Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

wow republicans really flushed this one down the shitter, didn't they


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
57 replies to this topic

#46 Davidson Deac II

Davidson Deac II

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 17,940
  • Reputation: 1,462
HUDDLER

Posted 15 February 2012 - 04:17 PM

Like I said in another thread, the Republicans are doomed until they finally let go of all conservative Bible-thumping ideals that are going to hold them back.


They are more doomed if they do let go. Social Conservatives make up a very large part of republican voters, maybe as high as 40%. Not all of them are as extreme as some, but lose them, say to a third party for example, and it will be a long time before the republicans win another national election.

And imo, the fiscal conservatives in the tea party are being just as hard headed if not more so than the evangelicals.

Edited by Davidson Deac II, 15 February 2012 - 04:22 PM.


#47 chris999

chris999

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 5,043
  • Reputation: 239
HUDDLER

Posted 15 February 2012 - 04:58 PM

They are more doomed if they do let go. Social Conservatives make up a very large part of republican voters, maybe as high as 40%. Not all of them are as extreme as some, but lose them, say to a third party for example, and it will be a long time before the republicans win another national election.

And imo, the fiscal conservatives in the tea party are being just as hard headed if not more so than the evangelicals.


I think that your right, but i think that they can do it, it would just take maybe 10 or 15 years.

I think that there are millions of people who believe in capitalism, small government and less regulation, but are turned off to the strong Christian values crammed down their throat, and think that our government should be separate from religion like it is supposed to be according to the Constitution.

I think that the fundamentalists would come around when they figure out that they can practice they're religion at home, but still be economically conservative when it comes to politics.

#48 cookinwithgas

cookinwithgas

    Grey Poupon Elitest Trash

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 24,430
  • Reputation: 2,350
SUPPORTER

Posted 15 February 2012 - 05:32 PM

I vote on social issues so the Republicans, as I've said before, will not be considered by me until they get rid of this monkey on their back.

#49 Davidson Deac II

Davidson Deac II

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 17,940
  • Reputation: 1,462
HUDDLER

Posted 15 February 2012 - 05:43 PM

I think that your right, but i think that they can do it, it would just take maybe 10 or 15 years.

I think that there are millions of people who believe in capitalism, small government and less regulation, but are turned off to the strong Christian values crammed down their throat, and think that our government should be separate from religion like it is supposed to be according to the Constitution.

I think that the fundamentalists would come around when they figure out that they can practice they're religion at home, but still be economically conservative when it comes to politics.


Maybe, but I think that there has always been some whose religion effects their vote, at least with people who take their religion very seriously. I don't think it can really be any other way. And fwiw, I don't have a problem with that.

I am not that concerned about the social issues anyway. For all the talk from conservatives over the years, very little of what they want has actually been implemented. People spend far to much time concerned about these things, when in truth they have very little impact on our lives. Social issues get out the vote for both sides, but they have far less impact than domestic issues, and far less impact than foreign policy issues.

My problem is the absolute uncompromising attitude that political groups have taken in the last few years. The Republican party have been severly impacted by this. There are some on the democrat side that are the same way as well, but their voice has been muted over the past decade or so, probably because they got tired of losing.

Its alright to have a core group of beliefs, but when running the government, you have to be willing to give a little to get a little.

#50 Floppin

Floppin

    Smooches

  • Joined: 10-May 10
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 12,896
  • Reputation: 3,407
HUDDLER

Posted 15 February 2012 - 05:54 PM

Anyone who actually takes the social issue campaigning seriously is just playing right into their game. None of that poo ever substantially changes, no matter who is in office and in the event that public opinion is overwhelmingly one sided on an issue it doesn't matter who is in office it will be conceded. The whole religion and social issue game is nothing more than a votes game.

#51 mav1234

mav1234

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 18-October 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 17,037
  • Reputation: 2,231
HUDDLER

Posted 15 February 2012 - 05:54 PM

I think you are vastly underestimating the huge proportion of people who won't even consider voting Republican (many of whom therefore end up voting Democrat, others who don't vote) that want limited government, fiscal responsibility, but not at the cost of social issues they consider instrumental in electing a leader that they identify with. It's not that all these people are single issue voters, it's that for so many of them, the idea of voting for a guy who sees the world so completely differently than they do is just hard to swallow.

The Republican conservative religious base continues to shrink and I think the sooner they find a way to move away from leaning on those social conservative ideals, the sooner they can start building a new base, one that is more likely to sustain itself into the future.

Anyone who actually takes the social issue campaigning seriously is just playing right into their game. None of that poo ever substantially changes, no matter who is in office and in the event that public opinion is overwhelmingly one sided on an issue it doesn't matter who is in office it will be conceded. The whole religion and social issue game is nothing more than a votes game.


Disagree, it sometimes takes time, but look at DADT.

#52 Davidson Deac II

Davidson Deac II

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 17,940
  • Reputation: 1,462
HUDDLER

Posted 15 February 2012 - 06:43 PM

I think you are vastly underestimating the huge proportion of people who won't even consider voting Republican (many of whom therefore end up voting Democrat, others who don't vote) that want limited government, fiscal responsibility, but not at the cost of social issues they consider instrumental in electing a leader that they identify with. It's not that all these people are single issue voters, it's that for so many of them, the idea of voting for a guy who sees the world so completely differently than they do is just hard to swallow.

The Republican conservative religious base continues to shrink and I think the sooner they find a way to move away from leaning on those social conservative ideals, the sooner they can start building a new base, one that is more likely to sustain itself into the future.



Disagree, it sometimes takes time, but look at DADT.


How many elections have the republicans won over the past 30 years or so? Since Reagan, they have dominated the whitehouse and been 50/50 or so in Congress, a big change from where they were before that. There may be some who are turned off by the evangelical stuff, but as the Gay marriage vote in California showed, there are also some social conservatives who will vote democratic in the elections.

I do agree that the republican base is shrinking though. But imo, it has more to do with changing demographics than with evangelicals. The population is becoming less white, and more hispanic/black, and those groups tend to vote democrat more often than not. Republicans are trying to reach out to hispanics, but the immigration issue is making it hard to do so.

#53 mav1234

mav1234

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 18-October 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 17,037
  • Reputation: 2,231
HUDDLER

Posted 15 February 2012 - 07:03 PM

I don't know why you think they dominated the white house; they've split it exactly equally since Reagan.

I think that while there are a lot of social conservatives who will vote democratic in elections, I think there are also a lot of fiscal conservatives (but social liberals) who will either vote dems or not at all, rather than vote Republican.

Ehh, I guess we'll see. I just think clinging too tightly to the religious right is a bad idea.

#54 Spaceballs83

Spaceballs83

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 09-September 10
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 1,189
  • Reputation: 297
HUDDLER

Posted 15 February 2012 - 07:05 PM

Say goodbye to our country if Obama gets re-elected. You think his liberal policies are bad now, wait until he has a 2nd term where he doesn't have to worry about getting re-elected again.

Kindof thinking about it though...it wouldn't surprise me if Obama enacted legislation to make his post for life.

#55 rodeo

rodeo

    Keelah se'lai

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 16,823
  • Reputation: 4,808
HUDDLER

Posted 15 February 2012 - 09:44 PM

Which liberal policy are you referring to?

#56 cantrell

cantrell

    secular progressive bogeyman

  • Joined: 16-May 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 4,447
  • Reputation: 3
HUDDLER

Posted 15 February 2012 - 09:54 PM

Which liberal policy are you referring to?


tax cuts and eliminating government jobs obviously

e: also obamacare, featuring the socialist government takeover private mandate

#57 Davidson Deac II

Davidson Deac II

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 17,940
  • Reputation: 1,462
HUDDLER

Posted 15 February 2012 - 10:53 PM

I don't know why you think they dominated the white house; they've split it exactly equally since Reagan.

I think that while there are a lot of social conservatives who will vote democratic in elections, I think there are also a lot of fiscal conservatives (but social liberals) who will either vote dems or not at all, rather than vote Republican.

Ehh, I guess we'll see. I just think clinging too tightly to the religious right is a bad idea.


I was including the Reagan years.

And fwiw, I think clinging to tightly to any specific group is a bad idea for a party that actually wants to win. :)

#58 cookinwithgas

cookinwithgas

    Grey Poupon Elitest Trash

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 24,430
  • Reputation: 2,350
SUPPORTER

Posted 16 February 2012 - 11:17 PM

Yes spaceballs if you think that keeping Gitmo open, bailing out banks and all that is a desperate attempt at converting our nation to socialism well just vote for whatever dork ends up as the Republican nominee. Romneycare, Gingrich bipartixanship, or Santorum insanity, you are sure to pick a real alternative.