Page 11 of 13 FirstFirst ... 910111213 LastLast
Results 301 to 330 of 379

Thread: Today's Republican Party is....

  1. #301
    Senior Member GGT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    18,591
    Quote Originally Posted by Flixy View Post
    Yeah, it's not like Democrats don't woo voters, and put that ahead of governing. They just pander to different groups. Unions come to mind, raising retirement age..
    That post was referring to Republicans trying to use the budget process to kill Obamacare, shut-down the federal government....and the looming fight over raising the debt ceiling.

  2. #302
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Amsterdam/Istanbul
    Posts
    9,986
    Quote Originally Posted by Nessus View Post
    How does the voter control those opaque internal movements?
    The NYT had a piece today that shows that the GOP has a relatively high number of congressional districts that are considered 'safe'. Which would make me think that the influence of the voter on those inner party workings are declining.

    Isn't California a bit of an example for what all of America is turning into?
    Greece shows us that there is a kind of politician worse than the ones that break their election promises; the ones that keep their election promises.

  3. #303
    Senior Member GGT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    18,591
    Recent poll from WSJ/NBC shows a huge decline in Republican 'favorability'. The worst since Clinton's impeachment. Seems the financial and business guys, and news journalists, have finally rung the bell on this dog-n-pony show.

  4. #304
    Senior Member GGT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    18,591
    Bump. The Republican house majority leader (Cantor) has lost his congressional seat to an unknown Tea Party rival. Apparently, that hasn't happened since the 1800's. So much for the Republican Party and its "Young Guns", eh?

  5. #305
    Local talking head LittleFuzzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    5,661
    Quote Originally Posted by Hazir View Post
    The NYT had a piece today that shows that the GOP has a relatively high number of congressional districts that are considered 'safe'. Which would make me think that the influence of the voter on those inner party workings are declining.

    Isn't California a bit of an example for what all of America is turning into?
    Since GGT bumped the thread and I didn't see this before. . . there are two different definitions of safe seats. A seat that is safe for the person holding it and a seat that is safe for one of the parties. There is, naturally, a whole lot of overlap in these two definitions. In neither case, though, does it indicate the above. When a seat is safe because no one is getting the incumbent out, the incumbent is more or less immune to the internal party movements. S/he is still influenced by the voters though because it is invariably their local responsiveness that makes them so safe in the first place. When the seat is safe for one of the parties, then the only real function it has on inner-party workings is to make them less opaque. Because those workings are the only thing behind any changes with the seat. See what GGT is commenting on with her bump. Cantor's district hasn't voted Democrat since the party lost its southern-conservative wing.

    And yeah, it looks like the country has been moving in the incredibly incumbent-protective direction we've been a national leader on
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  6. #306
    Senior Member GGT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    18,591
    Fuzzy, you're full of shit. You've insinuated that politics is just politics....it's all the same, regardless of topics or issues, or locations. And you've said the Republican Party is right-of-center, but mostly centrist.

    Who are you kidding?





  7. #307
    Local talking head LittleFuzzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    5,661
    Quote Originally Posted by GGT View Post
    Fuzzy, you're full of shit. You've insinuated that politics is just politics....it's all the same, regardless of topics or issues, or locations.
    Electioneering is all the same. That's only one subset of politics though. OTOH, I'm certain plenty of other things in politics are much more similar than you prefer to pretend.

    And you've said the Republican Party is right-of-center, but mostly centrist.


    I've said no such thing. Your reading comprehension remains crap.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  8. #308
    All Worship Ragnarök Loki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    16,642
    Hope is the denial of reality

  9. #309
    Local talking head LittleFuzzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    5,661
    Gotta love how people write things. When Balz was picking examples of differences on party lines, he usually presented something Dems liked and then presented a contrast of the partisan conservative doesn't like it. The only times he writes it the other way is when citing a religion-based datum.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  10. #310
    All Worship Ragnarök Loki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    16,642
    This is why you need peer-review and more systematic data-driven analysis.
    Hope is the denial of reality

  11. #311
    Senior Member GGT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    18,591
    [QUOTE=LittleFuzzy;153105]Electioneering is all the same. That's only one subset of politics though. OTOH, I'm certain plenty of other things in politics are much more similar than you prefer to pretend.

    I've said no such thing. Your reading comprehension remains crap.
    "The Tea Party isn't fringe nor is it or the Republican Party extreme right. Well, maybe by your own hard Left/progressive perspective which probably sees anything more than just barely right of the political middle as extreme right but certainly not by any national evaluation, before or after the rise of that bit of conservative populism. Both are solidly center-right. It's just that the party's moderate wing collapsed nor do they have any functional equivalent of the Blue Dog Democrat. What actually characterizes the Tea Party is that they are Stupid Right. This is a normal problem with populist movements since they tend to be built on overly-simplistic platforms (in the Tea Party's case, an anti-tax and somewhat weaker anti-spending platform). The only way in which this political movement can be characterized as a "national threat" is in that it has galvanized the party you don't belong to in opposing a platform you favored but were never going to see enacted anyway."

    You've said many things in other threads, Fuzzy. I don't keep post-it notes to keep track....but my overall impression is that you think the modern Republican Party hasn't changed much over the decades, even though "conservatism" has changed.
    Last edited by GGT; 06-14-2014 at 06:47 AM.

  12. #312
    Local talking head LittleFuzzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    5,661
    [QUOTE=GGT;153198]
    Quote Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy View Post
    Electioneering is all the same. That's only one subset of politics though. OTOH, I'm certain plenty of other things in politics are much more similar than you prefer to pretend.



    "The Tea Party isn't fringe nor is it or the Republican Party extreme right. Well, maybe by your own hard Left/progressive perspective which probably sees anything more than just barely right of the political middle as extreme right but certainly not by any national evaluation, before or after the rise of that bit of conservative populism. Both are solidly center-right. It's just that the party's moderate wing collapsed nor do they have any functional equivalent of the Blue Dog Democrat. What actually characterizes the Tea Party is that they are Stupid Right. This is a normal problem with populist movements since they tend to be built on overly-simplistic platforms (in the Tea Party's case, an anti-tax and somewhat weaker anti-spending platform). The only way in which this political movement can be characterized as a "national threat" is in that it has galvanized the party you don't belong to in opposing a platform you favored but were never going to see enacted anyway."

    You've said many things in other threads, Fuzzy. I don't keep post-it notes to keep track....but my overall impression is that you think the modern Republican Party hasn't changed much over the decades, even though "conservatism" has changed.
    Center-right is not the center of the political spectrum. I think you're confusing it with right-of-center. Last term is controlling, earlier terms modify/describe the last, this is basic English structure. If one were dyslexic I could see the confusion, or were unfamiliar with this type of discussion, but these are pretty commonly used political referents on here and in the media you're reading Center right is mainstream conservative. Not extreme conservativism, not moderate conservativism (which is itself to the right of the right-of-center), but the central area of the right side of the political spectrum.

    And if you look at their positions on the issues, the mainstream conservative stance hasn't changed much. The proportion of the party holding those views has, it's increased (the proportion of those on the hard right has also increased though not by as much) as the moderate wing has evaporated for the time being. The party might have changed but the only significant change in "conservativism" in recent decades has been the rise of the neo-cons. The Tea Party's positions are not appreciably different from those of mainstream conservatives, they're just louder, more populist, and demonstrate less awareness and understanding. Less taxes, less spending, some religious sentiment, big fans of the 2nd amendment, not fans of immigration, surface proponents of state power, that's most of the primary positions (held in varying proportions) of the major segments in the Tea Party. And the only differences between them and the classic "paleo-conservative" which was mocked as a dinosaur and out-of-touch for most of the '90s and '00s is that the Tea Party doesn't seem to have much of an interest in foreign policy and its people are way less familiar with how to make the US political system work in even a semi-functional manner. Which is, again, pretty common with populist movements. The initial electoral upsets caused by the protest movement in the 60s and 70s fizzled out for just that reason
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  13. #313
    Senior Member GGT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    18,591
    [QUOTE=LittleFuzzy;153216]
    Quote Originally Posted by GGT View Post
    ...

    And if you look at their positions on the issues, the mainstream conservative stance hasn't changed much. The proportion of the party holding those views has, it's increased (the proportion of those on the hard right has also increased though not by as much) as the moderate wing has evaporated for the time being.

    The party might have changed but the only significant change in "conservativism" in recent decades has been the rise of the neo-cons.

    The Tea Party's positions are not appreciably different from those of mainstream conservatives, they're just louder, more populist, and demonstrate less awareness and understanding. Less taxes, less spending, some religious sentiment, big fans of the 2nd amendment, not fans of immigration, surface proponents of state power, that's most of the primary positions (held in varying proportions) of the major segments in the Tea Party. And the only differences between them and the classic "paleo-conservative" which was mocked as a dinosaur and out-of-touch for most of the '90s and '00s is that the Tea Party doesn't seem to have much of an interest in foreign policy and its people are way less familiar with how to make the US political system work in even a semi-functional manner. Which is, again, pretty common with populist movements. The initial electoral upsets caused by the protest movement in the 60s and 70s fizzled out for just that reason
    Be consistent when you're nit-picking terminology, especially for what "mainstream" means.

    I agree about the rise of neo-cons (mostly as military hawks/interventionists), but I don't agree that the "moderate wing" has evaporated...or that Tea Party factions are just another Republican animal hangin' out in the GOP. I think what's different about the modern national (R) party is a consensus about what governance means, or that governing requires negotiations and compromises -- not just with Democrats but within their own party.

    Couple that disconnect with electioneering, gerrymandering, primary challenges --- and Republican nominees are drowning in political swamp soup. That's partly why Independent and Unaffiliated voter registrations have been rising. There's nothing "mainstream" about RNC social issues regarding sex, marriage, Birth Control, abortion, "Personhood", or "legitimate rape".

    Pew Research published new data about political polarization in the US. Have you seen it?

  14. #314
    Senior Member GGT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    18,591
    Bump.




    And now a Republican majority can't elect a new Speaker of the House.

    WTF is going on?
    Last edited by GGT; 10-15-2015 at 09:46 PM.

  15. #315
    Senior Member GGT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    18,591
    Today's Republican Party has such an identity crisis that it can't let the RNC negotiate its public appearances on public debates. When things go bad, they try to pin it on "the media", instead of the RNC.

    And when the House has a Republican majority.....it means something when the House Speaker uses "Catholic guilt" to get a new speaker.
    Last edited by GGT; 11-01-2015 at 11:11 PM.

  16. #316
    Senior Member GGT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    18,591
    Bump.

    "Today's" Republican Party is.....unfortunately showing its xenophobic fears. Donald Trump is the least of its problems. What's more disturbing is the number of people who'd vote for Trump because they don't trust the "Political Establishment", or our political process.
    Last edited by GGT; 12-14-2015 at 12:39 AM.

  17. #317
    All Worship Ragnarök Loki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    16,642
    Um, aren't you the one constantly talking about not trusting the political establishment or political process?
    Hope is the denial of reality

  18. #318
    Senior Member GGT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    18,591
    Quote Originally Posted by Loki View Post
    Um, aren't you the one constantly talking about not trusting the political establishment or political process?
    Yep. But that doesn't mean I agree with anti-establishment Trump voters.

  19. #319
    All Worship Ragnarök Loki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    16,642
    Read your previous post. You're basically disturbed by your own existence...
    Hope is the denial of reality

  20. #320
    Senior Member GGT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    18,591
    It's possible to criticize the 'political establishment' and failures of the political process, and not agree with Trump or his supporters, ya know.

  21. #321
    All Worship Ragnarök Loki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    16,642
    Again, read your own post. The "most disturbing" part was that people didn't trust the political process, not Trump.
    Hope is the denial of reality

  22. #322
    Senior Member GGT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    18,591
    Quote Originally Posted by Loki View Post
    Again, read your own post. The "most disturbing" part was that people didn't trust the political process, not Trump.
    Distrusting the political process, or "institutional" power isn't anything new. In case I didn't make myself clear....what's disturbing is that a candidate (like Trump) has so much support.

  23. #323
    Senior Member GGT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    18,591
    Bump.

    Today's Republican Party is......continuing its identity struggle. In an era of identity politics, that's a problem. Sarah Palin endorsed Trump. The once VP for McCain who ended the (R) Presidential campaign is now stumping for Trump? Go figure.

  24. #324
    Senior Member GGT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    18,591
    Well, today's Republican Party is still in the thralls of an identity crisis, and its 'internal civil war' has hit a new paroxysmal high. When all the candidates running for the party's presidential nomination are lambasting the leader (Trump) by proclaiming he's NOT a Republican, and don't agree with his 'principles', but then turn around and say they'll "support" him if he's the party's nominee.....it's understandable why politicians have lost the trust of the people.

  25. #325
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,918
    American politics is strange. You would think parties would align themselves on the government control vs. freedom access but they don't.

    You have some Republicans who say 'don't trust the government' but then expect the government to legislate morality.

    You have some Democrats who say 'morality has no place in politics' but wave the flag of 'government must help everyone it is the right thing to do' flag.

    /Boggle

  26. #326
    Senior Member GGT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    18,591
    Quote Originally Posted by Lewkowski View Post
    American politics is strange. You would think parties would align themselves on the government control vs. freedom access but they don't.

    You have some Republicans who say 'don't trust the government' but then expect the government to legislate morality.

    You have some Democrats who say 'morality has no place in politics' but wave the flag of 'government must help everyone it is the right thing to do' flag.

    /Boggle
    How long should we re-live the Civil War before we act like a Union?

  27. #327
    Senior Member Flixy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    5,778
    Quote Originally Posted by Lewkowski View Post
    American politics is strange. You would think parties would align themselves on the government control vs. freedom access but they don't.

    You have some Republicans who say 'don't trust the government' but then expect the government to legislate morality.

    You have some Democrats who say 'morality has no place in politics' but wave the flag of 'government must help everyone it is the right thing to do' flag.

    /Boggle
    What, people are inconsistent? :O That's new

    I guess it doesn't help that you have a two party system, people (including politicians) and their views are too far spread out that any party will have one clear message that everyone agrees with.

    What's even weirder to me is people (like, say, Trump) running for a party they don't even agree with. What's the point of eing in that party then, I wonder.. until I realise that in a two party system that's the only real way to get in, I suppose.
    Keep on keepin' the beat alive!

  28. #328
    Senior Member GGT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    18,591
    Quote Originally Posted by Flixy View Post
    What, people are inconsistent? :O That's new

    I guess it doesn't help that you have a two party system, people (including politicians) and their views are too far spread out that any party will have one clear message that everyone agrees with.

    What's even weirder to me is people (like, say, Trump) running for a party they don't even agree with. What's the point of eing in that party then, I wonder.. until I realise that in a two party system that's the only real way to get in, I suppose.
    Exactly.

  29. #329
    Senior Member GGT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    18,591
    And today's Republican Party is refusing to evaluate the next nominee to the Supreme Court, while also claiming they're supporters of the Constitution.

  30. #330
    Administrator Dreadnaught's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    9,326
    The constitution requires confirmations when nominated by Democratic presidents.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •