Politics
- Started
- Last post
- 33,755 Responses
- ********0
- Thanks for bringing the material from 2004.TheBlueOne
- you welcome fiend********
- Should I just call you "marcostill" now? Because that was really, really fucking obvious...TheBlueOne
- ukit0
- this dinosaur will eat all the ones below though..Mirpour
- No, that's a vegetarian dino.TheBlueOne
- shiit just saw the elephant in the dino.. but yeah its vegetarian alrightMirpour
- zenmasterfoo0
http://article.nationalreview.co…
Here's a grouping of conservative voices chiming in on the GOPs future. It's easy enough to listen to polls that show most people don't consider themselves Republican, but the real value in differing voices isn't that you have to be part of a political party to have one. Most conservative people I know don't belong to the Republican party. Not because they don't believe in it, but simply because they don't want a party affiliation at all.
Like many of us here, myself included, we don't belong to a political party. I like the freedom of deciding conservatively on one issue and swinging far left on another without looking to a party to tell me what to do or think or say. They're necessary, but the polls probably don't give you a proper slice of American political leanings.
- yeah but: a) all the money is in the two parties and b) tough to do stuff outside of them.TheBlueOne
- That said, I'm an independent voter myself.TheBlueOne
- We have other parties on the tickets. None as powerful as the top two. But they exist.zenmasterfoo
- I think it's about the message. If the right person, with the right message went independent, we could see it happenzenmasterfoo
- It's about the money and influence, sadly.TheBlueOne
- ukit0
I think the Libertarian party deserves a seat at the table. Although their views in the most extreme form (i.e., destroy government) are not all that workable, they could stand for a kind of conservatism that is committed to less spending, efficient government, non-intervention overseas, civil liberties and staying the fuck out of people's lives.
I bet if you did a poll that would be a more appealing message than the one the Republicans are putting up.
- zenmasterfoo0
I think you're, in part, mistaken Ukit. The Republican party has entered a phase where it's attempting to find its voice again. The messages are still the same, fiscal responsibility, faith, etc. etc. But when you take a group and give it no voice, you have something similar to the protest rallies in DC. A bunch of yahoos, with good intentions, but no cohesive message.
- DrBombay0
- relevance?zenmasterfoo
- She was running for VP this past time around, maybe?DrBombay
- right.zenmasterfoo
- TheBlueOne0
GetRefresh brings his Tea Party to The Man:
- ukit0
Yep, but see zenmasterfoo the problem is that the message the Rs carry forward into the next election will not be determined by people like you or other independents who might lean to the right, but by people who are actually involved with the party.
And at this point what's left, in terms of card-carrying Republicans, are the hardcore true believers like Limbaugh, Palin and Bachman. And they are going to be the people most resistant to changing the GOP in ways that could make it more appealing to people in the center. That's why I think a third party could have a serious shot at it next time. Because by marginalizing themselves so much, the Republicans are leaving out a lot of people who are going to want to be heard.
- I disagree. Obama got elected by disenfranchised voters, many numbering the millions with no party affiliationzenmasterfoo
- TheBlueOne0
The Republicans are simply a mess. They were holding a disparate coalition together for a decade past it's prime by appealing to the long-ago patina-tinged Reagan nostalgia. It's over. They were gluing together the moralistic christian fundamentalist "Silent Majority" with Big Business, Small Business issues and Big Finance. They had people who loved the death penalty but hated abortion. They were trying to hold onto the growing anti-drug law Libertarians along with the "tough on crime" people. Trying to keep the increasingly redneck south appeased while trying to reach out to black and hispanic voters. Soccer moms and guys that want to own assault weapons? After a certain point the internal dissonance just grew to much. There is absolutely no way that party can survive in it's current shape.
The Reagan era is over. The so-called "Reagen democrats" (how they maintained that name for three decades when they consistently voted Republican to me is another riddle of how the mainstream media frames shit). They don't even have the glue of the Cold War to keep it together, and the terrorist "scare" doesn't generate enough consistent heat like the good old commies did - although they keep trying to call Obama a "communist". Good luck with that.
Their message now is nothing but confusion and negativity. I have no doubt they'll be back - I think counting out a reeling opponent is mistake numero uno in the political game, but when they find their way back from the woods they will be a much different party.
- ukit0
I just don't see why a third party couldn't make serious strides at this point with a strong web-based campaign and small donors funding it.
A lot of the old barriers that allowed the Ds and the Rs to dominate are no longer there. I mean, tell me what resources and infrastructure the Republicans have that couldn't be co opted by some other group with a better message and brand in a pretty short amount of time?
- TheBlueOne0
One problem with a Third Party (and don't think I'm against it, 'cause I'm not) is simply the one of local politics. The Ds & Rs scale - they operate of local, regional, state and federal levels. There are lots of invisible "support" going on there, and one level feeds into the next. Any third party will have so much inbuilt political infrastructure to deal with. it becomes next to impossible. Look at the Green Party for example, or the existing Libertarians...they've been trying to crack that nut for decades.
Oddly, we came REAL close with Perot the first time around. He was leading both Bush and CLinton in the polls by a sizable majority. Then he went weird, dropped out, came back in, and picked that asstard for a VP pick, and it all went south. But Perot proved, that in the right circumstances a thrid party could gain a significant if not winning voting share in a national election. Of course, after whoever is elected, that person has to govern, and if you think we have a hard time with the Rs and Ds now in the WH and congress? Imagine a 3rd party candidate sitting at the Oval Office and trying to get both Ds and Rs to play ball with his agenda in Congress...
- Who was his VP pick? As a kid I loved him at the time. Had a "Ross For Boss" t-shirt.mg33
- tommyo0
^^ I think (hope) you'll see more strides made in establishing a viable 3rd party. There are a few factors that I think will make this a possibility in the not so distant future.
1. People are becoming more and more disillusioned with the direction of 'their party.' This goes double for the Republicans, however I think we're going to see a similar exodus from the Democrat rank and file over the next 4 years.
2. Politics are finally figuring out the power of the internet. Just look at what Ron Paul did when he received almost zero mainstream coverage. Obama used the internet to his advantage in a big way as well.
3. The bullshit notion that 'voting 3rd party is throwing away your vote' that the major parties and their media outlets perpetuate is utter crap. This is the biggest hurdle in my opinion. This sort of thinking keeps money and viable potential candidates away from the 3rd parties. The simple fact is that all a 3rd party candidate needs to win is votes, just the same as the Democrat candidate, just the same as the Republican candidate.
- but for 200+ years we've been a two party system more then we've been a multi-party system.TheBlueOne
- The last 200 years we didn't have the kind of access to information that we have now. Couple that with politicaltommyo
- unrest and to me that spells opportunity for people to ditch tradition and search for different solutions.tommyo
- ukit0
Yea, I guess the old school "machine politics" does count for something, but I think it counts for less now that we have the ability to mobilize people online.
Compare Perot to Ron Paul. The only reason Perot had a shot at it is because he was already a millionaire and was able to self fund. Ron Paul on the other hand relied entirely on grass roots support and in a couple months of the campaign (I think it was Dec 07 right before the primaries) he was banking more campaign donations than ANY of the other Republican candidates. Despite zero support from the party and the fact that the guy didn't even have all that competent of a web campaign.
Now imagine a younger Ron Paul without the racist baggage and slightly moderated views, and you've got a serious prospect. Especially considering that the Rs are arguably in much bigger meltdown than when Bush I was in office.
- TheBlueOne0
I agree guys that there is definitely the need/desire for a new party, especially probably center-right. Not so sure on the left side, depends on how Obama's presidency is judged by 2012, although I'd be the first in line for a more progressive party if it emerged to counter the Dems. And the technology is there for a "new kind of politics".
I'm just saying, don't assume the old system would go away without a fight. Old power bases are far quicker to co-opt new movements and technology than you think. the Ron Paul/Obama campaigns might have been the actual zenith of the internets impact on transforming politics instead of a "new beginning" as you are hoping. The monied interests now see an opening and you better fucking believe it that come 2010/2012 that money will be thrown behind vast "internet initiatives". The window for some young hip party to use the tools of the net to it's advantage I would bet are already over. Hope I'm wrong, but I'm a cynical old fart that way. Prove me wrong. I want to be proved wrong.
- ********0
Good evening you asshats.
- ..and the conversation goes into a tailspin...TheBIueOne
- ...straight into the funnel.TheBlueOne
- threadpost0
Dear repugs,
please please please run Cheney or Palin as your presidential choice for 2012. That would be a gift from all that is everything ironic and hilarious.
You MIGHT see mormon utah, the 18 people living in wyoming and the helicopter wolf hunters in alaska stay red, but I would really enjoy those fox news numbers come in as they call the election.- oh and that guy holding the "get a brain! morans" sign.
http://z.about.com/d…threadpost - you mean this guy
http://img152.images…TheBIueOne
- oh and that guy holding the "get a brain! morans" sign.
- tommyo0
^^ You super Dems are just as scary as the white trash Republicans you mock. Just thought it would be a good thing for you to know. You scare us normal middle minded folk. I do appreciate that you're just too ignorant to realize though ... it must be similar to being a belly shirt wearing fat girl who thinks she's sexy.
- TheBIueOne0
Ahoy!
- <-- this was supposed to be in a pirate related thread. Ignore at will.TheBlueOne
- TheBlueOne0
What Glenn says:
"The only way they could make it more blatant is if they hung a huge Goldman Sachs logo on the Capitol dome and then branded it onto the foreheads of leading members of Congress and executive branch officials."
