The death throes of American conservatism....
- Thread starter torbee
- Start date
We have a 2-party bias in America, but the GOP and Dems aren't guaranteed to be the 2 parties. I could see the American Christian Party replacing one of them in the top 2 in a couple of election cycles.
You and Torbee should hash this out. You think the religious right could get 51% of the vote while he thinks they could be sidelined.
Then it would be the same as the current GOP, just have a different name. The GOP and American Christian Party would be the same party. It would just be the Christian Coalition under a new name.
The only way a third party might come around (at least in my opinion) is a socially liberal, fiscally conservative party. However, cable news tells us that is impossible so it's unlikely to ever happen.
Ever notice that when people suggest a 3rd party it often goes as you describe with social liberals and fiscal conservatives? Why is that? Why not a socially conservative group that actually takes the bible seriously and cares for the sick and poor? Raise taxes to fund the churches.
If the Republican Party moves past the stupid culture war and comes into this century on social issues. Then we will have a real debate because the conservative economic policies have validity on some issues.
Count me in as that liberal fringe that wants to return the US to tax rates and wealth distribution that was present in the 50s, and 60s. These were periods of times before really disastrous trade agreements, and a time where the US middle class was the envy of the world. Now we have a much smaller middle class and a growing working poor class. 70% of people or more are likely to want to earn a living and retire, nut it is only going to get harder to do as voodoo economics trickles money to the top as it has been doing since Reagan.
I suppose returning to tax rates of times that old timers look back on with such admiration makes me a socialist.
This list has nothing to do with this executive order thread......I'm just testing to see how much I'm able to copy and paste. This is a partial list....doesn't include all of the administrations scandals, ISIS, Mexican illegals, his Yemen success story, his gun grabs, his demeaning of our poiice, and how much whites discriminate blacks...still.......his latest........singing "Amazing Grace" (the worst).....what an ego he has. The guy is so inept, he shouldn't sing either.
Why are you libs so cranky........ the material I'm posting on here is from legitimate news sources.......I'm not making it up.......just pointing it out.
- Hawaii is in Asia.
- Passing on the keystone pipeline, but
- Solendra failure.outs a Green Energy Company as exemplary that fails a year later.
- Using the Gulf Oil Spill to promote Green Energy – instead of cleaning it up.
- Thinking the Tea Party is a passing fad – or that they are racists.
- Pulling out of Iraq with no clear victory over insurgent forces.
- Trying to re-write history through speeches – with inaccurate information (i.e. Statue of Liberty)
- Getting a Nobel Prize for being the most ineffective President in the history of the United States, though some say it was for his pigment.
- Putting all legislation on the Internet for five days before it comes to a vote.
- Returning the bust of Churchill to the Brits.
- Giving a collection of DVDs to the British PM.
- Denying the notion of American Exceptionalism.
- Promising to close Gitmo — failing to do so.
- Securing the Olympics for Chicago in 2016.
- Naming numerous Communists/Socialists/Progressives to his various Czar positions and then watching them scurry for cover when Beck begins to call them out, forcing them to resign.
- Government races for NJ, VA and the Senate Seat in Mass.
- The midterm elections, which Obama himself called a shellacking.
- Prediction that stimulus would ensure that unemployment doesn’t exceed 8%.
- Bowing to just about everybody.
- Proposing amnesty for illegal aliens to increase the population of voters for Democrat elections.
- He said, I have visited 57 states. Now there is just 1 left to visit.
-
Last edited:
That's just crazy talk.
My guess is that most politically active christians like the religion because it gives them moral justification to do terrible things. "I am a sinner but Jesus died to forgive my sins. Therefore, I can do whatever the hell I want and will be forgiven for it by God." I'm guessing that by focusing on the social parts of the Bible they can "prove their faith" to further justify the forgiveness of all their other sins.
Maybe, but not necessarily.
I suspect there are a lot of R voters who hold their noses over the religious nonsense and pull the R lever for other reasons, like spending, war, immigration, and so on. Most wouldn't vote for the American Christian Party.
It's also possible that the AC party would draw strongly from the Dems. A lot of Ds like some of the religious positions of the GOP but reject the racism, are pro environment and so on. If the Christian party wasn't racist, and didn't deny climate change and maybe actually stood for Christian values - for example, those being emphasized by Pope Frank - I could see lots of Catholics and blacks and Hispanics who now vote D giving the AC party a serious look.
I just said that list...extensive.....but was far from complete. It doesn't include such things as "no plan to defeat ISIS', the Benghazi scandal, the Chinese cyber attack, the conclusion of the IRS spying on consevatives......all that crap. But I have this very strong suspision there isn't anything the "inept one" would do....it would be just fine with you. Total dedication to the "Inept Cause"
True, hell, I might support that party. I just don't see that happening.
He could screw up this Iran thing. If we end up at war with them, I'll be pretty pissed.
Actually, I think most recent polls show a majority of Americans are closer to the Republican/conservative position on most major issues than to the Democratic/liberal position. I'm talking about things like abortion, Obamacare, among others.
51%? Maybe not. Who knows?
But be a viable, reliable party that has a chance to win a plurality in any given election? Absolutely.
It all depends on how the party builds itself. If it's the party of Religious Right rage and whiny Christian victimhood, then probably not. But suppose it's the party of Pope Frank's peace and love?
I don't see it happening either, but I am rather surprised no one seems to be trying.
In case you haven't noticed, the GOP has no better answers for these things, either - and THEY are Monday morning quarterbacking on ALL of them.
I may not be happy with Obama on some of these, but I sure don't want to replace him with the clueless clowns making all the noise on the right.
That's just because of the name. The GOP is doing quite well advocating the socialization of corporate risk-taking and the socialization of the toys of wealthy folks. They just don't call it that. If you think Pope Frank is a socialist, but his views are advertised as Christian, that will make a huge difference in a nation where most people don't look beyond labels.
I don't think American Conservatism has really been around much since the 1960's. We have lots of NEO-conservatism. But, Neocon is not conservative.
To the extent that you are correct, where are the "real" conservatives pointing this out and trying to reclaim their label?
The last intellectual conservative spokesman was
William F. Buckley Jr. who died in 2008. He started and
was the editor of National Review and was the TV host
of Firing Line on PBS until 1999. He was a newspaper
columnist and author of 50 books.
Included in Buckley's conservative beliefs was a strong
dependence on Christianity as the moral fabric of our
nation. He stood for conservatism in his lifetime and
nobody has yet replaced him in the 21st century.
William F. Buckley Jr. who died in 2008. He started and
was the editor of National Review and was the TV host
of Firing Line on PBS until 1999. He was a newspaper
columnist and author of 50 books.
Included in Buckley's conservative beliefs was a strong
dependence on Christianity as the moral fabric of our
nation. He stood for conservatism in his lifetime and
nobody has yet replaced him in the 21st century.
I agree. Its painfully obvious cons have lacked intellectual direction for some time.
I'm not sure. I really don't keep track of them based on those labels. I don't ally with any of them based on those labels.
Example:
Rand Paul and Bernie Sanders both voted against the Freedom Act. I like that stance. I like that action. I don't put a great deal of stock or trust in "party platforms", personally. Neo-cons love big government. They love spending and sending American military all over the globe. So, do democrats. So, where are Liberals and Conservatives being truly represented? I don't think they are. When I think of American Conservatism, I think of people like Robert Taft or Barry Goldwater. But, those labels are so loose and indistinct to me, anyway.
Liberal, conservative... it's misleading and it's really divisive. It would be much more advantageous if the structure was "People" vs. "Power", or Citizens vs. Government. Something that keeps it balanced instead of how it is now. So-called average citizens that identify as Liberals aren't getting what they want, because they're mostly fighting against other average people (so-called conservatives), and vice versa. As a result, the power structure that is really impeding them is exactly who they're all supporting and putting into offices that continues to divide them and basically dictate a divisive ideology that they become used to!! Party allegiance is killing this nation's freedoms and independence at home. And, that sets an example abroad.
Frankly, it isn't even as dominant for liberals today as it was for cons then. DeLay was talking about a permanent majority for R's at the time. There's some momentum for liberal points of emphasis ie gay marriage, but not a whole lot more substance. The future economy, how terrorism is dealt w/, privacy issues, immigration etc. all seem to have partisan balance
In the case of nose-holding, your suspicions are correct. I am a Christian who would hate like hell to see Huckabee, much less Santorum, nominated by the GOP, but if the alternative were Hillary, I'd vote for them. If the Dems put forward somebody honest and competent, like maybe Jim Webb, probably not.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
Brauns, Mulvey Taking Advantage of Added Minutes Down the Stretch
- Latest: Eliot Clough
