I actually pretty much agree with that, especially that the Republicans don't follow their platform. I made an argument about this in my journal on how some conservative issues are characteristic of big government as opposed to small government.
Also, I read something this morning which said if the trend continues, the only blue states will be California and New York (I would also argue Massachusetts).
I do think there will be a divide between fiscal conservatives and social conservatives.
Yes. The Republican advantage is that adherence to their principles energizes their base and is generally popular; the Democrats are caught in a cleft between their base and the populace, and can't please both. Also, as the original author points out, the Democratic coalition is inherently harder to keep together because redistributionist policies require winners and losers: by contrast, if the Republicans reduce taxes or stand firm against a Third World despot, almost all their constituency wins (and indeed, most of the American people).
Hence, since the Democrats adopted the hard left version of their platform in 1972, the only two-term Democratic President has been one whose major obvious ability was that he was a good liar. The others have lost popularity rapidly, either with base or general electorate (and sometimes both) as they were forced to make decisions once they had to govern.
I do think there will be a divide between fiscal conservatives and social conservatives.Yes. If the Democrats survive, they may be able to do
( ... )
Haven't read the article itself yet, but your two comments above make sense. I'd like to see the Republicans and Democrats each split into at least two parties. That way the San Francisco-style Democrats can have their small factions and have a few seats in San Francisco and a few other districts while the more moderate Democrats who perhaps are mildly pro-choice and anti-gun without the frothing-at-the-mouth elements can attract that type of MOR voter.
Likewise, the Republicans could split up into possibly even three groups: libertarians, Tea Party and conservatives who aren't opposed to larger government. The Tea Party seem to attract certain religious groups (evangelical Christians and Mormons) and while you do find that in libertarianism, it tends to have more a gamut without religion being the emphasis.
Just spitballin' here. Let me go read the article.
" * The Republicans were tossed out because they did not govern according to their principles. * The Democrats were tossed out because they did govern according to their principles."
This spoke to me, because I spent this morning responding to comments made by feminists on topics that were being addressed with an anti-feminist bent. After a while of asking questions and reading the answers, I saw a pattern:
I didn't have to rewrite their arguments to make them offensive. I didn't have to shut them into any word traps (have you stopped beating your wife?), and I didn't have to make eloquent complaints about their behavior.
The only thing I had to do was to get them to tell the truth, unvarnished and unedited. Once that was done, I did not even have to respond.
The feminists ... as a faction ... have decided to ally with the various Third World factions and be anti-Western. Unfortunately for the feminists, the West happens to be the place where the concept of equal rights for both major human genders originated, at least in modern times, and possibly for the first time. Hence, by being anti-Western and pro Third World, the feminists have put themselves in the unenviable position of having to oppose those currents of history which actually help women, and support those which actually hurt them.
They have to engage in a lot of obscurationist rhetoric in order to disguise this fact. Especially from themselves. This rhetoric is becoming increasingly threadbare, which is why "feminist" is increasingly coming to mean "insane" in the popular awareness.
Another perspective on why the democrats are in trouble, written by someone who seems to be liberal. As a side note, I heard the best thing ever on a radio talk show a while back. A caller mentioned that his son asked what conservative and liberal were, and he said, "Conservatives think that corporations are people. Liberals think their pets are people." It's the best oversimplification I've ever heard.
Less an "idea" than an insult. The use of the term "left-wing loonies" for liberals pretty much shows where he's coming from, followed by every tired cliche about how Democrats just want to take money and give it to lazy poor people for free while Republicans are about Real America
( ... )
About FEMA, I am sick and tired of hearing morons bitch about FEMA, there are THREE levels of government: local, state, and federal- FEMA did not fail, the state and local governments failed- to prepare, to repair the levies due to rampant corruption, and to evacuate.
But NO one bothers to read up on basic civics anymore so every douchebag in the media spreads this lie like herpes and no one calls them on it.
Lastly, I would debate that Democrats are unprincipled since most of the promises they made (closing Gitmo and civilian trials for instance)were to the radical far left rather than mainstream.
Hell, I've been saying that about the Democrats for years. It was only ever a matter of time before they couldn't any longer keep printing money to write more checks to more disparate groups to keep things together in order for a very few to keep increasing power. I used to hear Democrats and other liberals complain that conservatives couldn't "legislate morality" by trying to censor song lyrics and such, but in their legislative and political initiatives they themselves were trying ot do just that, only on a grander scale.
Comments 81
Also, I read something this morning which said if the trend continues, the only blue states will be California and New York (I would also argue Massachusetts).
I do think there will be a divide between fiscal conservatives and social conservatives.
Reply
Hence, since the Democrats adopted the hard left version of their platform in 1972, the only two-term Democratic President has been one whose major obvious ability was that he was a good liar. The others have lost popularity rapidly, either with base or general electorate (and sometimes both) as they were forced to make decisions once they had to govern.
I do think there will be a divide between fiscal conservatives and social conservatives.Yes. If the Democrats survive, they may be able to do ( ... )
Reply
Likewise, the Republicans could split up into possibly even three groups: libertarians, Tea Party and conservatives who aren't opposed to larger government. The Tea Party seem to attract certain religious groups (evangelical Christians and Mormons) and while you do find that in libertarianism, it tends to have more a gamut without religion being the emphasis.
Just spitballin' here. Let me go read the article.
Reply
Reply
* The Democrats were tossed out because they did govern according to their principles."
This spoke to me, because I spent this morning responding to comments made by feminists on topics that were being addressed with an anti-feminist bent. After a while of asking questions and reading the answers, I saw a pattern:
I didn't have to rewrite their arguments to make them offensive. I didn't have to shut them into any word traps (have you stopped beating your wife?), and I didn't have to make eloquent complaints about their behavior.
The only thing I had to do was to get them to tell the truth, unvarnished and unedited. Once that was done, I did not even have to respond.
Reply
They have to engage in a lot of obscurationist rhetoric in order to disguise this fact. Especially from themselves. This rhetoric is becoming increasingly threadbare, which is why "feminist" is increasingly coming to mean "insane" in the popular awareness.
Reply
Reply
Reply
As a side note, I heard the best thing ever on a radio talk show a while back. A caller mentioned that his son asked what conservative and liberal were, and he said, "Conservatives think that corporations are people. Liberals think their pets are people." It's the best oversimplification I've ever heard.
Reply
Conservatives spend their time and energy trying to help people in need.
Liberals spend your time and energy trying to help people in need.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
But NO one bothers to read up on basic civics anymore so every douchebag in the media spreads this lie like herpes and no one calls them on it.
Lastly, I would debate that Democrats are unprincipled since most of the promises they made (closing Gitmo and civilian trials for instance)were to the radical far left rather than mainstream.
Reply
"Social justice" is as subjective as "beauty".
Reply
Leave a comment