Fundraising complete, next renewal is August 2022. Paypal Donation Links US dollars CDN Dollars

Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

For discussion of religion and politics

Moderators: LawBeefaroni, $iljanus

Post Reply
User avatar
Smoove_B
Posts: 44440
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 am
Location: Kaer Morhen

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Smoove_B »

Well it's a good thing faith in our electoral system is rock solid heading into this, right?
I'm so far off the map the sun is shining
User avatar
Skinypupy
Posts: 16463
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 10:12 am
Location: Utah

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Skinypupy »

Blackhawk wrote: Fri Feb 14, 2020 1:36 pm Take that 'right way' away from people, and all that will be left is the fear and the rage. And that's scary.
I think you're highly underestimating American's laziness, ignorance, and general malaise.

I mean, there will be a core group of people who are likely get off their asses and do something (lots of folks like us here), but my guess is that the general population will largely shrug as long as they're still putting food on the table.
For those accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression.

Black lives matter
User avatar
Pyperkub
Posts: 20373
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 5:07 pm
Location: NC- that's Northern California

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Pyperkub »

Kraken wrote: Thu Feb 13, 2020 11:10 pm ...

We're at the point where only Republicans can save the Republic. There's no way they're going to allow themselves to be voted out. We are done for.
I'd change that to:

"...only informed Citizens can save the Republic...".

We do see some of this, but the Right Wing propaganda machine is in full tilt growth mode to ensure that the Citizens who should be driving this are kept complacent and in the dark, with nice, juicy rationalizations/appeals to hate/fear/etc. to justify the current corruption of the Republic. A House divided is the goal, and the path to remaining in power.
There are three ways to not tell the truth: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
User avatar
Pyperkub
Posts: 20373
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 5:07 pm
Location: NC- that's Northern California

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Pyperkub »

This applies to many things, but illustrates the difficulties in getting the GOP to stop living in fantasyland:
House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy had barely finished presenting his party’s modest plan to fight climate change when conservatives began piling on in opposition...

...the Club for Growth vowed to not endorse any candidate who backs what it called the “liberal” Republican climate plan.

“Besides hurting our economy, these measures will not make a single environmentalist vote for a Republican and only alienate conservatives across the country,” said Club for Growth President David McIntosh.

The blowback illustrates the challenges facing those trying to shed the Republican party’s climate-denying reputation, which alienates many young voters and polls well for Democrats. The fierce criticism also illustrates the limits of pragmatism for a party long backed by groups that question climate change.
There are three ways to not tell the truth: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
malchior
Posts: 14596
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by malchior »

Pyperkub wrote: Fri Feb 14, 2020 2:30 pm This applies to many things, but illustrates the difficulties in getting the GOP to stop living in fantasyland:
House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy had barely finished presenting his party’s modest plan to fight climate change when conservatives began piling on in opposition...

...the Club for Growth vowed to not endorse any candidate who backs what it called the “liberal” Republican climate plan.

“Besides hurting our economy, these measures will not make a single environmentalist vote for a Republican and only alienate conservatives across the country,” said Club for Growth President David McIntosh.

The blowback illustrates the challenges facing those trying to shed the Republican party’s climate-denying reputation, which alienates many young voters and polls well for Democrats. The fierce criticism also illustrates the limits of pragmatism for a party long backed by groups that question climate change.
I saw something similar on international tv. Essentially climate expert Michael Mann debating with a conservative Australian politician. The pol essentially said that if I make these massive changes to address climate change I won't get re-elected to do them. It's a real problem. Ultimately we might need to lose democracy to save civilization but the people who are taking control don't seem to care about climate change either so it seem we might be boned either way.
User avatar
Pyperkub
Posts: 20373
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 5:07 pm
Location: NC- that's Northern California

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Pyperkub »

malchior wrote: Fri Feb 14, 2020 3:15 pm
Pyperkub wrote: Fri Feb 14, 2020 2:30 pm This applies to many things, but illustrates the difficulties in getting the GOP to stop living in fantasyland:
House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy had barely finished presenting his party’s modest plan to fight climate change when conservatives began piling on in opposition...

...the Club for Growth vowed to not endorse any candidate who backs what it called the “liberal” Republican climate plan.

“Besides hurting our economy, these measures will not make a single environmentalist vote for a Republican and only alienate conservatives across the country,” said Club for Growth President David McIntosh.

The blowback illustrates the challenges facing those trying to shed the Republican party’s climate-denying reputation, which alienates many young voters and polls well for Democrats. The fierce criticism also illustrates the limits of pragmatism for a party long backed by groups that question climate change.
I saw something similar on international tv. Essentially climate expert Michael Mann debating with a conservative Australian politician. The pol essentially said that if I make these massive changes to address climate change I won't get re-elected to do them. It's a real problem. Ultimately we might need to lose democracy to save civilization but the people who are taking control don't seem to care about climate change either so it seem we might be boned either way.
IMHO, that's an argument which needs to be addressed via messaging. Moving to an economy which embraces Climate change fixes as a growth industry will have a lot of benefits, and the current Powers are too focused on costs only (with the climate change costs not included as a cost of doing business - the externalities are transferred to people and governments to fix - e.g. Big Oil asking Texas for 12 Billion + to protect its interests).

The parties of NO only focus on current, unadjusted costs and never think about benefits - this applies to the Health Care debate as well. The debates need to be reframed with an emphasis on the business growth opportunities (and citizen growth as well).

Of course, the messaging means breaking through the propaganda networks - which means incentivizing the "NO" groups such as the club for growth, etc. to buy in. That will take some pork as well as messaging, I'd think.
There are three ways to not tell the truth: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
User avatar
Unagi
Posts: 19433
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 5:14 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Unagi »

Pyperkub wrote: Fri Feb 14, 2020 2:30 pm This applies to many things, but illustrates the difficulties in getting the GOP to stop living in fantasyland:
House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy had barely finished presenting his party’s modest plan to fight climate change when conservatives began piling on in opposition...

...the Club for Growth vowed to not endorse any candidate who backs what it called the “liberal” Republican climate plan.

“Besides hurting our economy, these measures will not make a single environmentalist vote for a Republican and only alienate conservatives across the country,” said Club for Growth President David McIntosh.

The blowback illustrates the challenges facing those trying to shed the Republican party’s climate-denying reputation, which alienates many young voters and polls well for Democrats. The fierce criticism also illustrates the limits of pragmatism for a party long backed by groups that question climate change.
... wrong side of history ...

Hope they enjoy it.
Drazzil
Posts: 3654
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:54 pm

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Drazzil »

Default wrote: Sat Nov 16, 2019 6:00 pm
El Guapo wrote: Wed Nov 13, 2019 4:23 pm Maybe if Jesus descends from Heaven along with Ronald Reagan and Abraham Lincoln to condemn Trump, and then only maybe.
"That Jesus looks Mexican to me, and Lincoln freed the n***ers. Reagan is ok." - GOP rural voters.
Lincoln curb stomped the Confederacy and Jesus preaches socialism. You're totally right.
Daehawk wrote:Thats Drazzil's chair damnit.
Drazzil
Posts: 3654
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:54 pm

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Drazzil »

Unagi wrote: Fri Feb 14, 2020 5:15 pm
Pyperkub wrote: Fri Feb 14, 2020 2:30 pm This applies to many things, but illustrates the difficulties in getting the GOP to stop living in fantasyland:
House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy had barely finished presenting his party’s modest plan to fight climate change when conservatives began piling on in opposition...

...the Club for Growth vowed to not endorse any candidate who backs what it called the “liberal” Republican climate plan.

“Besides hurting our economy, these measures will not make a single environmentalist vote for a Republican and only alienate conservatives across the country,” said Club for Growth President David McIntosh.

The blowback illustrates the challenges facing those trying to shed the Republican party’s climate-denying reputation, which alienates many young voters and polls well for Democrats. The fierce criticism also illustrates the limits of pragmatism for a party long backed by groups that question climate change.
... wrong side of history ...

Hope they enjoy it.
*cough* Altria *cough*

Because what happens in the rest of the world doesent affect us... At all.. :|
Daehawk wrote:Thats Drazzil's chair damnit.
User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 37514
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Kraken »

Is it bad luck to bump this thread in anticipation of America after trump?

Why Carly Fiorina is voting for Joe Biden.
It hasn’t been an easy journey to backing a Democrat, especially when she thinks about issues that she cares deeply about, such as limiting government spending and restricting abortion. But as she’s been working with her Unlocking Potential Foundation, which focuses on increasing diversity among corporate leadership, she’s also been watching how the coronavirus pandemic has exposed inequality in America. She needed to speak up, too. Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren are right, she said: The structures of power have been bent too far toward corporate control. But if conservatives really want to do anything about it, she said, they need to start by standing up for their principles.
I didn't listen to the interview, but the edited-down transcript is good.
User avatar
Grifman
Posts: 19168
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 7:17 pm

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Grifman »

Assuming/hoping Biden wins, the post Trump Republican Party is going to be interesting. I have a lot of thoughts about this, but I am going to hold them for that moment, assuming it comes. It's just going to be very interesting to say the least.
Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions. – G.K. Chesterton
User avatar
LordMortis
Posts: 64102
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:26 pm

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by LordMortis »

Grifman wrote: Fri Jun 26, 2020 9:57 am Assuming/hoping Biden wins, the post Trump Republican Party is going to be interesting. I have a lot of thoughts about this, but I am going to hold them for that moment, assuming it comes. It's just going to be very interesting to say the least.
Noting that I hoped and thought the GOP would implode *before* 2015, my thought is that win or lose it moves right and shrinks, not necessarily losing its grip on power. The irony being more and more historical conservatives #walkingaway having diluting affect on the democrats and their "cohesion" and making it harder from them to govern a position where electoral system and Senate gut punch them at every turn.

The good news for me as a voter being forced to vote democrat is that they will be forced to work with conservative and progressive democrats. The bad news is that competing visions on the left will only make the GOP more effective at being a tyrannical minority.

I'll be wrong in my thoughts just like I was wrong in predicting/hoping for a GOP implosion from radical conservatism, snake oil sales, billionaire strangleholds, and religious righteousness but wrong or not it's where I see things going. (The alternative I see is worse. That we are baddies and the success of the GOP is the most damning evidence possible.)
User avatar
Skinypupy
Posts: 16463
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 10:12 am
Location: Utah

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Skinypupy »

David Frum lays out the GOP platform that they're "too scared" to publish.

Thing is, I honestly can't tell if this is satire or if he's serious.

Here's a quick summary:
Spoiler:
1) Moar tax cuts
2) Coronavirus is a hoax
3) Climate change is a hoax
4) Let's declare war on China
5) F*ck NATO and WTO, I do want I want
6) F*ck affordable health care and insurance
7) F*ck voting rights
8) F*ck oppressed minorities
9) Women should be subservient
10) Corruption is good, oversight is bad
11) F*ck immigrants
12) The taste of boot leather is delicious
13) DEEP STATE
For those accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression.

Black lives matter
User avatar
Carpet_pissr
Posts: 14515
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 5:32 pm
Location: Columbia, SC

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Carpet_pissr »

Skinypupy wrote: Tue Aug 25, 2020 4:18 pm David Frum lays out the GOP platform that they're "too scared" to publish.

Thing is, I honestly can't tell if this is satire or if he's serious.

Here's a quick summary:
Spoiler:
1) Moar tax cuts
2) Coronavirus is a hoax
3) Climate change is a hoax
4) Let's declare war on China
5) F*ck NATO and WTO, I do want I want
6) F*ck affordable health care and insurance
7) F*ck voting rights
8) F*ck oppressed minorities
9) Women should be subservient
10) Corruption is good, oversight is bad
11) F*ck immigrants
12) The taste of boot leather is delicious
13) DEEP STATE
That list is incomplete without a "We Hatessss the Clintonssessssss!"
At least measured in the amount of verbal diarrhea spewed from Republican's mouths since 2016 that contained keywords "Hillary" or "Clinton", I would definitely say it's a platform plank. A big one.

To be fair. should Democrats prevail and elect Biden, and keep the House, you will see a LOT of vitriol for the next 4 years directed at Trump. I'm sure his name will be invoked just as much if not more. Hell, name that shit: "Patching up the Great Undoing" or something.
User avatar
Holman
Posts: 24915
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 8:00 pm
Location: Approximately Wissahickon

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Holman »

Skinypupy wrote: Tue Aug 25, 2020 4:18 pm David Frum lays out the GOP platform that they're "too scared" to publish.

Thing is, I honestly can't tell if this is satire or if he's serious.
It's serious. Frum's paragraphs are all accurate descriptions of the GOP's stance on the key issues of the day. It seems to me he tried hard to avoid hyperbole.
Much prefer my Nazis Nuremberged.
User avatar
Skinypupy
Posts: 16463
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 10:12 am
Location: Utah

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Skinypupy »

Holman wrote: Tue Aug 25, 2020 5:32 pm
Skinypupy wrote: Tue Aug 25, 2020 4:18 pm David Frum lays out the GOP platform that they're "too scared" to publish.

Thing is, I honestly can't tell if this is satire or if he's serious.
It's serious. Frum's paragraphs are all accurate descriptions of the GOP's stance on the key issues of the day. It seems to me he tried hard to avoid hyperbole.
The fact that someone could actually say these things with a straight face made me question it. It seems so ludicrously over-the-top and exaggerated for effect.

The fact that it's not is...well, it's certainly something.
1) The most important mechanism of economic policy—not the only tool, but the most important—is adjusting the burden of taxation on society’s richest citizens. Lower this level, as Republicans did in 2017, and prosperity will follow. The economy has had a temporary setback, but thanks to the tax cut of 2017, recovery is ready to follow strongly. No further policy change is required, except possibly lower taxes still.
6) Health care is a purchase like any other. Individuals should make their own best deals in the insurance market with minimal government supervision. Those who pay more should get more. Those who cannot pay must either rely on Medicaid, accept charity, or go without.
7) Voting is a privilege. States should have wide latitude to regulate that privilege in such a way as to minimize voting fraud, which is rife among African Americans and new immigrant communities. The federal role in voting oversight should be limited to preventing Democrats from abusing the U.S. Postal Service to enable fraud by their voters.
For those accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression.

Black lives matter
User avatar
Holman
Posts: 24915
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 8:00 pm
Location: Approximately Wissahickon

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Holman »

What's even more something is that Frum himself was part of the GOP establishment under Bush Jr. You probably know this, but he was the speechwriter responsible for "Axis of Evil."

That's why we should be careful of the NeverTrumpers. Right now they are our allies against Trump, but it's hard to believe that any of them would have revolted against a Rubio or Jeb or even a Cruz administration that pursued pretty similar policies enabled by the very same Mitch McConnell.

Did any of the champion NeverTrumpers speak against the refusal to hold hearings on Merrick Garland?
Much prefer my Nazis Nuremberged.
User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 37514
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Kraken »

Carpet_pissr wrote: Tue Aug 25, 2020 5:23 pm To be fair. should Democrats prevail and elect Biden, and keep the House, you will see a LOT of vitriol for the next 4 years directed at Trump. I'm sure his name will be invoked just as much if not more. Hell, name that shit: "Patching up the Great Undoing" or something.
I worry that the opposite will happen. Biden's a conciliator who'll believe his mandate is to heal the country. I'm afraid that his administration will forgo investigations and prosecution in favor of "turning the page" and "moving forward." I don't think it will extend to actual pardons, but it could, especially if that's trump's price for going peacefully in January.

There have to be consequences when a would-be dictator tramples the Constitution. Not just for Agolf Twittler, but also for all those who broke any laws in collaborating and enabling him. Democrats can't just say "glad that's over...better luck next time!"

(Biden has said he won't pursue trump legally, but he won't impede his justice department, either, which makes his AG selection especially important. I would've recommended Kamala for that job. :doh: )
User avatar
The Meal
Posts: 27134
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 10:33 pm
Location: 2005 Stanley Cup Champion

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by The Meal »

Kraken wrote: Tue Aug 25, 2020 8:39 pmAgolf Twittler
:!: :!: :!: :lol: :!: :!: :!:

Amazing!
2 + 2 = 4

Come play online poker with fellow forum members!
User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 36241
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by El Guapo »

Holman wrote: Tue Aug 25, 2020 7:03 pm What's even more something is that Frum himself was part of the GOP establishment under Bush Jr. You probably know this, but he was the speechwriter responsible for "Axis of Evil."

That's why we should be careful of the NeverTrumpers. Right now they are our allies against Trump, but it's hard to believe that any of them would have revolted against a Rubio or Jeb or even a Cruz administration that pursued pretty similar policies enabled by the very same Mitch McConnell.

Did any of the champion NeverTrumpers speak against the refusal to hold hearings on Merrick Garland?
Frum in particular has had an interesting political journey, though. He was essentially branded a heretic and kicked out of the conservative movement in 2009 for arguing that the GOP should actually negotiate in good faith and strike a deal on the ACA, rather than go full rejectionist. So Frum's an establishment Republican (or at least of the former GOP establishment), but he has a history of pushing back on the extremist wing of the party.

And yeah, when and if sanity is restored, a lot of people who are allies today won't be allies tomorrow. But we should hope that sane, principled Republicans (even if we disagree with a lot of those principles) will be able to rebuild a sane conservative opposition party. And ultimately we'll worry about tomorrow's battles tomorrow.
Black Lives Matter.
User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 36241
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by El Guapo »

The Meal wrote: Wed Aug 26, 2020 11:12 am
Kraken wrote: Tue Aug 25, 2020 8:39 pmAgolf Twittler
:!: :!: :!: :lol: :!: :!: :!:

Amazing!
That is pretty solid.
Black Lives Matter.
User avatar
gilraen
Posts: 3076
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2013 7:45 pm
Location: Broomfield, CO

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by gilraen »

El Guapo wrote: Wed Aug 26, 2020 11:31 am
Holman wrote: Tue Aug 25, 2020 7:03 pm What's even more something is that Frum himself was part of the GOP establishment under Bush Jr. You probably know this, but he was the speechwriter responsible for "Axis of Evil."

That's why we should be careful of the NeverTrumpers. Right now they are our allies against Trump, but it's hard to believe that any of them would have revolted against a Rubio or Jeb or even a Cruz administration that pursued pretty similar policies enabled by the very same Mitch McConnell.

Did any of the champion NeverTrumpers speak against the refusal to hold hearings on Merrick Garland?
Frum in particular has had an interesting political journey, though. He was essentially branded a heretic and kicked out of the conservative movement in 2009 for arguing that the GOP should actually negotiate in good faith and strike a deal on the ACA, rather than go full rejectionist. So Frum's an establishment Republican (or at least of the former GOP establishment), but he has a history of pushing back on the extremist wing of the party.
Well...I think his Canadian sanity had to prevail.
User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 37514
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Kraken »

El Guapo wrote: Wed Aug 26, 2020 11:32 am
The Meal wrote: Wed Aug 26, 2020 11:12 am
Kraken wrote: Tue Aug 25, 2020 8:39 pmAgolf Twittler
:!: :!: :!: :lol: :!: :!: :!:

Amazing!
That is pretty solid.
Shamelessly stolen...I wish I were that clever.
User avatar
Little Raven
Posts: 7960
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 10:26 am
Location: Austin, TX

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Little Raven »

China has become an economic and geopolitical adversary of the United States. Military spending should be invested with an eye to defeating China on the seas, in space, and in the cyber-realm. US economic policy should recognize that relations with China are increasingly zero-sum: when China wins, the US loses and vice-versa.
This is the only plank of Frum's platform that I actually agree with.

China is not going to be our friend, and they are not going to be a friend to humanity, either. We should prepare.
/. "She climbed backwards out her
\/ window into Outside Over There."
User avatar
coopasonic
Posts: 17632
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 11:43 pm
Location: Dallas-ish

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by coopasonic »

I think it basically boils down to winning (primarily for the elite) at any cost, with the caveat that black/brown, LGBTQ, etc lives and livelihoods hardly constitute a cost at all.

Things are only in the platform that support that goal. They don't give a damn about abortion or the second amendment. They give a damn about how they can use the ideas.

Now that I have typed that I have to consider if it is the same for the democratic party, trying to be aware of my bias and information bubble. Realistically who does the green new deal really serve. Yeah it would enrich renewables executives and stockholders. Who wins with abortion rights? I mean other than women in general? Gay and transgender rights? Medicare for all? Yeah it hurts insurance companies, but honestly, I am not sad about that but what special interest does it benefit?

Is the democratic strategy a mess simply because there is no big organizations behind it, funding it?
-Coop
Black Lives Matter
User avatar
Little Raven
Posts: 7960
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 10:26 am
Location: Austin, TX

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Little Raven »

coopasonic wrote: Thu Aug 27, 2020 12:00 pmIs the democratic strategy a mess simply because there is no big organizations behind it, funding it?
Democratic strategy is a mess because the Democratic Party is very wide. There are a LOT of factions in it, and many of them do not see eye to eye on much besides "Trump must go." By contrast, the Republican Party is SUPER narrow at this point. That means they can react with laser focus, but it also means they're constantly behind the 8-ball. Narrow parties can and often do punch well above their weight class, but that only takes you so far.
/. "She climbed backwards out her
\/ window into Outside Over There."
User avatar
gilraen
Posts: 3076
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2013 7:45 pm
Location: Broomfield, CO

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by gilraen »

Little Raven wrote: Thu Aug 27, 2020 12:33 pm
coopasonic wrote: Thu Aug 27, 2020 12:00 pmIs the democratic strategy a mess simply because there is no big organizations behind it, funding it?
Democratic strategy is a mess because the Democratic Party is very wide. There are a LOT of factions in it, and many of them do not see eye to eye on much besides "Trump must go." By contrast, the Republican Party is SUPER narrow at this point. That means they can react with laser focus, but it also means they're constantly behind the 8-ball. Narrow parties can and often do punch well above their weight class, but that only takes you so far.
I heard James Carville in an interview describe it as this: Democratic Party is a coalition. They have different platforms among different groups, but they agree on some kind of bigger picture, so they can work together (for the most part). But they are not following a single ideology, which is the defining characteristic of the Republican Party. The Republicans have a party line that they are expected to follow, blindly or otherwise.
User avatar
Defiant
Posts: 19848
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:09 pm
Location: Tongue in cheek

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Defiant »

Yes, the Democratic party is a coalition, which arrives at it's platform through compromise and consensus. And now it's even more complicated by the inclusion of never-Trumper Republicans and independents.
User avatar
Little Raven
Posts: 7960
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 10:26 am
Location: Austin, TX

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Little Raven »

It's even FURTHER complicated by the fact that we're in the middle of a party realignment. The Democrats are slowly but surely becoming the conservative party, as the Republicans morph into....something else entirely.
/. "She climbed backwards out her
\/ window into Outside Over There."
User avatar
Carpet_pissr
Posts: 14515
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 5:32 pm
Location: Columbia, SC

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Carpet_pissr »

coopasonic wrote: Thu Aug 27, 2020 12:00 pm I think it basically boils down to winning (primarily for the elite) at any cost, with the caveat that black/brown, LGBTQ, etc lives and livelihoods hardly constitute a cost at all.
Things are only in the platform that support that goal. They don't give a damn about abortion or the second amendment. They give a damn about how they can use the ideas.
There are definitely a LOT of people that will vote R no matter what due to those single items (abortion and 2a). That's all they care about. All the other noise is just that. It's also those voters who Trump bragged would vote for him even if he murdered someone in Times Square. And he's right. They have such a massive case of tunnel vision surrounding their specific item, that literally nothing else matters. Lies? Pssh. Treason? He's not the first! Sexual assault? See: everyone's doing/done it. Stupid, bullying, dangerous douche-bag that might destroy America? Mmmmmm, ok, that's rough. BUT IS HE GOING TO SUPPORT (insert 2a or pro-life here)?!

Without any data to back this up whatsoever, I am going to guess the makeup of those who will vote for Trump in November:

5%'ers (1% is too exclusive)
Super social conservatives (see abortion), but they will have to hold their nose to vote for the orange pig
working class under/uneducated (hateses the elites, the Clintons, the globalism that took their jobs, librerals, foreigners, and quasi-socialists)
2a voters
Abortion voters

Please feel free to add other groups, and if you're really feeling randy, try to assign percentages to each.
User avatar
LordMortis
Posts: 64102
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:26 pm

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by LordMortis »

Carpet_pissr wrote: Thu Aug 27, 2020 2:13 pm 5%'ers (1% is too exclusive)
I would guess closer to 10%ers. I also think that 9.5+% of that 10% would probably be better off as his opposition but they won't come out of either direction hurting unless it all falls apart. Look at what the last six months has done for the trust fund populace. I barely squeak into the shrinking working middle class and the pandemic has been growing my 401k and I've been profiting in the small time stock trade.
User avatar
coopasonic
Posts: 17632
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 11:43 pm
Location: Dallas-ish

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by coopasonic »

LordMortis wrote: Thu Aug 27, 2020 2:36 pm
Carpet_pissr wrote: Thu Aug 27, 2020 2:13 pm 5%'ers (1% is too exclusive)
I would guess closer to 10%ers. I also think that 9.5+% of that 10% would probably be better off as his opposition but they won't come out of either direction hurting unless it all falls apart. Look at what the last six months has done for the trust fund populace. I barely squeak into the shrinking working middle class and the pandemic has been growing my 401k and I've been profiting in the small time stock trade.
Be careful now, there are a lot of 10%ers on this board. It's not a very high bar at our collective age.
-Coop
Black Lives Matter
User avatar
LordMortis
Posts: 64102
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:26 pm

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by LordMortis »

coopasonic wrote: Thu Aug 27, 2020 3:05 pm Be careful now, there are a lot of 10%ers on this board. It's not a very high bar at our collective age.
I am finding there are a lot of people at our collective age who seem to be trying to protect theirs and think that Trump's America is protecting theirs. Far more of them than I am comfortable with. And they aren't all 2A Pro-Life Qanon following uneducated Fox TV watchers. They are largely people who grew up "privileged" in the 21st century use of the word, meaning they did what they were supposed to do, got to live "the college lifestyle" and then eased in to an office job with some sort of kick start from their family, allowing them start preparing for their financial future at a younger age. And they're all voters. They may not be vocal Trump supporters, but they are voters and they don't mind where the country is.
User avatar
Carpet_pissr
Posts: 14515
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 5:32 pm
Location: Columbia, SC

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Carpet_pissr »

LordMortis wrote: Thu Aug 27, 2020 4:36 pm
coopasonic wrote: Thu Aug 27, 2020 3:05 pm Be careful now, there are a lot of 10%ers on this board. It's not a very high bar at our collective age.
I am finding there are a lot of people at our collective age who seem to be trying to protect theirs and think that Trump's America is protecting theirs. Far more of them than I am comfortable with. And they aren't all 2A Pro-Life Qanon following uneducated Fox TV watchers. They are largely people who grew up "privileged" in the 21st century use of the word, meaning they did what they were supposed to do, got to live "the college lifestyle" and then eased in to an office job with some sort of kick start from their family, allowing them start preparing for their financial future at a younger age. And they're all voters. They may not be vocal Trump supporters, but they are voters and they don't mind where the country is.
Well I'm done here. That precisely sums up my feelings about my Trump-voting peers. I know a crap ton of people that fit that description. Too embarrassed to verbally admit they will vote for him (including to pollsters, who would probably never get a chance to talk to them anyway), and maybe some of them feel guilty for voting for him, knowing how selfish it is.

In terms of "minding where the country is", I doubt that is much of a thought. Certainly not nearly as important as which candidate will likely benefit them personally (or the reverse, which candidate won't rock the very steady, safe boat.(taxes, schools, etc).

One thing that continues to bug me is that in the midst of this national peril, really, I STILL hear and read about people being interviewed that only talk about how they have or haven't or would be affected under President X. And it's like journalists (even NPR), lead to that question, first. What about the fucking country, people? Think outside your own personal got damn backyards and pocket books for once, for fuck's sake. Just today I heard a radio show on NPR, and the interviewer was asking this guy (surprisingly) what he would like to see for the country in the next 3-6 years. Where would he like to see us as a country. He answered by talking about how his personal life was great, he was doing great financially under Obama's presidency (this is someone who voted for Trump in 2016 but will not be in 2020). And just went on and on about how he personally was affected. Same for another person she talked to. It's like there's some blinder preventing people from realizing that like it or not, we are a society, a GROUP, a collective. I know individualism is deep in our DNA, but I think we may have gone too far, honestly, and fallen off the cliff into the Pit of Selfishness.

If that's representative of most of us, we are fucked. If we can't (or worse, maybe, choose not to) think outside our little personal sphere, we have no hope to continue to be great as a COUNTRY. (cue some nationalistic music here)
User avatar
Little Raven
Posts: 7960
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 10:26 am
Location: Austin, TX

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Little Raven »

LordMortis wrote: Thu Aug 27, 2020 4:36 pmThey may not be vocal Trump supporters, but they are voters and they don't mind where the country is.
I don't doubt your description for a moment, but I am super confused by that perspective.

As I see it, if you like "where the country is," right now....then you should vote for Biden. Biden is, in every sense except for the letter after his name, the conservative candidate. He is basically still running for Obama's third term. He has committed to no radical policy positions. He's super comfortable with all of the powerful institutions in this country and is making no signals that he intends to challenge any of them. He's basically saying "Hey....remember when government wasn't a reality television show? Let's go back to that."

By contrast, Trump desires to conserve nothing. He's not a progressive, because he has no coherent ideology that I can discern, but he most definitely an accerationist. He runs around setting one fire after another just to watch them burn. I can see why a lot of people would like that - there are a lot of people in this country who have very little to lose and frankly think burning everything down would probably not be a bad start...but those aren't the people you're talking about. Heck, *I'm* one of those people you're talking about. (in terms of the well-educated, decent job, nice savings, always vote, etc.) And I wouldn't touch Trump with a 10 foot pole....precisely because I like the country the way it is.
/. "She climbed backwards out her
\/ window into Outside Over There."
User avatar
Skinypupy
Posts: 16463
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 10:12 am
Location: Utah

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Skinypupy »

Carpet_pissr wrote: Thu Aug 27, 2020 5:04 pm
LordMortis wrote: Thu Aug 27, 2020 4:36 pm
coopasonic wrote: Thu Aug 27, 2020 3:05 pm Be careful now, there are a lot of 10%ers on this board. It's not a very high bar at our collective age.
I am finding there are a lot of people at our collective age who seem to be trying to protect theirs and think that Trump's America is protecting theirs. Far more of them than I am comfortable with. And they aren't all 2A Pro-Life Qanon following uneducated Fox TV watchers. They are largely people who grew up "privileged" in the 21st century use of the word, meaning they did what they were supposed to do, got to live "the college lifestyle" and then eased in to an office job with some sort of kick start from their family, allowing them start preparing for their financial future at a younger age. And they're all voters. They may not be vocal Trump supporters, but they are voters and they don't mind where the country is.
Well I'm done here. That precisely sums up my feelings about my Trump-voting peers. I know a crap ton of people that fit that description. Too embarrassed to verbally admit they will vote for him (including to pollsters, who would probably never get a chance to talk to them anyway), and maybe some of them feel guilty for voting for him, knowing how selfish it is.

In terms of "minding where the country is", I doubt that is much of a thought. Certainly not nearly as important as which candidate will likely benefit them personally (or the reverse, which candidate won't rock the very steady, safe boat.(taxes, schools, etc).

One thing that continues to bug me is that in the midst of this national peril, really, I STILL hear and read about people being interviewed that only talk about how they have or haven't or would be affected under President X. And it's like journalists (even NPR), lead to that question, first. What about the fucking country, people? Think outside your own personal got damn backyards and pocket books for once, for fuck's sake. Just today I heard a radio show on NPR, and the interviewer was asking this guy (surprisingly) what he would like to see for the country in the next 3-6 years. Where would he like to see us as a country. He answered by talking about how his personal life was great, he was doing great financially under Obama's presidency (this is someone who voted for Trump in 2016 but will not be in 2020). And just went on and on about how he personally was affected. Same for another person she talked to. It's like there's some blinder preventing people from realizing that like it or not, we are a society, a GROUP, a collective. I know individualism is deep in our DNA, but I think we may have gone too far, honestly, and fallen off the cliff into the Pit of Selfishness.

If that's representative of most of us, we are fucked. If we can't (or worse, maybe, choose not to) think outside our little personal sphere, we have no hope to continue to be great as a COUNTRY. (cue some nationalistic music here)
I had a conversation with a co-worker the other day about this. This is someone whose household has made at least $500K every year for the entire time I've been working here (she's one of the top salespeople here, and her husband is a DC lawyer). They own properties in both Northern VA and Hawaii, they both drive brand new Jaguars, they spend a month every year skiing throughout Europe, etc., etc.

Her comment was that while she despises Trump, thinks he's a horrible person, and is very concerned about the damage he is doing to the country, she just couldn't bring herself to vote for Biden because of "what it would do to my taxes" and because she "doesn't support socialism". She'll be "plugging her nose and voting for him again" because she absolutely could not bear the thought of making marginally less money as a trade off for restoring sanity and decency.

I fear there are lots of people out there like her. They are completely unwilling to make even slightly less money, no matter the consequences. It feels remarkably selfish and short-sighted. Of course, they will all likely be fine if everything comes crashing down, so why should they care?
For those accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression.

Black lives matter
User avatar
Pyperkub
Posts: 20373
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 5:07 pm
Location: NC- that's Northern California

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Pyperkub »

Skinypupy wrote:
Carpet_pissr wrote: Thu Aug 27, 2020 5:04 pm
LordMortis wrote: Thu Aug 27, 2020 4:36 pm
coopasonic wrote: Thu Aug 27, 2020 3:05 pm Be careful now, there are a lot of 10%ers on this board. It's not a very high bar at our collective age.
I am finding there are a lot of people at our collective age who seem to be trying to protect theirs and think that Trump's America is protecting theirs. Far more of them than I am comfortable with. And they aren't all 2A Pro-Life Qanon following uneducated Fox TV watchers. They are largely people who grew up "privileged" in the 21st century use of the word, meaning they did what they were supposed to do, got to live "the college lifestyle" and then eased in to an office job with some sort of kick start from their family, allowing them start preparing for their financial future at a younger age. And they're all voters. They may not be vocal Trump supporters, but they are voters and they don't mind where the country is.
Well I'm done here. That precisely sums up my feelings about my Trump-voting peers. I know a crap ton of people that fit that description. Too embarrassed to verbally admit they will vote for him (including to pollsters, who would probably never get a chance to talk to them anyway), and maybe some of them feel guilty for voting for him, knowing how selfish it is.

In terms of "minding where the country is", I doubt that is much of a thought. Certainly not nearly as important as which candidate will likely benefit them personally (or the reverse, which candidate won't rock the very steady, safe boat.(taxes, schools, etc).

One thing that continues to bug me is that in the midst of this national peril, really, I STILL hear and read about people being interviewed that only talk about how they have or haven't or would be affected under President X. And it's like journalists (even NPR), lead to that question, first. What about the fucking country, people? Think outside your own personal got damn backyards and pocket books for once, for fuck's sake. Just today I heard a radio show on NPR, and the interviewer was asking this guy (surprisingly) what he would like to see for the country in the next 3-6 years. Where would he like to see us as a country. He answered by talking about how his personal life was great, he was doing great financially under Obama's presidency (this is someone who voted for Trump in 2016 but will not be in 2020). And just went on and on about how he personally was affected. Same for another person she talked to. It's like there's some blinder preventing people from realizing that like it or not, we are a society, a GROUP, a collective. I know individualism is deep in our DNA, but I think we may have gone too far, honestly, and fallen off the cliff into the Pit of Selfishness.

If that's representative of most of us, we are fucked. If we can't (or worse, maybe, choose not to) think outside our little personal sphere, we have no hope to continue to be great as a COUNTRY. (cue some nationalistic music here)
I had a conversation with a co-worker the other day about this. This is someone whose household has made at least $500K every year for the entire time I've been working here (she's one of the top salespeople here, and her husband is a DC lawyer). They own properties in both Northern VA and Hawaii, they both drive brand new Jaguars, they spend a month every year skiing throughout Europe, etc., etc.

Her comment was that while she despises Trump, thinks he's a horrible person, and is very concerned about the damage he is doing to the country, she just couldn't bring herself to vote for Biden because of "what it would do to my taxes" and because she "doesn't support socialism". She'll be "plugging her nose and voting for him again" because she absolutely could not bear the thought of making marginally less money as a trade off for restoring sanity and decency.

I fear there are lots of people out there like her. They are completely unwilling to make even slightly less money, no matter the consequences. It feels remarkably selfish and short-sighted. Of course, they will all likely be fine if everything comes crashing down, so why should they care?
That knee jerk reaction to Socialism! is successful propaganda. She needs to see somehow that the GOP is just corporate Socialism, while the Dems Socialism she is so afraid of is pretty much in play in every single other first world economy. Ask her if Great Britain is socialist, or Japan, or Germany.
There are three ways to not tell the truth: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
User avatar
Little Raven
Posts: 7960
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 10:26 am
Location: Austin, TX

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Little Raven »

Skinypupy wrote: Thu Aug 27, 2020 6:04 pmI fear there are lots of people out there like her.
The US census estimates that only 3% of American households make over $300K+ a year. I can't find stats for $500K+ but it's got to be even smaller...and most of those people live in very wealthy, very Democratic states. So as grating as I'm sure she is, rest assured...there aren't very many people like her, and even fewer of them live in swing states.
/. "She climbed backwards out her
\/ window into Outside Over There."
User avatar
LordMortis
Posts: 64102
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:26 pm

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by LordMortis »

Skinypupy wrote: Thu Aug 27, 2020 6:04 pm I had a conversation with a co-worker the other day about this. This is someone whose household has made at least $500K every year for the entire time I've been working here (she's one of the top salespeople here, and her husband is a DC lawyer)
You can cut that wage by 80% in my neck of the woods, be a minor trust fund baby climbing the fiscal ladder through a portfolio and upgrading to a bigger mausoleum every five years, believing in and living a suburban life of "America First." That's the 10% I'm talking about.
User avatar
Skinypupy
Posts: 16463
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 10:12 am
Location: Utah

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Skinypupy »

Little Raven wrote: Thu Aug 27, 2020 6:19 pm
Skinypupy wrote: Thu Aug 27, 2020 6:04 pmI fear there are lots of people out there like her.
The US census estimates that only 3% of American households make over $300K+ a year. I can't find stats for $500K+ but it's got to be even smaller...and most of those people live in very wealthy, very Democratic states. So as grating as I'm sure she is, rest assured...there aren't very many people like her, and even fewer of them live in swing states.
I meant that there are lots of people with her same attitude of "I will vote against anything that may cause me to pay one single cent more in taxes, even if it means the world burns as a result".

Not that there are lots of $500K+ people. :)
For those accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression.

Black lives matter
Post Reply