Thanks for that Dave, and the link. This is infuriating! I don’t know how you put up with it. I can see I’m going to have to write about it again or I might explode in outrage or something!

Also, I don’t see how NZEI can say this isn’t important to their members if they haven’t even asked them about it, let alone discussed it. What they mean is, it’s not important to current leadership because current leadership is okay with RI and indoctrinating kids.

The NZSTA, who are a body involved in assisting boards of trustees (who run primry schools in NZ and approve religious instruction) were the worst. You can read my write up on them here: https://religiouseducation.co.nz/nzsta-refuses-answer-questions-religious-instruction/

Does the primary teachers’ union or professional association have a position on it? If they opposed it, that would help a lot in getting it banned. I seems their opinion against it in Aus helped a lot. Is there any chance of getting them on side?

I agree with what you say. I do not see how a reasonable person could vote for a Republican given the policies they are espousing and the success of the current government. However, no matter how well a government is doing, there tends to be a cycle of people just getting sick of the same government and voting for the opposition for not better reason than that. That is why I say that COMPARED to 2008 and 2012, 2016 SHOULD be easier for the Republicans. They will not succeed though for all the reasons you’ve mentioned and more.

My reason for not being 100% certain is that cycle. It is possible that something could happen to make the electorate lean towards the Republicans by the end of next year. I can’t imagine what that would be, but it is more likely than in 2008 and 2012. That doesn’t mean I think it will happen.

As for 2000, I’m still appalled by that. Gore won, and should’ve been president. I still view it with a bit of unreality that it even happened in a country that calls itself the greatest democracy on the planet. It’s disgusting and disgraceful and a stain on the history of the country.

Heather, I agree with your assessment, but I’d like to put the case a little more strongly. You say, “In 2008, for example, it would’ve been almost impossible for any Republican to win a presidential election because…” Bush had flubbed everything he touched. He ignored the warnings on 9/11, he initiated two wars that went badly and solved nothing, he presided over the biggest financial collapse since the great depression. Only extreme reaction to the Bush disasters, induced Americans to elect a black man as President. Obama’s Presidency, by almost any measure, has been extremely successful. There are few in America who are not better off now than when Obama became President, in spite of the fact that the Plutocrats have siphoned off most of the proceeds of the longest economic recovery in the postwar period. After 8 years of Clinton, Americans elected Al Gore President, by a substantial plurality, but the fact that Bush’s brother was Governor of the state that decided the election, and that the majority of the supreme court was Republican, gave the office to Bush, perhaps the unfittest man to hold the office since Richard Nixon.

You say “the Republicans have not offered any better alternatives in regards to people or policy, and unless and until they do, they cannot get a majority of votes.” What reason is there to believe that any of the Republican candidates have any better alternatives to offer on anything? After the disastrous Bush Presidency, the Republican leadership committed itself to opposing anything Obama submitted, and let it be known that they did not consider him a “real American” and it was open season on vilifying him on his ancestry, his citizenship, his religion.

Is there a Republican candidate who believes humans are altering the climate? Who believes in evolution? A few may try to fudge it. Every one believes we should cut back on social security, medicare, Medicaid, food stamps, unemployment compensation, primary safety net programs. They all oppose any tax increases on the rich, on corporations, or on large estates. They have shut down the government out of pique. They are all itching for a war with Iran. There’s abundant reason to reject anyone who identifies with the Republican party as having the good sense or moral compass to be considered for President.

The reason I think it should be easier is that the Democrats have been in power for eight years, and that typically means the US electorate is ready for a change. In 2008, for example, it would’ve been almost impossible for any Republican to win a presidential election because of the unpopularity of Bush.

At this stage in the process, more than a year out, my prediction is that the Democrats will win. There are plenty who criticize Obama and the Democrats, but the Republicans have not offered any better alternatives in regards to people or policy, and unless and until they do, they cannot get a majority of votes.

First, why do you think it should be easier for Republicans to win in 2016 than it has been for some time? Do you think the American public is getting increasingly delusional?

Second, what Republican candidate do you think is more credible than Trump? He is just saying what all of them think but are too dishonest to say. Trump even bragged about buying politicians in the first debate. The rest of them are the bought. The Republican party is still the party of the rich and the big international corporations, but they have lost control of their minions.