<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Salon.com > Jamelle Bouie</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.salon.com/writer/jamelle_bouie/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.salon.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 May 2013 21:30:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Marco Rubio can&#8217;t save the GOP</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/02/12/marco_rubio_cant_save_the_gop_partner/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/02/12/marco_rubio_cant_save_the_gop_partner/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Feb 2013 15:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The American Prospect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marco Rubio]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ronald Reagan]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13198474</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Immigration aside, the Florida senator's sympathies still lie with Tea Party-type Republicans]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.prospect.org"><img align="left" style="margin: 0 10px 0 0;" src="http://media.salon.com/2012/10/TAP_new_logo6.png" alt="The American Prospect" /></a> The rapid rise of Florida Senator Marco Rubio makes one thing clear about the Republican Party: They’ve convinced themselves that outreach (or the lack thereof) is their issue with Latinos. Solve the communications problem—with gentler language and high-status Hispanic politicians—and you’ll solve the electoral problem. It’s why Fox News CEO Roger Ailes has <a href="http://www.newrepublic.com/article/112364/fox-news-latino-roger-ailes-courts-hispanic-viewers">committed himself</a> to making the network more friendly to Latino voters—an abrupt shift for a place that refers to immigrants as “illegal aliens”—and why Rubio will give his State of the Union response in English <em>and Spanish</em>.</p><p>None of this is bad. The GOP’s new push to win Latino voters includes growing support for comprehensive immigration reform, which will be a huge humanitarian boon to millions of undocumented immigrants if it’s passed. But Republicans are fooling themselves if they think this will fix their problem with Latino voters or if they think immigration is the beginning and end of the issue.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/02/12/marco_rubio_cant_save_the_gop_partner/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/02/12/marco_rubio_cant_save_the_gop_partner/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Is the NRA&#8217;s message backfiring?</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/02/06/is_the_nras_message_backfiring_partner/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/02/06/is_the_nras_message_backfiring_partner/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Feb 2013 20:17:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The American Prospect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Guns]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NRA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wayne LaPierre]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Wall Street Journal]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13192726</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A new national survey reveals that the organization is less popular with Americans than it's ever been]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.prospect.org"><img style="margin: 0 10px 0 0;" src="http://media.salon.com/2012/10/TAP_new_logo6.png" alt="The American Prospect" align="left" /></a> Last month, I noted the extent to which the National Rifle Association was digging a hole for itself by hewing to the most extreme rhetoric in its arsenal. Rather than quietly agree to sensible reforms — like an assault weapons ban and universal background checks — the NRA has taken a maximalist position on gun control, pushing the view that safety requires a gun in every home and a holster on every belt.</p><p>True to form, this approach has backfired in the court of public opinion, as ordinary Americans — who otherwise support the Second Amendment — recoil from the extreme rhetoric of the NRA and its supporters. To wit, the latest <a href="http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/02/voters-consider-nra-endorsement-a-negative.html">national survey</a> from Public Policy Polling shows that the organization has lost cachet with a good number of Americans. Thirty-nine percent say they would be less likely to vote for a candidate with the NRA’s endorsement, compared to 26 percent who say they would be more likely. Among independents, 41 percent consider the NRA’s endorsement a negative, while 27 percent say it’s a plus.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/02/06/is_the_nras_message_backfiring_partner/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/02/06/is_the_nras_message_backfiring_partner/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Tea Party alone didn&#8217;t cripple the GOP</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/02/04/the_tea_party_alone_didnt_cripple_the_gop_partner/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/02/04/the_tea_party_alone_didnt_cripple_the_gop_partner/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Feb 2013 18:25:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The American Prospect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republicans]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tea Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Richard Mourdock]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Todd Akin]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13190349</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Establishment Republicans can't keep blaming their party's troubles on its extremist fringe]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.prospect.org"><img style="margin: 0 10px 0 0;" src="http://media.salon.com/2012/10/TAP_new_logo6.png" alt="The American Prospect" align="left" /></a> When Republicans began 2012, the Senate was within in their grasp—Democrats were defending a huge number of seats, and several incumbents, like Claire McCaskill of Missouri, were deeply unpopular. They finished it, however, with a smaller minority than anyone could have predicted. Obviously, this was a huge defeat for the GOP, and blame for it has fallen on two particular candidates—Richard Mourdock in Indiana and Todd Akin in Missouri—who represent the failures and excesses of Tea Party conservatism.</p><p>In an effort to avoid a repeat of this in 2014, establishment Republicans have begun an effort to recruit more pliable candidates—ones who won’t sink GOP odds with ill-considered words on rape and women’s health. According to The New York Times, the “Conservative Victory Project” is “intended to counter other organizations that have helped defeat establishment Republican candidates over the last two election cycles. It is the most robust attempt yet by Republicans to impose a new sense of discipline on the party, particularly in primary races.”</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/02/04/the_tea_party_alone_didnt_cripple_the_gop_partner/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/02/04/the_tea_party_alone_didnt_cripple_the_gop_partner/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>32</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>It&#8217;s not a democracy if we don&#8217;t have the right to vote</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/30/its_time_to_make_voting_constitutional_partner/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/30/its_time_to_make_voting_constitutional_partner/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Jan 2013 15:10:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The American Prospect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eric Holder]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Constitution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[voting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Voter ID Laws]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[California]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Voting Rights Act]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13185899</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Most Americans already believe that the vote is sacrosanct. The least we can do is enshrine it in our laws]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.prospect.org"><img style="margin: 0 10px 0 0;" src="http://media.salon.com/2012/10/TAP_new_logo6.png" alt="The American Prospect" align="left" /></a> Early last year, when Attorney General Eric Holder took a strong stand against voter-identification laws, he emphasized how much they violate core American ideals. “What we are talking here is a constitutional right,” he said. “This is not a privilege. The right to vote is something that is fundamental to who we are as Americans. We have people who have given their lives—people have sacrificed a great deal in order for people to have the right to vote. It’s what distinguishes the United States from most other countries.”</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/01/30/its_time_to_make_voting_constitutional_partner/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/30/its_time_to_make_voting_constitutional_partner/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>40</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Voters to the GOP: It&#8217;s not you, it&#8217;s your ideas</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/28/voters_to_the_gop_its_not_you_its_your_ideas/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/28/voters_to_the_gop_its_not_you_its_your_ideas/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Jan 2013 17:56:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The American Prospect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mitt Romney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Paul Ryan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tea Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reince Priebus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marco Rubio]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13184053</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Republicans continue to believe that their problem in 2012 was their messaging. It wasn't]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.prospect.org"><img style="margin: 0 10px 0 0;" src="http://media.salon.com/2012/10/TAP_new_logo6.png" alt="The American Prospect" align="left" /></a> Over the weekend, conservative activists and politicians got together under the banner of the National Review to discuss the future. How can Republicans recover from 2012 and move the United States away from the liberalism of Barack Obama and the Democratic Party? While some political observers have called for ideological reform—a reorientation of the GOP’s priorities—Republicans themselves are less interested in taking this path. According to GOP insiders, <a href="http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=1473A58C-9AED-4D12-AB0D-34758847FAFD">notes Politico</a> in a story on the summit, 2012 had little to do with substance and <em>everything</em> to do with message. If Republicans can change the package—and find someone more engaging than Mitt Romney—they can win:</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/01/28/voters_to_the_gop_its_not_you_its_your_ideas/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/28/voters_to_the_gop_its_not_you_its_your_ideas/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>27</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Sam Brownback&#8217;s Kansas is a resort for &#8220;makers&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/27/sam_brownbacks_kansas_is_a_resort_for_makers_partner/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/27/sam_brownbacks_kansas_is_a_resort_for_makers_partner/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Jan 2013 14:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The American Prospect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Governor Sam Brownback]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kansas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ayn Rand]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Conservatism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13182024</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The governor has transformed the state into a laboratory for ultraconservative policies]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Much like Bobby Jindal in Louisiana, Governor Sam Brownback is busy turning Kansas into a right-wing paradise, with low wages, few public services, and reactionary social policy. Since 2010, when conservative Republicans—including Brownback—took full control of the state, Kansas has passed <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/12/us-abortion-kansas-idUSTRE73B7XL20110412">strict new anti-abortion laws</a> as well as large cuts to <a href="http://kansasreporter.org/72069.aspx">education and mental health</a>care services. And last year, Brownback signed a bill that cuts state income taxes by <a href="http://midwestdemocracy.com/articles/brownback-signs-big-tax-cut-in-kansas/">roughly $3.7 billion</a> over five years, and collapses the state’s current three-bracket tax system into two brackets: 4.9 percent and 3 percent.</p><p><a href="http://www.prospect.org"><img style="margin: 0 10px 0 0;" src="http://media.salon.com/2012/07/Prospect-Logo.png" alt="The American Prospect" align="left" /></a> That tax cut took effect this month, and as the <em>New York Times</em> <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/24/us/politics/gov-sam-brownback-seeks-to-end-kansas-income-tax.html?smid=tw-share&amp;_r=1&amp;pagewanted=all&amp;">reports</a>, it’s the largest reduction in Kansas history. It’s also only the beginning; this week, Kansas Republicans introduced a bill that would pare taxes further, and eventually eliminate the state’s individual income tax.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/01/27/sam_brownbacks_kansas_is_a_resort_for_makers_partner/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/27/sam_brownbacks_kansas_is_a_resort_for_makers_partner/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>52</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Virginia Republicans move forward with mass disenfranchisement</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/23/virginia_republicans_move_forward_with_mass_disenfranchisement/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/23/virginia_republicans_move_forward_with_mass_disenfranchisement/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jan 2013 23:49:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The American Prospect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[voting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Electoral Votes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Charles W. Carrico]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13180126</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A Senate subcommittee has recommended a bill to rig the state's electoral vote allocation]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.prospect.org"><img style="margin: 0 10px 0 0;" src="http://media.salon.com/2012/10/TAP_new_logo6.png" alt="The American Prospect" align="left" /></a> This morning, I <a href="http://prospect.org/article/republicans-are-seriously-considering-plan-rig-electoral-system">wrote</a> on an emerging Republican plan—in swing states won by President Obama—to rig presidential elections by awarding electoral votes to the winner of the most congressional districts. Because Democratic voters tend to cluster in highly-populated urban areas, and Republican voters tend to reside in more sparsely populated regions, this makes <em>land</em> the key variable in elections—to win the majority of a state’s electoral votes, your voters will have to occupy the most geographic space.</p><p>In addition to disenfranchising voters in dense areas, this would end the principle of “one person, one vote.” If Ohio operated under this scheme, for example, Obama would have received just 22 percent of the electoral votes, despite winning 52 percent of the popular vote in the state.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/01/23/virginia_republicans_move_forward_with_mass_disenfranchisement/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/23/virginia_republicans_move_forward_with_mass_disenfranchisement/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>47</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Will Obama put guns in schools after all?</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/19/will_obama_put_guns_in_schools_after_all/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/19/will_obama_put_guns_in_schools_after_all/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Jan 2013 17:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The American Prospect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gun Control]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wayne LaPierre]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NRA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13176422</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The president's executive actions aren't as far removed from Wayne LaPierre's vision as we might like to believe]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.prospect.org"><img style="margin: 0 10px 0 0;" src="http://media.salon.com/2012/10/TAP_new_logo6.png" alt="The American Prospect" align="left" /></a> Included in President Obama’s plan for reducing gun violence is an idea made famous, or infamous, by the National Rifle Association in its press conference following the massacre in Newtown, Connecticut. After <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/remarks-from-the-nra-press-conference-on-sandy-hook-school-shooting-delivered-on-dec-21-2012-transcript/2012/12/21/bd1841fe-4b88-11e2-a6a6-aabac85e8036_print.html">railing against</a> violence in movies and video games, NRA spokesperson Wayne LaPierre called on Congress “to act immediately to appropriate whatever is necessary to put armed police officers in every single school in this nation.”</p><p>Obama’s <a href="http://prospect.org/article/president-obama-announces-action-gun-control-23-new-executive-orders">plan</a> isn’t as dramatic or far-reaching, but it is a variation on the same idea. His executive action on guns calls for federal agencies to “provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers.” This includes mental-health professionals, guidance counselors, and police officers or other security officials.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/01/19/will_obama_put_guns_in_schools_after_all/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/19/will_obama_put_guns_in_schools_after_all/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>23</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Restricting abortions will backfire on conservatives</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/18/restricting_abortions_will_backfire_on_conservatives/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/18/restricting_abortions_will_backfire_on_conservatives/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2013 19:24:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The American Prospect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Abortion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Poverty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Conservativism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13175814</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If the GOP wants to reach low-income families, it'll make sure they have the resources to care for their kids]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.prospect.org"><img style="margin: 0 10px 0 0;" src="http://media.salon.com/2012/10/TAP_new_logo6.png" alt="The American Prospect" align="left" /></a> The Guttmacher Institute has a <a href="http://www.guttmacher.org/media/inthenews/2013/01/08/index.html">useful set of charts</a> detailing the state of abortion in 2013, apropos of <em>Roe</em>’s 40th anniversary. The short story is that abortion is far more widespread than Americans tend to think; by age 45, almost half of American women will have an unintended pregnancy, and nearly one in three will have an abortion. Sixty percent of women who have abortions already have one child, 44 percent are married or have a partner, and 69 percent are economically disadvantaged. Conservative rhetoric notwithstanding, the vast majority of abortions occur in the first trimester, and 73 percent of women who have abortions are “religiously affiliated.”</p><p>Unintended pregnancies and unplanned births are highest among African Americans and Latinos, and accordingly, those groups have the highest abortion rates—40 percent for blacks, 29 percent for Latinos.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/01/18/restricting_abortions_will_backfire_on_conservatives/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/18/restricting_abortions_will_backfire_on_conservatives/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Republicans are creating their own worst economic nightmare</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/15/republicans_are_creating_their_own_worst_economic_nightmare/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/15/republicans_are_creating_their_own_worst_economic_nightmare/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Jan 2013 19:28:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The American Prospect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fiscal cliff]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Debt ceiling]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Treasury]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13171653</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hitting the debt ceiling could set off a global financial panic -- and plunge us even deeper into our fiscal crisis]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.prospect.org"><img style="margin: 0 10px 0 0;" src="http://media.salon.com/2012/10/TAP_new_logo6.png" alt="The American Prospect" align="left" /></a> Two years ago, when S&amp;P downgraded the credit rating of the United States, they didn’t cite our debt or our spending. Instead, they knocked our political system, and in particular, the dysfunction and institutional creakiness that made a debt-ceiling stand-off possible: “The downgrade reflects our view that the effectiveness, stability, and predictability of American policymaking and political institutions have weakened at a time of ongoing fiscal and economic challenge,” said the company <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/06/business/us-debt-downgraded-by-sp.html?_r=0">in a statement</a> released that summer.</p><p>We’re just two weeks into 2013, but it’s already clear that the “effectiveness, stability, and predictability” of our institutions is in question. First, we came uncomfortably close to implementing a round of ruinous austerity that no one—even the deficit hawks—wanted, and now, we’re again fighting the GOP over raising the debt ceiling, and fulfilling our financial obligations to the world.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/01/15/republicans_are_creating_their_own_worst_economic_nightmare/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/15/republicans_are_creating_their_own_worst_economic_nightmare/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>21</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Are Republicans winning on diversity?</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/10/are_republicans_winning_on_diversity/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/10/are_republicans_winning_on_diversity/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jan 2013 22:09:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The American Prospect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marco Rubio]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bobby Jindal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hillary Clinton]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13167453</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The GOP offers a bevy of ethnic presidential candidates in 2016. Its strategists? Well, that's another story]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.prospect.org"><img style="margin: 0 10px 0 0;" src="http://media.salon.com/2012/10/TAP_new_logo6.png" alt="The American Prospect" align="left" /></a> Writing for ABC News, Amy Walters <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/politics/t/blogEntry?id=18179367">notes</a> that for all the criticism of Obama’s traditional cabinet—which, thus far, is heavy on white men—the bigger problem for Democrats is that their presidential hopefuls lean heavily on the conventional side:</p><blockquote><p>For all the hand-wringing over the lack of diversity in the Obama Administration’s second term Cabinet, Democrats should really be more depressed about the fact that their potential 2016 field is a lot less diverse than the GOP’s. Take away Hillary Clinton, and the Democratic bench looks more like that picture in the New York Times than it does the picture of Obama’s 2012 voting coalition.</p></blockquote><p>It’s true that if there’s anything you can say about the GOP’s likely field for 2016, it’s that it’s pretty diverse—for which the party deserves real credit.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/01/10/are_republicans_winning_on_diversity/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/10/are_republicans_winning_on_diversity/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>9</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>This isn&#8217;t 2011&#8242;s debt ceiling fight</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/08/this_isnt_2011s_debt_ceiling_fight/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/08/this_isnt_2011s_debt_ceiling_fight/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Jan 2013 17:06:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The American Prospect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Debt ceiling]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fiscal cliff]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[John Boehner]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13164831</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[An increasingly rattled GOP heads into a new round of negotionations with the future of the party up in the air]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.prospect.org"><img style="margin: 0 10px 0 0;" src="http://media.salon.com/2012/10/TAP_new_logo6.png" alt="The American Prospect" align="left" /></a> There’s no way to spin the 2011 debt-ceiling crisis as anything other than ridiculous, but it’s easy to understand the mentality that led the GOP to hold the country hostage. Republicans had just won a massive victory in the House of Representatives and conservatives felt validated; the GOP majority was built with candidates who didn’t shy away from the right. Moreover—to the recently elected representatives—the public had sent them to Washington to cut spending<em>,</em> and the debt ceiling was a perfect opportunity to do just that.</p><p>There’s much less clarity in the current situation. President Obama won re-election by <a href="http://prospect.org/article/final-tally">a solid margin</a>, taking 51 percent of the popular vote and 65 million votes overall. Democrats expanded their majority in the Senate, and managed to make a little headway in the House. For as much as it disappointed liberals, the fiscal-cliff deal was a sign of the new times: It’s hard to imagine <em>any </em>House Republicans voting for a tax increase on the wealthy in 2011.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/01/08/this_isnt_2011s_debt_ceiling_fight/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/08/this_isnt_2011s_debt_ceiling_fight/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>14</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>New Congress, same Republicans</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/04/new_congress_same_republicans/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/04/new_congress_same_republicans/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Jan 2013 15:18:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The American Prospect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republicans]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13161747</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The House of Representatives in the 113th Congress will be just as dysfunctional as the last one]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.prospect.org"><img style="margin: 0 10px 0 0;" src="http://media.salon.com/2012/10/TAP_new_logo6.png" alt="The American Prospect" align="left" /></a> The new Congress was sworn in today, which was cause for various writers to note the abysmal performance of the last Congress. Here’s Ezra Klein, for example, on the many, many <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-02/good-riddance-to-rottenest-congress-in-history.html">failures</a> of the 112th:</p><blockquote><p>What’s the record of the 112th Congress? Well, it almost shut down the government and almost breached the debt ceiling. It almost went over the fiscal cliff (which it had designed in the first place). It cut a trillion dollars of discretionary spending in the Budget Control Act and scheduled another trillion in spending cuts through an automatic sequester, which everyone agrees is terrible policy. It achieved nothing of note on housing, energy, stimulus, immigration, guns, tax reform, infrastructure, climate change or, really, anything. It’s hard to identify a single significant problem that existed prior to the 112th Congress that was in any way improved by its two years of rule.</p> <p>The 112th, which was gaveled into being on Jan. 3, 2011, by newly elected House Speaker John Boehner, wasn’t just unproductive in comparison with the 111th. It was unproductive compared with any Congress since 1948, when scholars began keeping tabs on congressional productivity.</p></blockquote><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/01/04/new_congress_same_republicans/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/04/new_congress_same_republicans/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Republican Party is the problem</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/02/the_republican_party_is_the_problem/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/02/the_republican_party_is_the_problem/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Jan 2013 19:21:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The American Prospect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[John Boehner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[George W. Bush]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13159839</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The fight over the "fiscal cliff" was a reminder that the GOP remains the main impediment to economic recovery]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.prospect.org"><img style="margin: 0 10px 0 0;" src="http://media.salon.com/2012/10/TAP_new_logo6.png" alt="The American Prospect" align="left" /></a> After weeks of negotiating, we have a deal on the fiscal cliff, which — in true, congressional fashion — passed hours <em>after</em> the government went “over” the cliff.</p><p>The <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/12/31/your-fiscal-cliff-deal-cheat-sheet/">details</a> of the deal are straightforward: Tax rates will rise permanently to Clinton-era levels for families with income over $450,000 and individuals with income over $400,000. For everyone below that ceiling, taxes will remain at Bush-era levels. Likewise, for families and individuals at that income threshold, the taxes on capital gains will rise to 20 percent, while staying at 15 percent for everyone else. Given the financial situation of most Americans — who don’t earn much, if anything, from investments — this is a good move, considering the circumstances.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/01/02/the_republican_party_is_the_problem/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/02/the_republican_party_is_the_problem/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>13</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Wayne LaPierre&#8217;s bizarre pop culture references</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/12/21/wayne_lapierres_bizarre_pop_culture_references/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/12/21/wayne_lapierres_bizarre_pop_culture_references/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Dec 2012 21:48:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The American Prospect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wayne LaPierre]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NRA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Natural Born Killers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sandy Hook Elementary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Newtown]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13152686</guid>
		<description><![CDATA["Natural Born Killers?" "Mortal Kombat?" You wonder why the NRA is so feared when its leader is this addled]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.prospect.org"><img style="margin: 0 10px 0 0;" src="http://media.salon.com/2012/10/TAP_new_logo6.png" alt="The American Prospect" align="left" /></a> The National Rifle Association has been in a tough spot since the shootings in Newtown, Connecticut. As an advocacy group for gun manufacturers and a particular set of gun enthusiasts, it has no interest in new gun-control regulations. But as a powerful political force, it has to say something — otherwise, it’s vulnerable to continued criticism.</p><p>This morning, NRA president Wayne LaPierre held <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/remarks-from-the-nra-press-conference-on-sandy-hook-school-shooting-delivered-on-dec-21-2012-transcript/2012/12/21/bd1841fe-4b88-11e2-a6a6-aabac85e8036_print.html">a press conference </a>— occasionally interrupted by protesters — in which he explained where the organization stood in light of last week’s violence. But rather than stand behind the modest gun-regulation efforts brewing in Congress or even offer a simple message of condolence, LaPierre decided to go on the offensive, blaming everything from video games, movies, and music — "Natural Born Killers," a 20-year-old film, received a shout out — to Obama’s budget for the proliferation of mass shooters.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/12/21/wayne_lapierres_bizarre_pop_culture_references/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/12/21/wayne_lapierres_bizarre_pop_culture_references/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>46</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Gun owners can&#8217;t hurt Democrats</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/12/17/gun_owners_cant_hurt_democrats/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/12/17/gun_owners_cant_hurt_democrats/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Dec 2012 16:04:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The American Prospect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Guns]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Columbine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sandy Hook]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tuscon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Aurora]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13147367</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[President Obama needs to follow through on his promise from last night's speech and stop kowtowing to extremists]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.prospect.org"><img style="margin: 0 10px 0 0;" src="http://media.salon.com/2012/10/TAP_new_logo6.png" alt="The American Prospect" align="left" /></a> The most notable thing to come out of President Obama’s speech last night—eulogizing the tragedy in Newtown, Connecticut—was his unambiguous commitment to pursuing new gun regulations in the coming weeks. Granted, he didn’t use the word “gun,” but the implications were clear:</p><blockquote><p>If there’s even one step we can take to save another child or another parent or another town from the grief that’s visited Tucson and Aurora and Oak Creek and Newtown and communities from Columbine to Blacksburg before that, then surely we have an obligation to try.</p> <p>In the coming weeks, I’ll use whatever power this office holds to engage my fellow citizens, from law enforcement, to mental health professionals, to parents and educators, in an effort aimed at preventing more tragedies like this, because what choice do we have? We can’t accept events like this as routine.</p> <p>Are we really prepared to say that we’re powerless in the face of such carnage, that the politics are too hard?</p> <p>Are we prepared to say that such violence visited on our children year after year after year is somehow the price of our freedom?</p></blockquote><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/12/17/gun_owners_cant_hurt_democrats/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/12/17/gun_owners_cant_hurt_democrats/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>In defense of 2016 speculation</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/12/08/in_defense_of_2016_speculation/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/12/08/in_defense_of_2016_speculation/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Dec 2012 15:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The American Prospect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marco Rubio]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2012 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Elections 2012]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bill Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[George W. Bush]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13119074</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Yes, it's annoying only a month removed from the last election, but now's when possible candidates start to emerge]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.prospect.org"><img style="margin: 0 10px 0 0;" src="http://media.salon.com/2012/10/TAP_new_logo6.png" alt="The American Prospect" align="left" /></a> Over at <em>The Atlantic</em>, Conor Friedersdorf mocks the breathless 2016 speculation with a <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/12/the-race-begins-gearing-up-for-the-2048-presidential-election/266005/">post</a> "gearing up for the 2048 presidential election." It's genuinely funny:</p><blockquote><p>Although it is still early, Mitt Romney, who has 16 grandchildren, is leading among the patriarchs of America's dynastic political families, in part due to the present childlessness of George P. Bush and Chelsea Clinton, whose presence in articles on this subject is an apparent journalistic convention. Starting families now could give the hypothetical grandchildren of George W. Bush and Bill Clinton a head start on the theoretical grandchildren of Barack Obama, whose daughters are years away from having children if they decide to procreate at all.</p></blockquote><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/12/08/in_defense_of_2016_speculation/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/12/08/in_defense_of_2016_speculation/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>10</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>New York Times trolls women</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/12/03/new_york_times_trolls_women/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/12/03/new_york_times_trolls_women/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Dec 2012 15:40:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The American Prospect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New York Times]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Birthrate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mexico]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Latin America]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13113340</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Columnist Ross Douthat ascribes the United States' declining birthrate to the "decadence" of American women]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.prospect.org"><img style="margin: 0 10px 0 0;" src="http://media.salon.com/2012/10/TAP_new_logo6.png" alt="The American Prospect" align="left" /></a> It’s hard to overstate the role of demographics in shaping the challenges that face the United States over the next few decades. To use one prominent example, the rush to reform entitlements and the focus on restraining health care costs owe themselves to demographics—an unusually large cohort of people are due to retire from the workforce and begin to strain our social insurance programs. Likewise, efforts to prepare for this inevitability—such as the Affordable Care Act—are hampered by, again, demographics—as we saw in the 2010 midterm elections, older voters are loathe to sign on to anything that looks like a change to the status quo.</p><p>With that said, if the United States has a distinct advantage over its similarly–situated fellow travelers in Europe and elsewhere, it’s due to demographics. Thanks to mass immigration, our birth rate has held steady, and in a prosperous society, more people is a recipe for more growth.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/12/03/new_york_times_trolls_women/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/12/03/new_york_times_trolls_women/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>15</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Does anyone want Medicare cuts?</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/11/30/does_anyone_want_medicare_cuts/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/11/30/does_anyone_want_medicare_cuts/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2012 16:05:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The American Prospect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Medicare]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Washington Post]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ABC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mitt Romney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Affordable Care Act]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13111230</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A new poll reveals that 68 percent of conservatives oppose slicing the health care program for seniors]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.prospect.org"><img style="margin: 0 10px 0 0;" src="http://media.salon.com/2012/10/TAP_new_logo6.png" alt="The American Prospect" align="left" /></a> One of the more interesting results in yesterday’s <em>Washington Post</em>/ABC News <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/polling/postabc-poll-support-reducing-nations-budget/2012/11/28/083a0a26-3952-11e2-9258-ac7c78d5c680_page.html">poll</a>, as the <em>Post</em>'s Greg Sargent <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/the-morning-plum-can-obama-change-washington-from-the-outside/2012/11/28/3e636eec-394f-11e2-b01f-5f55b193f58f_blog.html">alluded</a> to this morning, is the overwhelming opposition to Medicare cuts from Republican voters. Sixty-eight percent of self-identified Republicans—and 68 percent of self-identified <em>conservatives</em>—oppose cuts to the health-care program for seniors.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/11/30/does_anyone_want_medicare_cuts/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/11/30/does_anyone_want_medicare_cuts/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>9</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Are Republicans losing the South?</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/11/26/have_republicans_lost_the_south/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/11/26/have_republicans_lost_the_south/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2012 16:41:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The South]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Alabama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The American Prospect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[South Carolina]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Georgia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Slavery by Another Name]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13107505</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As the region changes demographically, the GOP's stranglehold is starting to loosen]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.prospect.org"><img style="margin: 0 10px 0 0;" src="http://media.salon.com/2012/10/TAP_new_logo6.png" alt="The American Prospect" align="left" /></a> One of the more interesting elements of President Barack Obama’s re-election victory was his strong performance in the South. He won Virginia and Florida—again—and came close to a win in North Carolina, where he lost by just two points. “Obama’s 2012 numbers in the Southeastern coastal states,” <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/republicans-face-unexpected-challenges-in-coastal-south-amid-shrinking-white-vote/2012/11/23/02cbda58-336a-11e2-bb9b-288a310849ee_print.html">writes</a> Douglas Blackmon for <em>The</em> <em>Washington Post</em>, “outperformed every Democratic nominee since Carter and significantly narrowed past gaps between Democratic and Republican candidates.”</p><p>Indeed, Blackmon—who won a Pulitzer for the book <em>Slavery by Another Name</em>—sees this as a crack in the Republican Party’s otherwise solid hold on the South. A growing African American population, combined with greater Latino immigration and a shrinking white electorate (the share of white votes in Florida dropped to 66 percent, for example) has allowed Democrats to make gains in states that were once GOP strongholds. Judging from Election Day, this is most true in the five states that hug the coast: Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/11/26/have_republicans_lost_the_south/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/11/26/have_republicans_lost_the_south/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>20</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
