Republican Party on the Decline?

[lost999]

Ah -- everyone else's fault. Why am I not surprised?

I blame it on Bush, Valentino.

 

[Savior2006]

Ah -- everyone else's fault.

Why am I not surprised?

We can't forget the dreaded SECULAR public school education.

 

[lost999]

We can't forget the dreaded SECULAR public school education.

Truth.

I feel guilty I have to send my daughter to a public school.

I shall overcome this obstacle though.

 

[A2SG]

Liberalism requires you to be too grouchy and obedient to the government. It tells you what to eat, what to buy, what to think, how to vote, what is and is not science based on popular opinion, and above all, it tells you to what to do with your money. There are essentially more rules to liberalism than conservativism.

To the extent that they reject Liberalism/Socialism because it's too much into controlling everyone...

Um, you guys have weirdly distorted, and inaccurate, views of liberals!

"obedient to the government"? Tell that to those who practiced civil disobedience in the 60s!

"tells you what to eat, what to buy, what to think, how to vote," Some liberals, like everyone else, may suggest certain things, and encourage boycotts of certain products or producers for some specific reason, but no more so than anyone else.

"what is and is not science based on popular opinion" Liberals don't do that at all! Liberals tend to prefer to let science speak for itself, rather than tell it what to say based on our personal belief systems.

"it tells you to what to do with your money." Tells, no. Suggests, much like everyone else, maybe. In some cases, anyway.

"There are essentially more rules to liberalism than conservativism." Flat out ridiculous! Especially when compared to conservatives, who love the idea of using government to enforce their particular beliefs on those who disagree (abortion, same sex marriage, religion and religious morality, etc.).

"Liberalism...too much into controlling everyone" Not even close. In fact, the idea of controlling people is very much against the liberal philosophy. Liberals are very often identified as those who prefer to leave individuals to live and believe as they wish to, rather than enforce draconian rules on them, especially as regards morality and such.

-- A2SG, next time you guys want to know what a liberal thinks about such things, rather than make blind assumptions (and be wrong), why not ask us?

 

[Jeffwhosoever]

Good post, as always, A2

Looks we might take the Senate and you the POTUS in 2016. We NEED to learn to work together.

 

[A2SG]

Good post, as always, A2

Thanks!

Looks we might take the Senate and you the POTUS in 2016.

Dunno about that, as there's really only one liberal running, and much as I'd love to see Bernie Sanders in the White House, I don't imagine for a second it'll happen.

But it does seem a lock that a democrat will win the presidency, though.

We NEED to learn to work together.

We've done it before, we can do it again.

-- A2SG, not that hard, so long as we drop the tea party-ish idea of thinking of those who disagree as being the enemy....

 

[PsychoSarah]

All of your leaders are lying idiots. Toss EVERYONE of them out on their ear [gauntlet throw].

To be fair, it's hard to be angry when the Senate has an approval rating of 13% but the plebs are still so lost in rhetoric as to vote 91% of them back in. As an outsider, who could I REALLY wag a finger at?

If it makes you feel better, you don't have to live here amongst this crap. And I can't prevent my fellow voters from being stupid about who they vote for.

 

[Aldebaran]

All of your leaders are lying idiots. Toss EVERYONE of them out on their ear [gauntlet throw].

To be fair, it's hard to be angry when the Senate has an approval rating of 13% but the plebs are still so lost in rhetoric as to vote 91% of them back in. As an outsider, who could I REALLY wag a finger at?

It's happened before, but it only had a temporary effect. After Clinton passed the assault weapon ban in 1994, there was a huge shift. The democrat-controlled senate and house was thrown out in favor of a decidedly Republican-controlled senate and house. But did it last? It's only 20 years later, and look what we've had for the past 8 years.

It's not so much the people that are in congress, but rather the whole system of things. Throw out the corrupted people and replace them with fresh ones, and they become corrupted by the system too.

 

[nightflight]

In 1992 we were told the Republicans were finished. In 94 the Democrats were done for. The same in 2000. In 2008 again the Republicans were set to extinction, and that myth continues today. The power will flip again and the insipid, stupid media will over-dramatize again.

 

[Aldebaran]

In 1992 we were told the Republicans were finished. In 94 the Democrats were done for. The same in 2000. In 2008 again the Republicans were set to extinction, and that myth continues today. The power will flip again and the insipid, stupid media will over-dramatize again.

The longer a party is in power, the sicker people get of them, making it easier for the other party to take power from them. When the GOP took power after 1994, they also took the presidency afterwards. The people got sick of Bush and the Republican congress and went to Obama and Democrat congress after that. After 8 years, I think there's a chance we'll be going Republican in the mid-term election coming up, but maybe not by a large margin. Anything's possible in 2016, depending on how the next 2 years go.

 

[Albion]

In 1992 we were told the Republicans were finished. In 94 the Democrats were done for. The same in 2000. In 2008 again the Republicans were set to extinction, and that myth continues today. The power will flip again and the insipid, stupid media will over-dramatize again.

Basically true. But this is why BO is flooding the country with immigrants and intends to find a way to grant mass voting rights to them. If the electorate goes back and forth, one way to avoid that is to add more voters and make sure that they are people who expect the federal government to take care of their needs.

 

[The Outlier]

Um, you guys have weirdly distorted, and inaccurate, views of liberals!

"obedient to the government"? Tell that to those who practiced civil disobedience in the 60s!

"tells you what to eat, what to buy, what to think, how to vote," Some liberals, like everyone else, may suggest certain things, and encourage boycotts of certain products or producers for some specific reason, but no more so than anyone else.

"what is and is not science based on popular opinion" Liberals don't do that at all! Liberals tend to prefer to let science speak for itself, rather than tell it what to say based on our personal belief systems.

"it tells you to what to do with your money." Tells, no. Suggests, much like everyone else, maybe. In some cases, anyway.

"There are essentially more rules to liberalism than conservativism." Flat out ridiculous! Especially when compared to conservatives, who love the idea of using government to enforce their particular beliefs on those who disagree (abortion, same sex marriage, religion and religious morality, etc.).

"Liberalism...too much into controlling everyone" Not even close. In fact, the idea of controlling people is very much against the liberal philosophy. Liberals are very often identified as those who prefer to leave individuals to live and believe as they wish to, rather than enforce draconian rules on them, especially as regards morality and such.

-- A2SG, next time you guys want to know what a liberal thinks about such things, rather than make blind assumptions (and be wrong), why not ask us?

I probably over-generalized, but its impossible to have a big government without the unwritten rule that you have to obey that government for it to work- because if you don't have to obey it, the only way it can work is to force you to comply. If the government must support everybody, protect everybody but not control everybody, how can it work? Where does all this money come from- rich people? Rich people create jobs. The more you tax them the less reason they have to create them. Its true that the consumer creates jobs too. The consumer makes it possible for products to sell and companies to exist, but its a symbiotic relationship. It also takes a lot of money to start a business- that's business class 101. As for the idea that conservatism advocates pushing religion on people, the founding fathers said the opposite. The reason the country was set up like it was is so no one could tell you what to believe.

 

[A2SG]

I probably over-generalized,

In much the same way as saying WWII was a slight misunderstanding.

but its impossible to have a big government without the unwritten rule that you have to obey that government for it to work-because if you don't have to obey it, the only way it can work is to force you to comply.

If by that you mean obey the law, well, that's true for any government large or small. And a principle that is common to all political parties and ideologies.

If the government must support everybody, protect everybody but not control everybody, how can it work?

What led you to the belief that "the government must support everybody"? Liberals certainly don't believe that!

Where does all this money come from- rich people? Rich people create jobs. The more you tax them the less reason they have to create them.

First of all, it isn't only the rich who create jobs, many employers aren't rich, just people who are trying to make a living by opening a business. Second, no one creates jobs just because they have some extra money lying around or because they got a tax break.

Its true that the consumer creates jobs too. The consumer makes it possible for products to sell and companies to exist, but its a symbiotic relationship. It also takes a lot of money to start a business- that's business class 101.

Yup. All true. Not sure what any of that has to do with liberals, or the massive misunderstandings you have about them, but....

As for the idea that conservatism advocates pushing religion on people, the founding fathers said the opposite.

None of the founding fathers were members of the Republican Party.

The reason the country was set up like it was is so no one could tell you what to believe.

So tell that to those who argue against same sex marriage or birth control coverage in health insurance.

And you still haven't show me that you understand a thing about what liberals really think or what liberals really stand for. If you truly wish to know, feel free to ask us. We'll be glad to tell you!

-- A2SG, why not it right from the horse's mouth, picking information up off the street hasn't worked out to well up to now, has it?

 

[PsychoSarah]

I opened such a can of worms with this one. Gosh, Pandora is laughing at me even. I never intended for this to become a mudslinging mess between moderate Republicans, more extreme conservatives, and various liberal parties.

 

[Savior2006]

I opened such a can of worms with this one. Gosh, Pandora is laughing at me even. I never intended for this to become a mudslinging mess between moderate Republicans, more extreme conservatives, and various liberal parties.

Well, I'm not sure what you expected in the Political Forum.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Well, I'm not sure what you expected in the Political Forum.

Oh, I expected some, but not as much as this for the topic I posted. Forbid people be civil when it comes to politics. It's a good thing people aren't allowed to challenge each other to duals anymore.

 

[Savior2006]

Oh, I expected some, but not as much as this for the topic I posted. Forbid people be civil when it comes to politics.

Well I have no room to talk in that regard.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Well I have no room to talk in that regard.

Not proclaiming yourself as a civil political debater? I guess it is good to be honest with yourself. My policy has always been "kill them with kindness", which ironically seems to annoy some people more than the rare instances in which I lose all my patience in a rage quit.

 

[The Outlier]

Not proclaiming yourself as a civil political debater? I guess it is good to be honest with yourself. My policy has always been "kill them with kindness", which ironically seems to annoy some people more than the rare instances in which I lose all my patience in a rage quit.

I have started leaving debates in which there is no way to win without using careless words, as outlined in Matthew 12:36

But I tell you that everyone will have to give account on the day of judgment for every empty word they have spoken.

I left a few global warming debates over this verse. Honestly there are a lot of really smart people on both sides of debates like that. There is no reason to get angry at someone for believing or disbelieving in global warming.

 

[The Outlier]

In much the same way as saying WWII was a slight misunderstanding.



If by that you mean obey the law, well, that's true for any government large or small. And a principle that is common to all political parties and ideologies.



What led you to the belief that "the government must support everybody"? Liberals certainly don't believe that!



First of all, it isn't only the rich who create jobs, many employers aren't rich, just people who are trying to make a living by opening a business. Second, no one creates jobs just because they have some extra money lying around or because they got a tax break.



Yup. All true. Not sure what any of that has to do with liberals, or the massive misunderstandings you have about them, but....



None of the founding fathers were members of the Republican Party.



So tell that to those who argue against same sex marriage or birth control coverage in health insurance.

And you still haven't show me that you understand a thing about what liberals really think or what liberals really stand for. If you truly wish to know, feel free to ask us. We'll be glad to tell you!

-- A2SG, why not it right from the horse's mouth, picking information up off the street hasn't worked out to well up to now, has it?

You don't seem to know what conservatives believe. Conservatives have rarely ever been against birth control. There are a lot of Catholics who are. There is nothing wrong with a pill that delays ovulation. There is, however a big problem with telling me that my tax money has to go to someone else's birth control. You say you don't believe the government should support everybody- why should I pay for someone else's birth control? Why should I have to pay for their healthcare, or even be forced to have healthcare myself? As for same sex marriage, I am not against a paper saying they can live together and be included in each others' will. If two people want to screw up their lives by living the homosexual lifestyle, let them be free to take it up with God. I don't care much one way or the other. What I don't want is them adopting children- just like I wouldn't want 2 drug addicts, a boyfriend and girlfriend living together, or two people running a porn shop adopting children. Some people consider that mean. Look at how Muslims treat homosexuals- that's mean. Look at how they are treated in many Latin American countries with a "machismo" culture- thats mean. Homosexuals enjoy more freedoms here than they do in most of the world, excluding much of Europe. As for the founding fathers, they used problematic wording. They said they were about freedom of religion but they meant denomination. You were free to be Catholic, Lutheran, Methodist or even Deist. In theory you were free to be anything- in theory. Incidently, conservatism in America is typically different than conservatism anywhere else. You always hear conservatives being linked with the crusades, yet not only was it hundreds of years ago in a different country altogether, but the modern-day conservative is against the government and the church being united like that. You would be surprised at how many republicans and Tea partiers have no religion.