Republican Party on the Decline?

[AceHero]

Oh please. The GOP has barely compromised with the Democrats at all during Obama's time in office. I would love to see some actual compromise.

To be perfectly blunt, this country would be in even worse shape than it already is, if they had let Obama have his way on the things they were able to block.

Examples?

Yes, because the mainstream Republicans are so liberal...

The Republicans certainly display more diversity in congress than the Democrats, remember Obamacare is what caused people like Evan Bayh to leave office.

Republicans are diverse in what way?

 

[GarfieldJL]

Examples?

"If you like your plan, you can keep your plan." - Barack Obama - YouTube

Btw, they're trying to hide stuff again until after the election because more people are going to lose their employer based insurance coverage.

Republicans are diverse in what way?

You mean aside from the fact Republicans are made up of whites, blacks, hispanics, etc.

The Republican party demonstrates more diversity when it comes to Ideas, opinions, etc.

 

[Savior2006]

On the decline? Don't you have to be out of the hole to fall into it in the first place?

 

[Savior2006]

Frankly, the more the R party abandons what it stands for, the more people leave it and gravitate toward movements like the Tea Party.

Veritas is right. What the GOP needs is to be even more ideologically rigid. What can possibly go wrong.

 

[ChristsSoldier115]

The Tea party.. why do so many non rich people support a political sect who is against rich people and only rich people from being taxed? Their only stance for anything is bible, guns, and lower taxes[for rich people]. For some reason the combination of these things do not make any sense to me.

 

[HorsieJuice]

Why is it when the democratic party is on the outs, you don't hear the call for them to be more like the republican's to make people vote for them?

Isn't that exactly what happened in the late 80's-mid 90's? Society grew tired of the liberal social and economic policies of the 60's & 70's and started favoring a more conservative approach that limited government, cutback on handouts/entitlements and favored so-called "family values". The Democrats had to shift right-ward in order to stay in power; Clinton's welfare reform bill was a huge shift right-ward, was it not?

It's always the republicans that are suppose to change, give up their principles and throw in the towel. This is getting to be funny....sort of.

Hey, if you're ok with losing elections in the future, more power to you. I'm not going to complain.

 

[cow451]

Veritas is right. What the GOP needs is to be even more ideologically rigid. What can possibly go wrong.

LOL.

 

[GarfieldJL]

The Tea party.. why do so many non rich people support a political sect who is against rich people and only rich people from being taxed? Their only stance for anything is bible, guns, and lower taxes[for rich people]. For some reason the combination of these things do not make any sense to me.

That's cause you were sold a false narrative by the people you trust to give you the news and you really should stop believing the propaganda from leftwing media outlets and the DNC.

The fact of the matter is that, income tax hikes only affect people that are working their way up the economic ladder, you could make the upper bracket a 100% of their income and it wouldn't affect people like Warren Buffet at all cause the money they make falls under a seperate category.

The real reason why "the rich" that support income tax hikes do so, is because they don't want "the peasantry" like you and me to be able to work our way up the economic ladder and become wealthy.

The Tea Party actually understands that "the rich" wouldn't have to pay a single dime more than they already do, if the income tax got hiked, only people that get affected are people like you and me.

While the Tea Party wants things like the capital gains tax lowered, there is good reason for this, by giving the wealthy more potential return on investments, it encourages them to invest more money into companies, which allows those companies to hire people.

On eliminating any taxation of profits that companies make overseas, when they bring the money back here, it would also encourage more job creation.

 

[Manic Spinoza]

I remember after the 2012 election a lot of old school GOP members said the Republican Party needed to do some "soul searching" and become less radical over their social issues. Don't see that happening.

The Tea party.. why do so many non rich people support a political sect who is against rich people and only rich people from being taxed? Their only stance for anything is bible, guns, and lower taxes[for rich people]. For some reason the combination of these things do not make any sense to me.

Those are the only two things tea party voters care about

 

[Veritas]

Veritas is right. What the GOP needs is to be even more ideologically rigid. What can possibly go wrong.

You're kidding, right? The GOP is the most lax, lame and progressive it's ever been. If you want rigid, you're in the right place. The DNC won't work with the GOP. Can you say Obamacare? Not a single R vote.

Isn't that exactly what happened in the late 80's-mid 90's? Society grew tired of the liberal social and economic policies of the 60's & 70's and started favoring a more conservative approach that limited government, cutback on handouts/entitlements and favored so-called "family values". The Democrats had to shift right-ward in order to stay in power; Clinton's welfare reform bill was a huge shift right-ward, was it not?

Actually, I think what happened in the 80's was Reagan. He was a charismatic leader that spoke to the masses about what was important to them. He gained the votes of a lot of democrats who became affectionately known as the Blue Dog Democrats. Reagan's economic and foreign policies improved the country and world. It was quantifiable. Today, people see mayhem everywhere both home and abroad. Ironically, they (mostly young people) don't associate the problems we face with Obama. He is the untouchable. Of course, it helps that the MSM is on his side.

Hey, if you're ok with losing elections in the future, more power to you. I'm not going to complain

First of all, I'm a conservative libertarian. I believe both major parties have failed the country for different reasons (and some same) I wish we could have a viable 3rd party candidate that could win. Freedom, prosperity, limited government, etc. are winning issues!

 

[AceHero]

The Tea party.. why do so many non rich people support a political sect who is against rich people and only rich people from being taxed? Their only stance for anything is bible, guns, and lower taxes[for rich people]. For some reason the combination of these things do not make any sense to me.

The demographics of the Tea Party is a great example of people voting against their own interests.

 

[HorsieJuice]

You're kidding, right? The GOP is the most lax, lame and progressive it's ever been. If you want rigid, you're in the right place.

In what ways was the GOP more rigid in the past?

The DNC won't work with the GOP. Can you say Obamacare? Not a single R vote.

Wouldn't that be evidence of the Republicans refusing to work with the Democrats?

Actually, I think what happened in the 80's was Reagan. He was a charismatic leader that spoke to the masses about what was important to them. He gained the votes of a lot of democrats who became affectionately known as the Blue Dog Democrats. Reagan's economic and foreign policies improved the country and world.

Sure, he was part of the shift, but there were others, too. But you said that it was always the Republicans being expected to move, when in fact, the Dems have had to move quite a bit in the past, too. Whenever society moves in a certain direction, political parties can be expected to shift in that direction as well, lest they wind up losing power. Right now, society is moving away from many of the positions that have been central to the conservative Republican platform for the last couple decades, and as such, the Republicans are going to be expected to shift if they want to retain power.

 

[GarfieldJL]

Wouldn't that be evidence of the Republicans refusing to work with the Democrats?

Would you want to work with someone that publicly insults and does their best to humiliate you on a routine basis?

If your answer is no, then why are you demanding Republicans work with Obama and the Democrats in congress?

 

[Aldebaran]

Would you want to work with someone that publicly insults and does their best to humiliate you on a routine basis?

If your answer is no, then why are you demanding Republicans work with Obama and the Democrats in congress?

They're not even supposed to be "working together". What they are supposed to do is represent the people who elected them. I never voted for a guy so that he could "work with" the other side. I voted for him because he said he would represent my viewpoints in Congress.

 

[GarfieldJL]

They're not even supposed to be "working together". What they are supposed to do is represent the people who elected them. I never voted for a guy so that he could "work with" the other side. I voted for him because he said he would represent my viewpoints in Congress.

Which is what people like Ted Cruz and Mike Lee are doing, they were voted in to be as obstructionist as possible.

 

[AceHero]

Would you want to work with someone that publicly insults and does their best to humiliate you on a routine basis?

If your answer is no, then why are you demanding Republicans work with Obama and the Democrats in congress?

They're not even supposed to be "working together". What they are supposed to do is represent the people who elected them. I never voted for a guy so that he could "work with" the other side. I voted for him because he said he would represent my viewpoints in Congress.

How exactly do you expect successful legislation to be accomplished then?

 

[GarfieldJL]

How exactly do you expect successful legislation to be accomplished then?

Why should they rubberstamp bad legislation?

 

[blueapplepaste]

I totally agree with term limits. Not having them imho has been a key element to why we are where we are with the government as it is. Most who go there do so as a career move; and once there, the careerists already there welcome them with open arms into their fold as compatriots.

Thumbs up for common ground!

I don't really agree with the Tea Party being "social radicals." And yeah, there are some people in it who are too rigid in their ideology - but you have to understand that the "Tea Party" can't be compared to other recognized - and organized - political parties. It's truly a grass-roots, heterogenous collection of disparate groups all over the country, each with their own general allegiance to the general principles behind the concept that is the "Tea Party" but it simply is not possible to accurately broadbrush the whole with much other than that they generally adhere to general principles - beyond that, each group has its own identity and personality (if you will), each interpreting the general principles a little differently. Conceptually, I'm in alignment with the general principles, but it's impossible for me to say (or anyone to say, in truth) that we are "Tea Partiers" - except in the general sense of the term. Whether the TP disappears or not is in my mind somewhat irrelevant, as long as the general principles persist - because as a nation, we need them, desperately.

I think you're correct as far as the beginning of the TP is concerned. Was truly a grass roots movement. But it's been hijacked. So many of the TP groups are funded by big donors. Now I realize that it'll be argued that those aren't really the TP and so forth. But its become associated with the Koch brothers, Ted Cruz, Michelle Bachmann, etc. Fair or not, that's the way it is.

 

[AceHero]

How exactly do you expect successful legislation to be accomplished then?

Why should they rubberstamp bad legislation?

I'm not saying they should. I'm saying purposely obstructing legislation until you can get enough votes to get your way is a pretty terrible way to make policy. The Republicans seemingly exist only to say no; they don't often have actual alternatives to what the Democrats propose.

 

[Aldebaran]

How exactly do you expect successful legislation to be accomplished then?

Bad legislation is not successful legislation. That's why it needs to be stopped. That's who I vote for---people who will stand in the way of bad bills being passed and bad laws being forced upon us. We've had enough of these guys just letting bad laws be enacted for the sake of doing "something", or "getting along with each other".