Willard's other fault is that he truly is a chip off the ole block.
Willard's other fault is that he truly is a chip off the ole block.
"The mark of a great player is in his ability to come back. The great champions have all come back from defeat." - Sam Snead
Great piece Sic Em. As one of those evil conservative Christians, I would be willing to let the party drop the social issues and focus on the economic, but that won't be a winner overall for them.
3 million voters that voted for McCain stayed home this time. Why? I believe for two reasons.
One is Romney was a squishy moderate talking like a conservative. The other was his Mormonism. Many Christians just couldn't pull that lever.
If Romney had gotten just the same amount of turnout as McCain he would be President. The people that stayed home are just as responsible for four more years of Obama as the ones that voted for Obama.
A true conservative would have won, but the Republican apparatchik is set up to keep that from happening. The truth is Republican politicians dislike conservatives and especially conservative Christians as much as dems do.
"We still find the greedy hand of government thrusting itself into every corner and crevice of industry, and grasping at the spoil of the multitude. Invention is continually exercised to furnish new pretenses for revenue and taxation. It watches prosperity as its prey and permits none to escape without a tribute."
-- Thomas Paine
I always find it amusing when people say the Republicans could win if they only supported abortion, amnesty for illegals etc. Basically just adopt the democratic platform.Originally Posted by LiveLaughLove
Which is a fair point. It could be that these fundamental beliefs imply that Republicans will have a very hard time winning the national election. And there is nothing wrong with that, they clearly can win at the state and local level which feeds into the national process. But the Pubs can't force the majority to agree with those views and the demograhic trends point to those core beliefs being held by a shrinking minority.
That's where the Republican party is going. The country is going left. The liberals gladly keep moving left. The Republicans also move left but not as much.
"Center" is not the center any longer. It is way to the left of center from what it was just 30 years ago. And 30 years ago it was far to the left of what it was the 30 years before that.
Look at England. The Torries used to be actual conservatives. They are now to the left of our liberals here. The Labor party is waaaayyyyy to the left of liberals here, but we're getting there.
England at one time was the greatest country on Earth. Not any longer. It's just another nation. And one that's about to be overrun by Muslims too.
Yes, adopt Democrat policies to fight the Democrats you Republicans. Call yourself Republicans, but you won't be. In fact, you haven't been for some time.
"We still find the greedy hand of government thrusting itself into every corner and crevice of industry, and grasping at the spoil of the multitude. Invention is continually exercised to furnish new pretenses for revenue and taxation. It watches prosperity as its prey and permits none to escape without a tribute."
-- Thomas Paine
Unless we have two different idea's of welfare that person you described has to have income coming from somewhere else other then the government to own a $35,000 plus suv. Soonercare does not equal welfare in my book. As far people in low income housing have computers and tv's I would bet alot of that is rent to own (Who leech of off the less fortunate in my opinion) or bought from pawn shops etc. Most electronics are cheap these days. They are not driving new cars and having $50 dollar rent. And guess what? There are plenty of Republicans on welfare too. I work with the public and see all kinds of people in different situations. As been stated earlier demographics are changing we leave in a multicultural world now with different idea's. The only we will go thru this is to come together on common goals. We all want a better life.
Gallup found earlier this year that fewer Americans than ever before identify as being pro-choice - down to 41%.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/154838/pr...ecord-low.aspx
Immigration amnesty has tilted the other way - a higher percentage now approves of it.
None of you seem to understand. I'm not locked in here with you. You're locked in here with me.
Until we get back to a constitutional basis for running the country we are going see this drift to the left. We have let current hot button social issues filter into the governmental arena. Can you imagine somebody bringing up the issue of gay rights at the Constitutional Convention in 1787? Of course not. Things like this are what has trivialized our democratic process.
And abortion has been on the back burner for 4 years since everyone knew the status quo was not going to change.
But that is just 1 issue in a sea of many that can whittle republican support down to a minority. Even my *extremely* conservative parents who are republican to the bone think all this anti-gay stuff in the party platform is wrong. Yes, I was shocked to find this out myself recently.
Interesting read. Bottom line,, one group espouses a set of principals and hope others "get it",,,conversely,,,the other side buses ppl to polling stations b/c its a warm body, uses media to sway the ignorant, and panders to anything with a heartbeat. Romney didn't lose b/c of what he did or didn't do. O won b/c of he had a lot of help from a large network of ppl.
First, I absolutely do not think the Republican Party should adopt more of the Democrat platform. That's the last thing I want since a big part of the problem is that the Republican Party is already way way way the hell too much like the Democrat Party. I want the Republican Party to adopt a more libertarian platform not a more liberal platform...just because there is some convergence there with liberal issues doesn't mean I want a liberal platform.
For one thing, I oppose all immigration both legal and otherwise, so I sure as hell don't support amnesty. Abortion is and should be a state issue -- nationally, the GOP shouldn't have a position on abortion.
Last edited by SicEmBaylor; 11/9/2012 at 08:43 PM.
A party has to look not just at how many votes a stance may have cost it, but at how many it stands to lose if it gives in on it. I'm not sure that the GOP can afford to change its platform concerning some social issues without condemning itself to 40 years in the political wilderness. Literally.
Something else to remember - at this time in 2008 the so-called experts were writing epitaphs for the GOP and/or American political conservatism, and many who still wish for that very thing have been reporting that same tolling bell this week. Yet in 2010 Democrats didn't just lose a bulletproof (or at least filibuster-proof) stranglehold on DC, they lost the House by a landslide.
Two factors that seem to have been overlooked by many on here are 1) the natural political advantage given any incumbent, and 2) 7.8%. Many voters opted to give Obama a mulligan this time around. And apparently more than 7,000,000 others didn't think he deserved one. Had the September unemployment figure come in at, say, 8.2%, how many more Obama voters would either have defected or stayed home?
Few seats changed hands this election in the Senate and House. And as often happens, the party that won the presidential race picked up seats in each. But if unemployment figures early next year begin inching upwards again, or if more companies begin announcing layoffs, there will be hell to pay. This time there's no honeymoon, and no 70% approval rating to ride atop.
None of you seem to understand. I'm not locked in here with you. You're locked in here with me.
Wow, SicEm, you are alive and well in a country of immigrants, its very
foundation comes from immigration, which, btw, owes the natives every
sort of apology on record, but that's another thread. ( My ancestors came
over sometime after the Mayflower and were greeted by more of my ancestors.)
Your attitude seems to fall in line with the idea of, well, we're here so let's
lock the damn gate and shoot anyone else who tries to come in.
Keep your beliefs in mind as the world changes around you....imo, a path
to legalization is coming, tighter border restrictions are coming, more severe
penalties on companies who hire illegals are on the way and, a good chance
that most of the Dream Act will come to fruition. I understand why you feel
as you do but I don't understand why you are so unwilling to accept the inevitable.
It is a give and take world.
I neither think anything SicEm said is amazing or wonderful. I have never thought he was fully educated in the ways of Politics. He spent years in a type of Political Group Therapy for people who think they will one day wear blue blazers, $1000 suits and Flagpins.
I don't think he's had an original thought since he buried his nose in all of it.
I think he would have done better putting himself through School and working a few real jobs with real people. He has no idea what real people have had to struggle with. He's maybe had a huge reality check the last few years but this idea he has that Libertarians have all the answers and would best serve America are only to serve his ego and give him some sort of satisfaction in that he didn't waste so damn much money and time on an expensive education that reaped few rewards.
I tire of people who work so hard to tell Real hard working Taxpayers what to believe when all they spew is the viewpoint of a Professional Student who was financed by the wealth of someone else.
I know he's way to young to know what Abortion was like before they stopped incarcerating people for nearly killing their Daughter or Wife and the Town Doctor having to come in and clean up a tragedy of Greek Proportion. Not every Doctor went through those days. Mine did. I still shutter when I think of what our Country would be like if States had their own laws on Abortion.
Just that position in itself shows just how naive he is about people and their lives. I would tell him to go get his Vas Deferentia snipped as hopefully he will never procreate but I feel that would be way to strong of an opinion to take. All of the years I have in this World have proved to me that the offspring of even guys like him can overcome the one-sidedness and one-mindeness of their sperm donor.
So shall we assume that your ancestors sneaked in illegally? Did they also run drugs across the border?
None of you seem to understand. I'm not locked in here with you. You're locked in here with me.
There is no such thing as a "native" people in N. America. World history is replete with examples of one people doing another people wrong. That's life. I'd love for the Union to continue to apologize for their crimes against the southern people, but I certainly have no expectation of that. Whatever damage done to the so-called native population should be offset by the fact they have the privilege of living in one of the richest most advanced nations in all of human history instead of living in wood huts in NE or running across the prairie of the Great Plains wearing loin cloths -- the same can be said of another ethnic group.
Your characterization of my position on immigration is correct. We are a nation full of people whose ancestry includes immigrants; however, I have never heard a good compelling argument for why that should have any impact on contemporary American immigration policy. We also used to have a nation with more jobs and more space than we could fill with native-born citizens; however, we are now a nation of 350 million people and a real unemployment rate in the double digits. Let's get the unemployment rate down to at least under 5% and then if there are still a considerable number of menial labor jobs that need filling we can discuss the need to issue temporary work visas under a program that is closely monitored and well managed. But I will likely never support the naturalization process.
Having said all that, I don't necessarily put all the blame on illegal immigrants for exploiting a ****ty system with as many holes in it as swiss cheese. It's completely and utterly unreasonable and insane to try to deport the millions that are here illegally. That will never ever work.
However, I am in favor of new draconian laws that would make the penalty for hiring an illegal so harsh that few would ever take the risk. I'm talking laws that would result in criminal charges and fines so massive that could even result in a business having to shut its doors. And whenever illegals do work their way into the system from committing other crimes, they should immediately be deported without a hearing.
If new draconian laws were to be put in place...I would nominate you to be the first guy in a pickup to head down to the Border. We will give you a nice shiny badge and a bullet for your gun Frosty.
To those that have never achieved anything,,,,a welfare check is a huge achievement. Just ask those who live/lived in Juarez. To them, gov is the beacon of prosperity,,, especially our gov.
I was under the impression that most illegal immigrants are here to try to work. I suppose I could be wrong.
Posting Permissions
