel Maddow | Republican National Convention

BigGayDeal.com

Rachel Maddow Wonders How The Republican Party Can Possibly Rebrand its Image: VIDEO

Gop_maddow

Yesterday, I posted the RNC's 100-page report intended to counter the wacko headlines coming out of CPAC with points and recommendations aimed at helping the party recover from the losses it suffered in 2012 by portraying itself as more tolerant to minority groups, gay people, and younger voters.

Last night Rachel Maddow took a look at the report and wondered how they can possibly rebrand.

Watch, AFTER THE JUMP...

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. Good grief -- was Palin drunk?

    Posted by: Hunter | Mar 19, 2013 8:22:35 AM


  2. I'm hearing the same thing I've been hearing -- "we have to change the message without changing the policies." The one point he made that has potential is the idea of supporting children after birth, which so far doesn't seem to be on the Republican playbill. The rest of it's just the usual BS, except he seems to be saying openly that the strategy is to keep quiet on social issues until you get control of the government.

    Posted by: Hunter | Mar 19, 2013 8:35:59 AM


  3. Now I understand how dinosaurs extinct. No giant meteorite needed.

    Posted by: Bambinoitaliano | Mar 19, 2013 9:24:06 AM


  4. I am becoming convinced that some on the left would rather the republicans remain anti-gay than evolve towards acceptance. Just look at the vitriol hurled out from the left whenever a republican comes out in FAVOR of gay equality.

    Posted by: zach | Mar 19, 2013 9:31:08 AM


  5. For a Santorum adviser, that Brabender guy seemed way too reasonable.

    The Republicans aren't going to gain any traction until about half of the old guard dies. Even then, they'll face a few challenges. They know what their problems are but are unwilling to address them. Not to mention, not many rich people are eager to hold public office. It's a pain these days. Only the power hungry need apply.

    Posted by: Paul R | Mar 19, 2013 9:35:10 AM


  6. CPAC is kind of hilariously stupid. They allow Palin, Coulter, and Romney to speak---all divisive shrills, two of whom have lost presidential elections. Yet they won't invite Chris Christie, the most popular Republican in the country. It's like they want to fail.

    Posted by: Paul R | Mar 19, 2013 9:51:56 AM


  7. You can only spit shine a turd for so long before all you are left with is diarrhea.

    Posted by: Michael Heynz | Mar 19, 2013 9:57:21 AM


  8. That Rachel got a Republican lie brabender to come on the show is news. She always wants to have Republicans on the show to discuss issues. She's perfectly polite and respectful to everyone. And that's what frightens them. They can't make her a monster, cause she isn't. So they retreat to the safety of FOX where everyone who sn't Repubican is The Enemy. It would be nice to think that Brabender's appearance is a harbinger of other Republicns to come.

    But I doubt it.

    Posted by: David Ehrenstein | Mar 19, 2013 10:21:07 AM


  9. Why does Maddow keep saying "kindler"? Doesn't her job involve pronouncing words correctly?

    Posted by: Kevin | Mar 19, 2013 10:32:11 AM


  10. @Paul R

    you forgot to mention CPAC had Trump speak as well

    Trump! and didn't invite Christie, the most popular governor in the US at the moment & most popular republican

    Posted by: Moz's | Mar 19, 2013 10:58:10 AM


  11. This is the product equivalent of Microsoft trying to sell more Zunes by putting them in iPod boxes. It only works until people see it's the same garbage inside.

    Posted by: kp05 | Mar 19, 2013 10:59:25 AM


  12. @zach I hear you, but it is hard to get all excited and jump up and down because one or two republicans aren't viciously antigay, or because one or two of them are not hardcore racists. Letting this joke of a party maintain power is going to have the same result it always has. They can put it in a different bag and slap a pretty new label on it, but this dog still isn't interested in their dog food.

    Posted by: melvin | Mar 19, 2013 11:06:24 AM


  13. As someone else said, really what they want is to downplay all this, UNTIL THEY GET INTO OFFICE. Just look at the Republicans who were elected in 2010 as part of an anti-Obama backlash. On the campaign trail they only talked about the economy, jobs, etc. But the moment they were in office they went after the GOP's pet causes HARD.

    The backlash against that is another piece of why Obama won reelection. The public learned that you can't trust Republicans because even when they soft-sell their position on social issues, anti-Unionism, and cuts to social services, those are the FIRST things they go after when elected!

    And why is it that the GOP can come up with a 100 page plan on how to get themselves in office but can't manage to produce anything HALF that long about their actual legislative goals?

    Posted by: Caliban | Mar 19, 2013 11:30:18 AM


  14. while the newfound "support" of people like Portman is a welsome change, it still comes saddled with the reality that the "change" has given them the courage and integrity of a bowl of mashed potatoes.

    I think we all want anti-gay rhetoric and prejudice out of the political arena, so actual issues can get dealt with. but as honest folks know, the GOP needs anti-gay rhetoric to stir up their base.

    rebranding will be hard for them - how to not appear as bigots while still courting unrepentant bigots for their votes.

    CPAC was vert telling. as is the continued PROMOTION of anti-gay prejudice on Fox News.

    in every country around the world, the party that runs platforms of anti-gay prejudice do so because they can't talk honestly to their base about the realities of their fiscal plans.

    Posted by: Little Kiwi | Mar 19, 2013 11:40:17 AM


  15. It shouldn't be too hard to rebrand for them. Americans seem to have the memory powers of goldfish and seem unconcerned with facts or record. Rhetoric works much better at convincing us in large numbers. I don't see the GOP having a problem just shaking it off and getting roughly 50% of the presidential vote in 2016.

    Posted by: Chris | Mar 19, 2013 11:51:18 AM


  16. Chris, they do seem to have short memories. People act like the democrat party has always supported equality.

    Posted by: zach | Mar 19, 2013 12:09:49 PM


  17. Well mercifully the gay community still has someone to hate. I was worried. The leader was bullied into his statement by his vice president.
    And it will be pushed off the federal plate and turned into a states right issue. Hilary Clinton only made her recent statement to cover her bases for 2016.
    Does know one understand that the media on all sides adores the divisive sound bites? And that they are made for attention? People like Sarah palin Anne coulter and their ilk will go the way of the dodo they are ignored, but yet by giving anything they say creedance, it just adds fuel to the fire..

    Posted by: Ha! | Mar 19, 2013 12:23:09 PM


  18. "I am becoming convinced that some on the left would rather the republicans remain anti-gay than evolve towards acceptance. Just look at the vitriol hurled out from the left whenever a republican comes out in FAVOR of gay equality."

    You are absolutely right about that. The Far Left wants gay people to reside exclusively in their ghetto because it accrues to their political advantage and gay people who belong to the Far Left care far more about promoting leftism and social anarchy than they do about eradicating homophobia, so they will do anything to try to keep gay people on the Far Left plantation.

    This is why they attack rather than praise any conservative or Republican who embraces gay rights.....and lap at the feet of "liberals" (and tender excuses for them) even when they don't (as Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama did until political self-interest--not principle-- compelled them to change).

    Hopefully, more gays such as yourself will see the truth and return the movement to what it originally was and needs to be again--one designed to eradicate homophobia and free gay people to be themselves, NOT one designed to enforce conformity to the entire Far Left agenda.

    Posted by: Rick | Mar 19, 2013 12:29:05 PM


  19. In other words: "We have to lie better!"

    Posted by: Geoff | Mar 19, 2013 12:31:40 PM


  20. Oh Zach, even a short memory can remember way back to 2012 when the Democratic party put gay marriage in their party platform.

    Posted by: Lalala | Mar 19, 2013 12:34:59 PM


  21. as long as miserable gays who hate "The Left" continue to be anonymous faceless non-entities with capers for testes, their hoped-for revolution will never come. so, yay. :D

    rock ON MADDOW!

    Posted by: Little Kiwi | Mar 19, 2013 12:44:19 PM


  22. Meanwhile, Rachel completely ignores the fact that the United Nations Human Right Committee somehow managed to only find one nation being mean to women. Was it Syria? Saudi Arabia? Iran? Of course not! It was...... wait for it...... Israel. What? You heard it right, it was Israel.'

    Get the US out of the UN. We simply can't afford it.

    Posted by: David Hearne | Mar 19, 2013 1:04:49 PM


  23. Oh Hearne

    http://www.ohchr.org/en/NewsEvents/Pages/NewsSearch.aspx?NTID=PRS&MID=HR_COUNCIL

    The UN Human Rights Comittee has investigated, discussed, and condemned mysogny etc in all countries. U might be a bit confused in not understanding how the comittee works. They focus on a countrie or a few countries in blocks and deal with then move onto another area to investigate etc

    Yes, Israel and Palestine were dealt with this month and prior to that Peru etc etc etc

    Posted by: Moz's | Mar 19, 2013 1:25:31 PM


  24. In most countries you'd have coalition based parties, rather than attempts at majoritarian parties. Obviously you'll have libertarian Republicans that support gay rights in the abstract and they could form a coalition with like-minded Democrats, but the way our two party system works this can't happen.

    Posted by: anon | Mar 19, 2013 6:09:01 PM


  25. moz bs as usual

    Posted by: David Hearne | Mar 19, 2013 7:29:39 PM


  26. 1 2 »

Post a comment







Trending


« «Is This the Mobile Keyboard of the Future? - VIDEO« «