Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
1/22/2020 12:12:56 PM
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 5
Posted: 11/18/2012 8:16:40 AM EST
Are you interested in turning the tide in 2014 and 2016?


Or are you still in scapegoat mode?


I believe there was a lesson the Republican party needed to learn in 2008 and sadly didn't learn. Instead, the party did the exact same thing it's doing now. It made EXCUSES.

"Oh, he was a dynamic speaker. He had the media on his side. He spent more money. etc..."

Not only am I still hearing the same excuses in 2012, but I'm hearing new ones that alarm the fuck out of me. Excuses that make me wonder if the Republican party isn't set to commit slow suicide. For example:

"It's those fucking third party voters who threw their votes away!"
and still worse...
"It's all those assholes who didn't VOTE. It's THEIR fault!"

These two excuses speak volumes about where the GOP's mindset is right now. It tells me they aren't interested in learning how to sway those voters to their side. Only in assigning blame. And that scares the piss out of me.

If you aren't interested in figuring out why those people voted (or didn't vote) the way they did, then you have absolutely no chance of persuading them to vote your way. I mention 2008 because from where I am standing, it appears that we just witnessed the fruits of that kind of thinking.


And lest you think I'm just an asshole pontificating without any plan, here you go:



I hear alot of "You have to vote for the lesser of two evils." But I never hear it from people who are willing to apply that line of thinking to their own political philosophy. What do you TRULY care about?

The country is changing, true. But the "Free Shit Army" is NOT a majority. Young people are still getting jobs. They're still working for a living. These are things they really care about.

What they truly DO NOT care about, and by increasing proportion, is the broad swath of social issues that dot the GOP platform. I'm sorry, but harping on that stuff turns people off. And no, Romney didn't harp on any of it. But he didn't have to. Plenty in the party were willing to contribute their fucktarded soundbites to a hostile media.

So let's play the "Lesser evils" game. What do YOU care about more?

Abortion and gay marriage? Or free market capitalism, lower taxes, fewer regs, and people being able to get jobs? Pick the lesser evil to tolerate. Because that's what you're going to have to do persuade all those "assholes who didn't vote against Obama" to get on board in 2014 and 2016.


And no, I don't listen to the "liberal media." This is MY OWN analysis. If you think this compromise isn't real and a shift that the GOP needs to make, ask yourself if you've truly analyzed it or if you just think so because Sean Hannity told you oh so soothingly that it's pointless to compromise and that doing so won't change anything.

TL;DR

There's the easy way, which requires no change and no self-criticism.
And then there's the hard way, which requires you to choose which values you truly care about and what you think the country can and cannot survive. And yes, may even require you to change a little bit.


That's just my two cents. Worth less than what you paid for it, probably.
Link Posted: 11/18/2012 8:18:54 AM EST
Its too late.
Divide the fucking country...
Link Posted: 11/18/2012 8:20:12 AM EST
Originally Posted By MTUSA:
Its too late.
Divide the fucking country...


It isn't.

And not a realistic option.
Link Posted: 11/18/2012 8:39:18 AM EST
Originally Posted By 1Andy2:
Originally Posted By MTUSA:
Its too late.
Divide the fucking country...


It isn't.

And not a realistic option.


yes it is too late , you will never see another republican president again... or one that isnt a most extreme RINO . The GOP is just going to turn into a different flavor of the Dem party.
Link Posted: 11/18/2012 8:56:07 AM EST
Dude, it's over. Americans are in trouble financially and they want their government to bail them out. The last time this happened, it was 20 years before the Republicans got another president elected, and that guy was what Republicans today would call a liberal. Conservatism has been rejected, just as it was when Herbert Hoover told people to pull themselves up by their boot straps, just as it was when Barry Goldwater told people that we needed fiscal restraint and small government in order to preserve their liberty.
Link Posted: 11/18/2012 9:05:41 AM EST
So far, not one vote to take the hard but necessary road, huh?

That is what scares me the most. There is a lesson here that no one is interested in learning...
Link Posted: 11/18/2012 9:15:58 AM EST
Fuck quitting.

The Republic MUST NOT FALL. All this secession and revolution talk is lunacy.

We're in a tough spot, we're not going to get what we thought we wanted twelve years ago. The GOP largely blew their chance.

But we can't just burn the world down in a temper tantrum because we didn't get our way, and we can't just give up and let the liberal progressives run the world for the next 40 years.

I'm with OP, lets build a party that's actually viable and have some influence on the world we all live in.

The situation has been clear to me for a decade though, it seems a significant portion of the GOP would rather see the republic fall than compromise.
Link Posted: 11/18/2012 9:50:36 AM EST
So the answer is take the democrat social policies and somehow pay for them? And then wrap that up and call it Republican?
Link Posted: 11/18/2012 9:55:11 AM EST

Originally Posted By 1Andy2:
So far, not one vote to take the hard but necessary road, huh?

That is what scares me the most. There is a lesson here that no one is interested in learning...

They'd rather be "right" and lose elections. You nailed it - they don't really believe in the lesser of two evils, thing.
Link Posted: 11/18/2012 9:57:13 AM EST
Originally Posted By 57fairlane:
So the answer is take the democrat social policies and somehow pay for them? And then wrap that up and call it Republican?


Nope. Because no one said that.


Voter turnout was down across the board. Meaning alot of the people who might have voted Republican but for their fucked up social issue planks didn't vote for the Dems, either.
Link Posted: 11/18/2012 9:58:24 AM EST
I'm not planning on running.
Link Posted: 11/18/2012 10:00:12 AM EST

Originally Posted By 57fairlane:
So the answer is take the democrat social policies and somehow pay for them? And then wrap that up and call it Republican?

Yes. You can favor being socially liberal, while suggesting that freedom also means not forcing others to pay for it.

Suppose a Democrat said "So the answer is to take the Republican view of guns, and somehow pay for them?", implying that expanded gun rights somehow means the government must provide them to people, at taxpayer expense. You'd rightly think that was ludicrous.

Link Posted: 11/18/2012 10:00:44 AM EST
[Last Edit: 11/18/2012 10:04:22 AM EST by SpaceGuy]

Originally Posted By 57fairlane:
So the answer is take the democrat social policies and somehow pay for them? And then wrap that up and call it Republican?

How much money does it cost the GOP to be okay with the following:
  • Pot
  • Gay Marriage
  • Abortion
Give me a number, please.





OP is mostly right. The real question is if the GOP learns, or they are going to be the perpetual also-ran.

Here's the thing, ARFCom: During the 2012 election, I had a lot of liberal friends that voted for Obama. They could have easily changed their vote, if it weren't for Romney being the GOP frontrunner, in the midst of the Murdock/Akin debacles.

If the candidate were someone else that wasn't attached so strongly to abortion, pot, or gay marriage, they probably would have voted for the GOP guy, or at least not voted for Obama. But since the GOP guy was so polarizing, they voted for O because they feared what Romney would do.

Comparatively, the majority of these guys would have probably cut a check to the GOP if Ron Paul had been the nominee. Take that as you will, but do remember: There used to be a time that Democrats would cross party line to vote for the Republican. We haven't had that since Reagan. Guess why?



<object width="0" height="0" id="plugin0" type="application/x-dgnria" style="z-index:1000"> [div] [div]</object>
Link Posted: 11/18/2012 10:06:14 AM EST
[Last Edit: 11/18/2012 10:08:30 AM EST by fatalerror113]
Sadly OP, people want to throw blame, not learn.

I am not entirely sure if the religious right who preached to us for years to back their guy because he was the "lesser of two evils" who now say "we won't vote for a guy who doesn't pander to our social issues" were playing us for suckers, or if they sincerely and honestly believe that allowing two gay people to get married will have the same detrimental effect on our country as having a socialist president. ETA::Or worst of all, if they actually like socialism and the only reason they vote for Republicans is abortion.

Either way, I don't think it bodes well for the future of the republican party in the executive office.

Yes, there will still be republican congressmen, governors, and local officials, but if people are unwilling to learn then the presidency is done.
Link Posted: 11/18/2012 10:06:27 AM EST
The republicans lost because they ran Obama light. Romneycare? If a serious conservative would have been run, conservatives would have come out of the woodwork like it was Reagans funeral. Did anyone seriously think they were going to steal votes from Obama by running a semi liberal?
Link Posted: 11/18/2012 10:06:30 AM EST
Originally Posted By Subnet:

Originally Posted By 1Andy2:
So far, not one vote to take the hard but necessary road, huh?

That is what scares me the most. There is a lesson here that no one is interested in learning...

They'd rather be "right" and lose elections. You nailed it - they don't really believe in the lesser of two evils, thing.


Yes, I'd rather stand up for what I believe is right rather than just keep voting for people who don't stand for the same things. If you're suggesting that the way to fix this is to for get about our core beliefs, forget about integrity, forget about what we as individuals hold as our own personal morals............then I'm out.

The republic is done, let it burn. I will no longer support the beast.
Link Posted: 11/18/2012 10:09:30 AM EST
The GOP needs to abandon the theocratic bullshit and concentrate on the issues they're right about.
Link Posted: 11/18/2012 10:11:09 AM EST
[Last Edit: 11/18/2012 10:15:25 AM EST by Badfish25]
Hell you cant just blame democrats for the mess where in, republicans have contributed there fair share to our debt/lack of freedoms.

The problem is how the party's are set up. Let say I am a really smart guy who has a great plan to fix my district and would like to run for office. Do you think I would just fill out the petitions and run a good campaign based on facts and intelligence, and have a snow balls chance in hell of winning?

Oh no, in order to get anywhere you need money, and support of a party. To get these you must start kissing ass at the basic level of your party, and start promising "favors". In order to succeed in the party systems we have, you pretty much need the exact opposite of moral qualities that we really need in our leaders.

Until we address this issue (Money IMO), we will never get the reform that we claim to want.

Edit: Romney was a weak ass candidate, he could not beat McCain back in 2008, but since he did the right thing and backed down after he all but lost. The party said good boy, we will give you our support next time around.
Link Posted: 11/18/2012 10:12:23 AM EST
Originally Posted By leatherpuke:
Originally Posted By Subnet:

Originally Posted By 1Andy2:
So far, not one vote to take the hard but necessary road, huh?

That is what scares me the most. There is a lesson here that no one is interested in learning...

They'd rather be "right" and lose elections. You nailed it - they don't really believe in the lesser of two evils, thing.


Yes, I'd rather stand up for what I believe is right rather than just keep voting for people who don't stand for the same things. If you're suggesting that the way to fix this is to for get about our core beliefs, forget about integrity, forget about what we as individuals hold as our own personal morals............then I'm out.

The republic is done, let it burn. I will no longer support the beast.


Do you have children?

If so, which do you believe will be worse for them?

A country where they're allowed to partake in homo marriage, drugs, or abortion but wouldn't, because of the way you raised them?

OR

A country where they rely on the government hand to mouth for their job, food, dwelling, power, water, and medical care and have no choice in the matter other than to submit or go to jail?


Pick one. Because this really is becoming an either/or choice.
Link Posted: 11/18/2012 10:12:34 AM EST
[Last Edit: 11/18/2012 10:13:51 AM EST by fatalerror113]

Originally Posted By leatherpuke:
Originally Posted By Subnet:

Originally Posted By 1Andy2:
So far, not one vote to take the hard but necessary road, huh?

That is what scares me the most. There is a lesson here that no one is interested in learning...

They'd rather be "right" and lose elections. You nailed it - they don't really believe in the lesser of two evils, thing.


Yes, I'd rather stand up for what I believe is right rather than just keep voting for people who don't stand for the same things. If you're suggesting that the way to fix this is to for get about our core beliefs, forget about integrity, forget about what we as individuals hold as our own personal morals............then I'm out.

The republic is done, let it burn. I will no longer support the beast.
No one is saying give up your core beliefs, integrity, or morality.

All they are saying is to not try to elect your government to force your opinions about these things on others.

Like it or not, your beliefs are no more or less valid than anyone elses. Your opposition to gay marriage is not "more moral" than someone who says "actually, its not the government's job to care about gay marriage".

You've made your choice. You value your own emotions over the fate of the country, including the fate of your children.

Sorry, but that's just completely batshit crazy.

Link Posted: 11/18/2012 10:15:09 AM EST
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the Republicans just choose a gun grabbing, pro choice former governor of the first state to legalize gay marriage to be the leader of their party during the last election and run for president on the platform of reducing regulation on businesses, cutting government spending and reducing taxes? Didn't the Republican electorate flat out reject candidates who ran on social conservative issues like abortion, pornography and gay marriage?

Abortion wasn't an issue, except in a couple of Senate races in The South and I don't recall the question of gay marriage ever coming up. The only social issue that I recall hearing anything about was contraception, and only in the context of who should be paying for people's birth control.

I'm sorry, but your assessment doesn't hold any water.
Link Posted: 11/18/2012 10:17:30 AM EST

Originally Posted By motown_steve:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the Republicans just choose a gun grabbing, pro choice former governor of the first state to legalize gay marriage to be the leader of their party during the last election and run for president on the platform of reducing regulation on businesses, cutting government spending and reducing taxes? Didn't the Republican electorate flat out reject candidates who ran on social conservative issues like abortion, pornography and gay marriage?

Abortion wasn't an issue, except in a couple of Senate races in The South and I don't recall the question of gay marriage ever coming up. The only social issue that I recall hearing anything about was contraception, and only in the context of who should be paying for people's birth control.

I'm sorry, but your assessment doesn't hold any water.

Bullshit. That's like saying guns weren't an issue in 2008 because Obama didn't bring them up.

Sorry, in a game of chess, you're playing tic-tac-toe.

Link Posted: 11/18/2012 10:24:25 AM EST
Originally Posted By fatalerror113:

Originally Posted By motown_steve:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the Republicans just choose a gun grabbing, pro choice former governor of the first state to legalize gay marriage to be the leader of their party during the last election and run for president on the platform of reducing regulation on businesses, cutting government spending and reducing taxes? Didn't the Republican electorate flat out reject candidates who ran on social conservative issues like abortion, pornography and gay marriage?

Abortion wasn't an issue, except in a couple of Senate races in The South and I don't recall the question of gay marriage ever coming up. The only social issue that I recall hearing anything about was contraception, and only in the context of who should be paying for people's birth control.

I'm sorry, but your assessment doesn't hold any water.

Bullshit. That's like saying guns weren't an issue in 2008 because Obama didn't bring them up.

Sorry, in a game of chess, you're playing tic-tac-toe.




So what Republicans need to do is publically support abortion and homosexuality, or else we're not "playing chess?"
Link Posted: 11/18/2012 10:26:33 AM EST
Originally Posted By crushtheturtle:
Originally Posted By fatalerror113:

Originally Posted By motown_steve:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the Republicans just choose a gun grabbing, pro choice former governor of the first state to legalize gay marriage to be the leader of their party during the last election and run for president on the platform of reducing regulation on businesses, cutting government spending and reducing taxes? Didn't the Republican electorate flat out reject candidates who ran on social conservative issues like abortion, pornography and gay marriage?

Abortion wasn't an issue, except in a couple of Senate races in The South and I don't recall the question of gay marriage ever coming up. The only social issue that I recall hearing anything about was contraception, and only in the context of who should be paying for people's birth control.

I'm sorry, but your assessment doesn't hold any water.

Bullshit. That's like saying guns weren't an issue in 2008 because Obama didn't bring them up.

Sorry, in a game of chess, you're playing tic-tac-toe.




So what Republicans need to do is publically support abortion and homosexuality, or else we're not "playing chess?"


Nope.

It would probably help if they didn't sound like the American Taliban to those "assholes who didn't vote against Obama" tho.
Link Posted: 11/18/2012 10:30:46 AM EST
Originally Posted By 1Andy2:
Originally Posted By crushtheturtle:
Originally Posted By fatalerror113:

Originally Posted By motown_steve:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the Republicans just choose a gun grabbing, pro choice former governor of the first state to legalize gay marriage to be the leader of their party during the last election and run for president on the platform of reducing regulation on businesses, cutting government spending and reducing taxes? Didn't the Republican electorate flat out reject candidates who ran on social conservative issues like abortion, pornography and gay marriage?

Abortion wasn't an issue, except in a couple of Senate races in The South and I don't recall the question of gay marriage ever coming up. The only social issue that I recall hearing anything about was contraception, and only in the context of who should be paying for people's birth control.

I'm sorry, but your assessment doesn't hold any water.

Bullshit. That's like saying guns weren't an issue in 2008 because Obama didn't bring them up.

Sorry, in a game of chess, you're playing tic-tac-toe.




So what Republicans need to do is publically support abortion and homosexuality, or else we're not "playing chess?"


Nope.

It would probably help if they didn't sound like the American Taliban to those "assholes who didn't vote against Obama" tho.


Undecided voters are the stupidest people alive. Republicans and conservatives shouldn't have to pander to those idiots. Standing by principles is more important than trying to "not scare them away."

I'd rather just watch the whole thing burn under the watch of the democrats. That will do more than anything in "educating" the young dipshits currently running this country into the ground.


Link Posted: 11/18/2012 10:33:21 AM EST
Originally Posted By motown_steve:
Dude, it's over. Americans are in trouble financially and they want their government to bail them out. The last time this happened, it was 20 years before the Republicans got another president elected, and that guy was what Republicans today would call a liberal. Conservatism has been rejected, just as it was when Herbert Hoover told people to pull themselves up by their boot straps, just as it was when Barry Goldwater told people that we needed fiscal restraint and small government in order to preserve their liberty.


Pay attention people.
Link Posted: 11/18/2012 10:34:49 AM EST
Its over.
The election was soooo clear cut any body could see what needed to happen.
They won and we lost, end of story.
Link Posted: 11/18/2012 10:38:43 AM EST
Originally Posted By crushtheturtle:


Undecided voters are the stupidest people alive. Republicans and conservatives shouldn't have to pander to those idiots. Standing by principles is more important than trying to "not scare them away."

I'd rather just watch the whole thing burn under the watch of the democrats. That will do more than anything in "educating" the young dipshits currently running this country into the ground.




Yeah, well if I had wheels I'd be a wagon.

It's not that they were undecided... it's that neither choice was palatable enough to swallow.

As far as the part in red goes... really? You're blaming people for not holding their nose and voting your way even while you proclaim an intent to let the country burn for your refusal to do the very same thing?

Link Posted: 11/18/2012 10:39:36 AM EST

Originally Posted By fatalerror113:

Originally Posted By motown_steve:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the Republicans just choose a gun grabbing, pro choice former governor of the first state to legalize gay marriage to be the leader of their party during the last election and run for president on the platform of reducing regulation on businesses, cutting government spending and reducing taxes? Didn't the Republican electorate flat out reject candidates who ran on social conservative issues like abortion, pornography and gay marriage?

Abortion wasn't an issue, except in a couple of Senate races in The South and I don't recall the question of gay marriage ever coming up. The only social issue that I recall hearing anything about was contraception, and only in the context of who should be paying for people's birth control.

I'm sorry, but your assessment doesn't hold any water.

Bullshit. That's like saying guns weren't an issue in 2008 because Obama didn't bring them up.

Sorry, in a game of chess, you're playing tic-tac-toe.


What portion of the electorate was concerned with gun control during the 2008 presidential election?

Link Posted: 11/18/2012 10:45:36 AM EST
Originally Posted By 1Andy2:
Originally Posted By crushtheturtle:


Undecided voters are the stupidest people alive. Republicans and conservatives shouldn't have to pander to those idiots. Standing by principles is more important than trying to "not scare them away."

I'd rather just watch the whole thing burn under the watch of the democrats. That will do more than anything in "educating" the young dipshits currently running this country into the ground.




Yeah, well if I had wheels I'd be a wagon.

It's not that they were undecided... it's that neither choice was palatable enough to swallow.

As far as the part in red goes... really? You're blaming people for not holding their nose and voting your way even while you proclaim an intent to let the country burn for your refusal to do the very same thing?



Not sure I follow. I voted for Romney. I voted for him despite his Mormonism.

See, I am smart enough to know that there are more important things than social issues. The libtards, the media, and the people who don't find Republicans palatable apparently can't get their little minds past social issues. "Da big bad weepublicans are so scare-wy. They're going to take my weed and anal sex away."

Link Posted: 11/18/2012 10:46:36 AM EST
I would think it would be fairly simple for a candidate who favored smaller government to say (for example) "As a Catholic I am opposed to abortion. However, I also recognize that others may have different opinions, and I believe consenting and responsible adults should have the freedom to choose their own positions without interference from the government. In spite of my beliefs, I do not intend to restrict that freedom."
Link Posted: 11/18/2012 10:48:29 AM EST

Originally Posted By crushtheturtle:
Originally Posted By fatalerror113:

Originally Posted By motown_steve:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the Republicans just choose a gun grabbing, pro choice former governor of the first state to legalize gay marriage to be the leader of their party during the last election and run for president on the platform of reducing regulation on businesses, cutting government spending and reducing taxes? Didn't the Republican electorate flat out reject candidates who ran on social conservative issues like abortion, pornography and gay marriage?

Abortion wasn't an issue, except in a couple of Senate races in The South and I don't recall the question of gay marriage ever coming up. The only social issue that I recall hearing anything about was contraception, and only in the context of who should be paying for people's birth control.

I'm sorry, but your assessment doesn't hold any water.

Bullshit. That's like saying guns weren't an issue in 2008 because Obama didn't bring them up.

Sorry, in a game of chess, you're playing tic-tac-toe.




So what Republicans need to do is publically support abortion and homosexuality, or else we're not "playing chess?"
No.

They have to give up championing against them, as this turns off moderates (like how many dems gave up the whole gun control push, and it worked. Lots of gun owners now vote for them because "they won't do anything about guns")

People say "the base is full of more single issue voters than moderates that you will gain gain"...okay, maybe you are right. If so, then there is nothing we can do.

We are fucked either way.

Link Posted: 11/18/2012 10:49:53 AM EST

Originally Posted By crushtheturtle:
Originally Posted By 1Andy2:
Originally Posted By crushtheturtle:
Originally Posted By fatalerror113:

Originally Posted By motown_steve:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the Republicans just choose a gun grabbing, pro choice former governor of the first state to legalize gay marriage to be the leader of their party during the last election and run for president on the platform of reducing regulation on businesses, cutting government spending and reducing taxes? Didn't the Republican electorate flat out reject candidates who ran on social conservative issues like abortion, pornography and gay marriage?

Abortion wasn't an issue, except in a couple of Senate races in The South and I don't recall the question of gay marriage ever coming up. The only social issue that I recall hearing anything about was contraception, and only in the context of who should be paying for people's birth control.

I'm sorry, but your assessment doesn't hold any water.

Bullshit. That's like saying guns weren't an issue in 2008 because Obama didn't bring them up.

Sorry, in a game of chess, you're playing tic-tac-toe.




So what Republicans need to do is publically support abortion and homosexuality, or else we're not "playing chess?"


Nope.

It would probably help if they didn't sound like the American Taliban to those "assholes who didn't vote against Obama" tho.


Undecided voters are the stupidest people alive. Republicans and conservatives shouldn't have to pander to those idiots. Standing by principles is more important than trying to "not scare them away."

I'd rather just watch the whole thing burn under the watch of the democrats. That will do more than anything in "educating" the young dipshits currently running this country into the ground.



No, people who value emotional "principles" over the fate of the nation are far dumber than moderates.

Link Posted: 11/18/2012 10:50:43 AM EST

Originally Posted By motown_steve:

Originally Posted By fatalerror113:

Originally Posted By motown_steve:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the Republicans just choose a gun grabbing, pro choice former governor of the first state to legalize gay marriage to be the leader of their party during the last election and run for president on the platform of reducing regulation on businesses, cutting government spending and reducing taxes? Didn't the Republican electorate flat out reject candidates who ran on social conservative issues like abortion, pornography and gay marriage?

Abortion wasn't an issue, except in a couple of Senate races in The South and I don't recall the question of gay marriage ever coming up. The only social issue that I recall hearing anything about was contraception, and only in the context of who should be paying for people's birth control.

I'm sorry, but your assessment doesn't hold any water.

Bullshit. That's like saying guns weren't an issue in 2008 because Obama didn't bring them up.

Sorry, in a game of chess, you're playing tic-tac-toe.


What portion of the electorate was concerned with gun control during the 2008 presidential election?


Gun owners?
Link Posted: 11/18/2012 10:53:44 AM EST
[Last Edit: 11/18/2012 10:54:22 AM EST by 1Andy2]
Originally Posted By crushtheturtle:
Originally Posted By 1Andy2:
Originally Posted By crushtheturtle:


Undecided voters are the stupidest people alive. Republicans and conservatives shouldn't have to pander to those idiots. Standing by principles is more important than trying to "not scare them away."

I'd rather just watch the whole thing burn under the watch of the democrats. That will do more than anything in "educating" the young dipshits currently running this country into the ground.




Yeah, well if I had wheels I'd be a wagon.

It's not that they were undecided... it's that neither choice was palatable enough to swallow.

As far as the part in red goes... really? You're blaming people for not holding their nose and voting your way even while you proclaim an intent to let the country burn for your refusal to do the very same thing?



Not sure I follow. I voted for Romney. I voted for him despite his Mormonism.

See, I am smart enough to know that there are more important things than social issues. The libtards, the media, and the people who don't find Republicans palatable apparently can't get their little minds past social issues. "Da big bad weepublicans are so scare-wy. They're going to take my weed and anal sex away."



Yes. You're absolutely right. It's the inability of those people who can't get past those social issues that cost the Republicans the election.

And your plan is... fuck it, I'd rather watch the country burn to the ground than try to win next time? Why did you even bother to post in this thread if you absolutely do not care?

Link Posted: 11/18/2012 10:54:15 AM EST
Originally Posted By SpaceGuy:

Originally Posted By 57fairlane:
So the answer is take the democrat social policies and somehow pay for them? And then wrap that up and call it Republican?

How much money does it cost the GOP to be okay with the following:
  • Pot
  • Gay Marriage
  • Abortion
Give me a number, please.





OP is mostly right. The real question is if the GOP learns, or they are going to be the perpetual also-ran.

Here's the thing, ARFCom: During the 2012 election, I had a lot of liberal friends that voted for Obama. They could have easily changed their vote, if it weren't for Romney being the GOP frontrunner, in the midst of the Murdock/Akin debacles.

If the candidate were someone else that wasn't attached so strongly to abortion, pot, or gay marriage, they probably would have voted for the GOP guy, or at least not voted for Obama. But since the GOP guy was so polarizing, they voted for O because they feared what Romney would do.

Comparatively, the majority of these guys would have probably cut a check to the GOP if Ron Paul had been the nominee. Take that as you will, but do remember: There used to be a time that Democrats would cross party line to vote for the Republican. We haven't had that since Reagan. Guess why?



<object width="0" height="0" id="plugin0" type="application/x-dgnria" style=">[div][div]</object>


It's legal, I don't want to pay a fraction of a cent for it. I don't give a fuck if Sandra fluke uses 10,000,000,000,000 condoms a year. I aint gonna pay for it cause I aint fucking her.
Link Posted: 11/18/2012 10:54:45 AM EST
Originally Posted By underdogII:
Its over.
The election was soooo clear cut any body could see what needed to happen.
They won and we lost, end of story.


The story isn't over, we're all going to live through the rest of it. I have kids, I'm not about to give up on the world they're going to live in.

We don't need to compromise our principles, we just need to face the reality that we haven't always been correct, even when the liberals are also incorrect.

Monetarist fallacies in economic and fiscal policy

Dominionist overreach in social and civil rights policy.

Neoconservative overreach in foreign policy.

The belief that everyone who doesn't buy into our particular brand of stupid is a subhuman enemy of all that is good in the world.

These are the things that we're destroying the republic over.
Link Posted: 11/18/2012 10:56:31 AM EST
Originally Posted By mw365:
I would think it would be fairly simple for a candidate who favored smaller government to say (for example) "As a Catholic I am opposed to abortion. However, I also recognize that others may have different opinions, and I believe consenting and responsible adults should have the freedom to choose their own positions without interference from the government. In spite of my beliefs, I do not intend to restrict that freedom."


I agree... and it's absolutely terrifying to say this... but I think that might be a bridge too far for a big chunk of the Republican base.

There are alot of Republicans saying they would rather watch the country burn to the ground than compromise on ANY social issue.
Link Posted: 11/18/2012 10:57:22 AM EST
Originally Posted By fatalerror113:
No, people who value emotional "principles" over the fate of the nation are far dumber than moderates.[/span]


Right. You just described every so called "moderate" who withheld their vote based on social issues.

They're young, hip and educated by MTV. In other words, morons.

My personal opinion is that the Republicans should allow every initiative and policy that Obama and the Democrats propose. Let it all happen. In 2014, 2016, who are the libs going to "blame." When the country falls to shit, even "moderates" should be smart enough to see where the fault lies.

Link Posted: 11/18/2012 10:59:52 AM EST
Originally Posted By 1Andy2:
Originally Posted By mw365:
I would think it would be fairly simple for a candidate who favored smaller government to say (for example) "As a Catholic I am opposed to abortion. However, I also recognize that others may have different opinions, and I believe consenting and responsible adults should have the freedom to choose their own positions without interference from the government. In spite of my beliefs, I do not intend to restrict that freedom."


I agree... and it's absolutely terrifying to say this... but I think that might be a bridge too far for a big chunk of the Republican base.

There are alot of Republicans saying they would rather watch the country burn to the ground than compromise on ANY social issue.


So I should be willing to pay for other peoples Abortions and safe fucking in order to stop the tide of socialism?
Sound Right?
Link Posted: 11/18/2012 11:01:54 AM EST
[Last Edit: 11/18/2012 11:06:39 AM EST by 1Andy2]
Originally Posted By crushtheturtle:
Originally Posted By fatalerror113:
No, people who value emotional "principles" over the fate of the nation are far dumber than moderates.[/span]


Right. You just described every so called "moderate" who withheld their vote based on social issues.

They're young, hip and educated by MTV. In other words, morons.

[span style='color: red;']My personal opinion is that the Republicans should allow every initiative and policy that Obama and the Democrats propose. [/span]Let it all happen. In 2014, 2016, who are the libs going to "blame." When the country falls to shit, even "moderates" should be smart enough to see where the fault lies.



You want the Republican opposition to become a party to the destruction of the USA and you're calling the people who didn't vote with you morons?

Where do you think those "moderates" will assign blame if the Republicans do as you suggest?
Link Posted: 11/18/2012 11:03:08 AM EST
You completely discount 2010.

Link Posted: 11/18/2012 11:03:35 AM EST
Want to win? Run a ticket of Condi Rice for President and Clint Eastwood as VP.

You will be in the whitehouse, and the campaign will be FUCKING EPIC.
Link Posted: 11/18/2012 11:05:38 AM EST
Originally Posted By nukldragr:
Originally Posted By 1Andy2:
Originally Posted By mw365:
I would think it would be fairly simple for a candidate who favored smaller government to say (for example) "As a Catholic I am opposed to abortion. However, I also recognize that others may have different opinions, and I believe consenting and responsible adults should have the freedom to choose their own positions without interference from the government. In spite of my beliefs, I do not intend to restrict that freedom."


I agree... and it's absolutely terrifying to say this... but I think that might be a bridge too far for a big chunk of the Republican base.

There are alot of Republicans saying they would rather watch the country burn to the ground than compromise on ANY social issue.


So I should be willing to pay for other peoples Abortions and safe fucking in order to stop the tide of socialism?
Sound Right?


Where did you see that part?
Link Posted: 11/18/2012 11:07:55 AM EST
Originally Posted By 1Andy2:
Originally Posted By crushtheturtle:
Originally Posted By fatalerror113:
No, people who value emotional "principles" over the fate of the nation are far dumber than moderates.[/span]


Right. You just described every so called "moderate" who withheld their vote based on social issues.

They're young, hip and educated by MTV. In other words, morons.

[span style='color: red;']My personal opinion is that the Republicans should allow every initiative and policy that Obama and the Democrats propose. [/span]Let it all happen. In 2014, 2016, who are the libs going to "blame." When the country falls to shit, even "moderates" should be smart enough to see where the fault lies.



You want the Republican opposition to become a party to the destruction of the USA and you're calling the people who didn't vote with you morons?

Where do you think those "moderates" will assign blame if the Republicans does as you suggest and becomes a party to the collapse that you think is going to magically cause them all to flock to the Republicans?


The Democrats run things now. The democrat campaign narrative for 2014/16 is already set, I hope you can see it: "The country is in a bad way because these darn Republicans keep blocking our legislation. Vote more of us Democrats in. Also, hope and change and Republicans don't like gays, etc. etc.".

Let the Dems have their way, they can't use the "obstruction" excuse. Then Republicans get seats back in the next elections and we can more effectively advance conservative ideas.

Link Posted: 11/18/2012 11:08:51 AM EST
You'll never vote your way out of the mess we are in. Besides, come 2016 you won't have any Rights left, you'll only be able to say or do what the Govt. says you can.
This Republic was lost many moons ago. I laugh every time i hear some conservative say, "we'll get'em next time," or " we'll vote them all out of office," yeah right !
Link Posted: 11/18/2012 11:10:14 AM EST
Originally Posted By crushtheturtle:
Originally Posted By 1Andy2:
Originally Posted By crushtheturtle:
Originally Posted By fatalerror113:
No, people who value emotional "principles" over the fate of the nation are far dumber than moderates.[/span]


Right. You just described every so called "moderate" who withheld their vote based on social issues.

They're young, hip and educated by MTV. In other words, morons.

[span style='color: red;']My personal opinion is that the Republicans should allow every initiative and policy that Obama and the Democrats propose. [/span]Let it all happen. In 2014, 2016, who are the libs going to "blame." When the country falls to shit, even "moderates" should be smart enough to see where the fault lies.



You want the Republican opposition to become a party to the destruction of the USA and you're calling the people who didn't vote with you morons?

Where do you think those "moderates" will assign blame if the Republicans does as you suggest and becomes a party to the collapse that you think is going to magically cause them all to flock to the Republicans?


The Democrats run things now. The democrat campaign narrative for 2014/16 is already set, I hope you can see it: "The country is in a bad way because these darn Republicans keep blocking our legislation. Vote more of us Democrats in. Also, hope and change and Republicans don't like gays, etc. etc.".

Let the Dems have their way, they can't use the "obstruction" excuse. Then Republicans get seats back in the next elections and we can more effectively advance conservative ideas.



So the key to retaining a majority in the House is for those Representatives to do the opposite of what their constituents elected them to do? Is that right? Brilliant strategy.
Link Posted: 11/18/2012 11:11:21 AM EST
The people who suck the tit of government have spoken, and by 2016 there will be more of them. What we had is gone and is never coming back. Prepare for the ride.. errr.. crash.
Link Posted: 11/18/2012 11:12:06 AM EST
I just started reading Steyns "After America" so im starting to think that it flat out doesn't matter who wins in 2016.

It's like closing the barn door now that all the cows are out.
Link Posted: 11/18/2012 11:12:39 AM EST
[Last Edit: 11/18/2012 11:13:03 AM EST by 1Andy2]
I guess I got my answer. A resounding NO.

Absolutely pathetic.
Link Posted: 11/18/2012 11:14:43 AM EST
Originally Posted By 1Andy2:
Originally Posted By leatherpuke:
Originally Posted By Subnet:

Originally Posted By 1Andy2:
So far, not one vote to take the hard but necessary road, huh?

That is what scares me the most. There is a lesson here that no one is interested in learning...

They'd rather be "right" and lose elections. You nailed it - they don't really believe in the lesser of two evils, thing.


Yes, I'd rather stand up for what I believe is right rather than just keep voting for people who don't stand for the same things. If you're suggesting that the way to fix this is to for get about our core beliefs, forget about integrity, forget about what we as individuals hold as our own personal morals............then I'm out.

The republic is done, let it burn. I will no longer support the beast.


Do you have children?

If so, which do you believe will be worse for them?

A country where they're allowed to partake in homo marriage, drugs, or abortion but wouldn't, because of the way you raised them?

OR

A country where they rely on the government hand to mouth for their job, food, dwelling, power, water, and medical care and have no choice in the matter other than to submit or go to jail?


Pick one. Because this really is becoming an either/or choice.


This is a false dichotomy. All of those things are going to happen.
Neither party is going to stop it.

OK, so why are Social Conservatives so adamant about not backing down? We know, unlike the posters in this thread, that the couple of "small concessions" are just the tip of the iceberg.
Gay marriage isn't the goal. Drug legalization isn't the goal. Abortion isn't the goal.The goal is to make Christianity a hate crime. Even if you think Christianity is the dumbest idea ever created, you should very much fear the day when idea's are illegal.

Don't kid yourself into thinking social issues don't matter.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 5
Top Top