U.S. Republican Primary

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

JudeMorrigan
Posts: 1266
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 1:26 pm UTC

Re: U.S. Republican Primary

Postby JudeMorrigan » Wed Nov 23, 2011 2:21 pm UTC

podbaydoor wrote:I particularly enjoy the choice quote from Santorum: “Our founders understood liberty is not what you want to do, but what you ought to do. That’s what liberty really is about.”

WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

Ghostbear
Posts: 1764
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 10:06 pm UTC

Re: U.S. Republican Primary

Postby Ghostbear » Wed Nov 23, 2011 3:07 pm UTC

podbaydoor wrote:I particularly enjoy the choice quote from Santorum: “Our founders understood liberty is not what you want to do, but what you ought to do. That’s what liberty really is about.”

As others have noted, that is a truly terrifying quote. He might as well have said "liberty is the complete lack of liberty" it's a statement that just makes no sense.

Why is it that in an era with a society that has had an uptick in it's variety of religious (or lack thereof) beliefs, that at least one party seems to be more overwhelmingly aggressive with it's religion? Hell, I only met two people during my time at college who were christian. I guess they're just afraid of losing one of the elements of their cultural identity, but their rhetoric just seems outright terrifying to me. Even if I was otherwise inclined to vote for them, that language would be a total deal breaker.

In other news, for those of you who haven't had your fill of Herman Cain being crazy:

[Cain] did have a slight worry at one point during the chemotherapy process when he discovered that one of the surgeon's name was "Dr. Abdallah."
"I said to his physician assistant, I said, 'That sounds foreign—not that I had anything against foreign doctors—but it sounded too foreign," Cain tells the audience. "She said, 'He's from Lebanon.' Oh, Lebanon! My mind immediately started thinking, wait a minute, maybe his religious persuasion is different than mine! She could see the look on my face and she said, 'Don't worry, Mr. Cain, he's a Christian from Lebanon.'"

"Hallelujah!" Cain says. "Thank God!"

Oh no! You almost got operated on by someone with different beliefs than you! The horror, why, death would be a preferable alternative than something as terrible as that! Clearly, if the doctor hadn't been christian, he would have been planted there by the democrats and their.. evil.. uh.. somewhat less christian-centric worldview?

User avatar
podbaydoor
Posts: 7548
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 4:16 am UTC
Location: spaceship somewhere out there

Re: U.S. Republican Primary

Postby podbaydoor » Wed Nov 23, 2011 3:38 pm UTC

"Not that I had anything against foreign doctors," he said.

Oh but you do, Mr. Cain. You do.
tenet |ˈtenit|
noun
a principle or belief, esp. one of the main principles of a religion or philosophy : the tenets of classical liberalism.
tenant |ˈtenənt|
noun
a person who occupies land or property rented from a landlord.

AngelfishTitan
Posts: 36
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2010 8:47 pm UTC
Location: A different post

Re: U.S. Republican Primary

Postby AngelfishTitan » Wed Nov 23, 2011 4:06 pm UTC

podbaydoor wrote:"Not that I had anything against foreign doctors," he said.

Oh but you do, Mr. Cain. You do.


I think it's clear that he meant he never touched a foreign doctor. Wouldn't want to catch the Islam. :roll:
Belial wrote:Note: this means you should assume that every post I make has the thrumming, furious power of half a bottle of irish whiskey behind it. Yes, even the ones I make from work. ESPECIALLY the ones I make from work.

User avatar
Vaniver
Posts: 9422
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 2:12 am UTC

Re: U.S. Republican Primary

Postby Vaniver » Wed Nov 23, 2011 6:30 pm UTC

Ghostbear wrote:Oh no! You almost got operated on by someone with different beliefs than you! The horror, why, death would be a preferable alternative than something as terrible as that! Clearly, if the doctor hadn't been christian, he would have been planted there by the democrats and their.. evil.. uh.. somewhat less christian-centric worldview?
So, Lebanese Christians, as a group, have noticeably different outcomes from Lebanese Muslims. If I knew my doctor were Lebanese, I'd prefer for them to be Christian. Did Cain know that? It's not the justification he reached for. Should he have discussed it with the nurse, regardless? No. Should he have told that story to reporters? Very much no.
I mostly post over at LessWrong now.

Avatar from My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic, owned by Hasbro.

Ghostbear
Posts: 1764
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 10:06 pm UTC

Re: U.S. Republican Primary

Postby Ghostbear » Wed Nov 23, 2011 6:46 pm UTC

Vaniver wrote:
Ghostbear wrote:Oh no! You almost got operated on by someone with different beliefs than you! The horror, why, death would be a preferable alternative than something as terrible as that! Clearly, if the doctor hadn't been christian, he would have been planted there by the democrats and their.. evil.. uh.. somewhat less christian-centric worldview?
So, Lebanese Christians, as a group, have noticeably different outcomes from Lebanese Muslims. If I knew my doctor were Lebanese, I'd prefer for them to be Christian. Did Cain know that? It's not the justification he reached for. Should he have discussed it with the nurse, regardless? No. Should he have told that story to reporters? Very much no.

I don't know enough about Lebanon to say one thing or the other, but assuming that Lebanese christians are, on average, more likely to be good doctors, you can be certain that isn't what he was worried about, hence why he said:
Crazy Man Cain wrote:My mind immediately started thinking, wait a minute, maybe his religious persuasion is different than mine!

I don't think there's any way somebody can justify Cain during that exchange, unless being blatantly unwilling to accept people with any different religion than you has become a valid justification.

User avatar
Triangle_Man
WINNING
Posts: 1500
Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 8:41 pm UTC
Location: CANADA

Re: U.S. Republican Primary

Postby Triangle_Man » Wed Nov 23, 2011 6:51 pm UTC

JudeMorrigan wrote:
podbaydoor wrote:I particularly enjoy the choice quote from Santorum: “Our founders understood liberty is not what you want to do, but what you ought to do. That’s what liberty really is about.”

WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH


INCONSISTENCY ARE NOW CONSISTENT!


But seriously, if these are the kinds of attitudes being expressed by the Republican Candidates at this point, then should such a government come about it's going to be a shitty time to not be Christian.
I really should be working right now, but somehow I don't have the energy.

The Mighty Thesaurus wrote:My moral system allows me to bitch slap you for typing that.

Wodashin
Posts: 488
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 6:54 am UTC

Re: U.S. Republican Primary

Postby Wodashin » Wed Nov 23, 2011 7:56 pm UTC

Quick! Let's take the crazy words of the craziest non-contender and use them as the basis for an entire party! Santorum is a great representative of the Republican party. Definitely Obviously. Jonathan Sharkey would be a better representation. Logic brings one to that conclusion.

On another note... Does anyone else think... It might be Huntsman's turn to explode onto the scene? I mean, Gingrich did it and, I mean, he's Gingrich! And it'll never be Santorum's turn to rise up, so I think Huntsman might get the "Not Romney" treatment, even if they are quite similar.

Ghostbear
Posts: 1764
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 10:06 pm UTC

Re: U.S. Republican Primary

Postby Ghostbear » Wed Nov 23, 2011 8:24 pm UTC

Wodashin wrote:Quick! Let's take the crazy words of the craziest non-contender and use them as the basis for an entire party! Santorum is a great representative of the Republican party. Definitely Obviously. Jonathan Sharkey would be a better representation. Logic brings one to that conclusion.

If that is aimed at me (directly or indirectly) I think it's worth noting that podbaydoor had a list of ridiculous things that people besides Santorum said. Including statements from other crazies such as:
Bachmann (everyone knows America is the direct creation of her deity):
"I have a biblical worldview. And I think, going back to the Declaration of Independence, the fact that it’s God who created us—if He created us, He created government. And the government is on His shoulders, as the book of Isaiah says."

Cain (oh no! religion isn't all pervasive and controlling in our society anymore):
"What we are seeing is a wider gap between people of faith and people of nonfaith. … Those of us that are people of faith and strong faith have allowed the nonfaith element to intimidate us into not fighting back. I believe we’ve been too passive. We have maybe pushed back, but as people of faith, we have not fought back."

Gingrich (who needs protection from tyranny of the majority anyway?):
"Part of the purpose of singling out Judge Biery and eliminating his job is to communicate the standard that the two elected branches have the power and the authority to educate the judiciary when it deviates too far from the American people. And I think you would probably take that approach."

Perry (if it isn't in the bible, apparently it isn't worth legislating):
"Somebody’s values are going to decide what the Congress votes on or what the president of the United States is going to deal with. And the question is: Whose values? And let me tell you, it needs to be our values—values and virtues that this country was based upon in Judeo-Christian founding fathers."

Using the first results google gave me (using the Quannipac poll, as it's the most recent with a decent sample size) the above people (plus Santorum) have a combined 52% support. The rest is Romney (22%), Paul (6%), Huntsman (2%). With the remaining (18%), I assume being undecided.

Wodashin wrote:On another note... Does anyone else think... It might be Huntsman's turn to explode onto the scene? I mean, Gingrich did it and, I mean, he's Gingrich! And it'll never be Santorum's turn to rise up, so I think Huntsman might get the "Not Romney" treatment, even if they are quite similar.

Huntsman would be a good candidate, and I suspect, unless he gets passed over in favor of Rubio / Christie or the like in 2016/2020 (depending on who wins this election), he'll be filling in Romney's current spot. Right now the republican primary electorate is just far, far too conservative to choose him however. Also, unlike the other people that have surged- Bachmann, Perry, Cain, Gingrich- he is polling at the bottom of the barrel right now. All the others never seemed to dip below the mid-high single digits. Huntsman would literally need to increase his support by more than ten times to poll equally with Romney right now. And on top of that, Romney and Huntsman and essentially competing for the same block of the primary electorate. The more conservative part of the electorate is unsurprisingly quite a bit larger than the more moderate part. It seems by polling numbers, only about 25%-30% are open to "moderate" candidates (moderate here meaning defined by the media as moderate, regardless of their actual voting records or stances), with the rest going to the more conservative options.

It's too bad- I can only imagine that a Huntsman vs. Obama election would be the most friendly, respectful election we've had in a long time, and could even possibly start to heal the huge partisan rifts we have right now. He seems fairly knowledgeable, and while I almost certainly wouldn't end up voting for him, I'd at least have to think about it in his case, instead of just an knowing straight out, that he is a non-starter for me. His campaigning skills don't seem to be that good though- hopefully (for his sake) he learned a lot from his first foray onto a national stage. Being front and center in a small state like Utah is quite different from running a national campaign, even if most of his efforts are focused on NH.

User avatar
Vaniver
Posts: 9422
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 2:12 am UTC

Re: U.S. Republican Primary

Postby Vaniver » Wed Nov 23, 2011 8:55 pm UTC

Ghostbear wrote:could even possibly start to heal the huge partisan rifts we have right now.
I suspect the rifts cause the candidates, not the other way around.
I mostly post over at LessWrong now.

Avatar from My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic, owned by Hasbro.

Tirian
Posts: 1891
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2008 6:03 pm UTC

Re: U.S. Republican Primary

Postby Tirian » Wed Nov 23, 2011 9:50 pm UTC

Wodashin wrote:On another note... Does anyone else think... It might be Huntsman's turn to explode onto the scene? I mean, Gingrich did it and, I mean, he's Gingrich! And it'll never be Santorum's turn to rise up, so I think Huntsman might get the "Not Romney" treatment, even if they are quite similar.


Nope. Gingrich got a chance because he imploded early in the nomination process, and not even as badly or as late as McCain did four years ago, and he *is* a senior bottle-washer for the conservative platform.

Not only is Huntsman not an ideological contrast with Romney that would appeal to the masses who are looking for an alternative, but he has even more severe baggage when it comes to running against Obama. I appreciate that you don't say "no" when the President calls you, but in hyper-partisan times you have to recognize that it's the end of your career as a party loyalist and the start of your career as a non-partisan statesman. I think Paul would get a serious turn on the merry-go-round before Huntsman.

LtNOWIS
Posts: 371
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2010 4:21 pm UTC
Location: Fairfax County

Re: U.S. Republican Primary

Postby LtNOWIS » Thu Nov 24, 2011 12:00 am UTC

Wodashin wrote:On another note... Does anyone else think... It might be Huntsman's turn to explode onto the scene? I mean, Gingrich did it and, I mean, he's Gingrich! And it'll never be Santorum's turn to rise up, so I think Huntsman might get the "Not Romney" treatment, even if they are quite similar.

He did pretty great in this past debate, but I think he's playing for 2016.

User avatar
netcrusher88
Posts: 2166
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 4:35 pm UTC
Location: Seattle

Re: U.S. Republican Primary

Postby netcrusher88 » Thu Nov 24, 2011 12:22 am UTC

Vaniver wrote:
Ghostbear wrote:could even possibly start to heal the huge partisan rifts we have right now.
I suspect the rifts cause the candidates, not the other way around.

The fact that these people are candidates is a symptom of the rift, but rhetoric like theirs from leaders widens rifts.
Sexothermic
I have only ever made one prayer to God, a very short one: "O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous." And God granted it. -Voltaire
They said we would never have a black president until Swine Flu. -Gears

Tirian
Posts: 1891
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2008 6:03 pm UTC

Re: U.S. Republican Primary

Postby Tirian » Thu Nov 24, 2011 1:03 am UTC

LtNOWIS wrote:
Wodashin wrote:On another note... Does anyone else think... It might be Huntsman's turn to explode onto the scene? I mean, Gingrich did it and, I mean, he's Gingrich! And it'll never be Santorum's turn to rise up, so I think Huntsman might get the "Not Romney" treatment, even if they are quite similar.

He did pretty great in this past debate, but I think he's playing for 2016.


Hmmm. I'd suggest that he's running for Secretary of State.

Wodashin
Posts: 488
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 6:54 am UTC

Re: U.S. Republican Primary

Postby Wodashin » Thu Nov 24, 2011 3:14 am UTC

Huntsman would probably win against Obama, if he got enough recognition and people voted intelligently. Getting the independent vote wouldn't even be a contest. It would be a massacre. He'd probably get a good chunk of the Democrats too, seeing as Democrats tend to vote for the opposing party more often than Repiblicans. And Republicans hate Obama enough to vote for Huntsman. In the perfect conditions of knowledge distribution and whatnot, I think Huntsman would win.

Probably not, but I can dream, right?

User avatar
jakovasaur
Posts: 678
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2009 7:43 am UTC

Re: U.S. Republican Primary

Postby jakovasaur » Thu Nov 24, 2011 4:47 am UTC

I'm pretty liberal, and I'd prefer huntsman to obama just because he would be able to get more done.

User avatar
podbaydoor
Posts: 7548
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 4:16 am UTC
Location: spaceship somewhere out there

Re: U.S. Republican Primary

Postby podbaydoor » Thu Nov 24, 2011 4:58 am UTC

I don't. Huntsman seems really cool in other ways, but he has "signed numerous bills restricting abortion." (Wikipedia) It's nowhere near the crazy level of other candidates and active Republican legislators, but still, I can't support that.

I mean, if only he'd just kept on the way he is now and just left abortion alone. I wouldn't have objected to that. But actively restricting abortion? No.
tenet |ˈtenit|
noun
a principle or belief, esp. one of the main principles of a religion or philosophy : the tenets of classical liberalism.
tenant |ˈtenənt|
noun
a person who occupies land or property rented from a landlord.

Wodashin
Posts: 488
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 6:54 am UTC

Re: U.S. Republican Primary

Postby Wodashin » Thu Nov 24, 2011 5:12 am UTC

podbaydoor wrote:I don't. Huntsman seems really cool in other ways, but he has "signed numerous bills restricting abortion." (Wikipedia) It's nowhere near the crazy level of other candidates and active Republican legislators, but still, I can't support that.

I mean, if only he'd just kept on the way he is now and just left abortion alone. I wouldn't have objected to that. But actively restricting abortion? No.


Looking into this, I do disagree with him on it. But, I'm happy that a lot of his threats on abortion are "if Roe v Wade is overturned." He isn't going to just gung-ho implement his ideas. So it's impossible that his ideas will come to fruition, because that would never happen. Trying to make second tri abortions illegal is a bit too far in my opinion, but it's just one position out of many. I personally put little stock in social issues, as long as the politicians don't stray too far to either extreme.

He's just so much more qualified than anyone else, including our current president. Though that doesn't mean he'd make for a great president, as presidents have gone in with incredible records and accomplishments and done terrible jobs.

User avatar
Qaanol
The Cheshirest Catamount
Posts: 3069
Joined: Sat May 09, 2009 11:55 pm UTC

Re: U.S. Republican Primary

Postby Qaanol » Thu Nov 24, 2011 5:26 am UTC

Two questions for everyone here:

1. Hypothetically, if you were to register as a Republican and vote in the primary, who would you vote to nominate?
Note: you are still allowed to vote for Obama (or anyone else) in the November general election. This question is regarding only the Republican nomination in the primaries.

2. Have you considered actually registering as a Republican in order to vote in the primary?
wee free kings

Wodashin
Posts: 488
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 6:54 am UTC

Re: U.S. Republican Primary

Postby Wodashin » Thu Nov 24, 2011 5:38 am UTC

Qaanol wrote:Two questions for everyone here:

1. Hypothetically, if you were to register as a Republican and vote in the primary, who would you vote to nominate?
Note: you are still allowed to vote for Obama (or anyone else) in the November general election. This question is regarding only the Republican nomination in the primaries.

2. Have you considered actually registering as a Republican in order to vote in the primary?


1. Huntsman.

2. No, since I won't be of age. Will be for the general election though.

User avatar
Xeio
Friends, Faidites, Countrymen
Posts: 5101
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:12 am UTC
Location: C:\Users\Xeio\
Contact:

Re: U.S. Republican Primary

Postby Xeio » Thu Nov 24, 2011 6:20 am UTC

Wodashin wrote:Looking into this, I do disagree with him on it. But, I'm happy that a lot of his threats on abortion are "if Roe v Wade is overturned." He isn't going to just gung-ho implement his ideas. So it's impossible that his ideas will come to fruition, because that would never happen.
Wouldn't electing him to president giving him direct control over supreme court justice appointments make that a distinct possibility...?

User avatar
folkhero
Posts: 1775
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 3:34 am UTC

Re: U.S. Republican Primary

Postby folkhero » Thu Nov 24, 2011 7:47 am UTC

Qaanol wrote:1. Hypothetically, if you were to register as a Republican and vote in the primary, who would you vote to nominate?
Note: you are still allowed to vote for Obama (or anyone else) in the November general election. This question is regarding only the Republican nomination in the primaries.

2. Have you considered actually registering as a Republican in order to vote in the primary?

Gary Johnson

My state allows me to vote in the Republican primary as an independent.

Xeio wrote:
Wodashin wrote:Looking into this, I do disagree with him on it. But, I'm happy that a lot of his threats on abortion are "if Roe v Wade is overturned." He isn't going to just gung-ho implement his ideas. So it's impossible that his ideas will come to fruition, because that would never happen.
Wouldn't electing him to president giving him direct control over supreme court justice appointments make that a distinct possibility...?
Not direct control, he needs senate confirmation. Not to mention a justice to retire or die.
To all law enforcement entities, this is not an admission of guilt...

User avatar
EsotericWombat
Colorful Orator
Posts: 2567
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 4:36 pm UTC
Location: Boston, MA
Contact:

Re: U.S. Republican Primary

Postby EsotericWombat » Thu Nov 24, 2011 4:00 pm UTC

Ruth Bader Ginsburg is fairly likely to retire during the next Presidential term. And if a Republican takes the Presidency, the party is likely to have taken the Senate.

And if there's a judge up for nomination who would overturn Roe, we can expect the GOP to use the nuclear option to get them in.

But that's not the only problem with Huntsman. He's signed on to the Ryan plan, and even though he was the last to raise his hand when asked, he still indicated he'd reject any deficit reduction plan that included tax increases, even if it was a dollar in tax increases for ten dollars in spending cuts.

He also lacks the gravitas it would take to get his party to go along with him on any of his actually moderate positions (that he hasn't already discarded, e.g. cap and trade). In other words, he'd be pretty useless as a President.
Image

LtNOWIS
Posts: 371
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2010 4:21 pm UTC
Location: Fairfax County

Re: U.S. Republican Primary

Postby LtNOWIS » Thu Nov 24, 2011 5:48 pm UTC

2) My state allows me to vote as an independent.
1) It's not an early state. So, I'll probably vote for the only guy remaining, which will probably be Mitt Romney.

Wodashin
Posts: 488
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 6:54 am UTC

Re: U.S. Republican Primary

Postby Wodashin » Thu Nov 24, 2011 6:07 pm UTC

EsotericWombat wrote:Ruth Bader Ginsburg is fairly likely to retire during the next Presidential term. And if a Republican takes the Presidency, the party is likely to have taken the Senate.

And if there's a judge up for nomination who would overturn Roe, we can expect the GOP to use the nuclear option to get them in.

But that's not the only problem with Huntsman. He's signed on to the Ryan plan, and even though he was the last to raise his hand when asked, he still indicated he'd reject any deficit reduction plan that included tax increases, even if it was a dollar in tax increases for ten dollars in spending cuts.

He also lacks the gravitas it would take to get his party to go along with him on any of his actually moderate positions (that he hasn't already discarded, e.g. cap and trade). In other words, he'd be pretty useless as a President.


I think we can trust that, like Romney, some of the stuff he says is just to get elected. Which I'm fine with, because I actually want him to turn his back on some of his flip-flops. Which most people suspect Romney of doing once he gets in, so I'd expect the same from Huntsman.

He'd probably be able to actually work with the more moderate Democrats in Congress, and with the few moderate Republicans, he could probably get legislation passed with bi-partisan support.

User avatar
Triangle_Man
WINNING
Posts: 1500
Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 8:41 pm UTC
Location: CANADA

Re: U.S. Republican Primary

Postby Triangle_Man » Thu Nov 24, 2011 6:54 pm UTC

In response to Wodashin's question, if I could vote in the primary I'd vote for Gary Johnson as well. His views appear to be rather reasonable and while I don't agree with most of his economic views and his stance on Net Neutrality, he's the sort of individual who I wouldn't mind seeing take the presidency if Obama lost the election.
I really should be working right now, but somehow I don't have the energy.

The Mighty Thesaurus wrote:My moral system allows me to bitch slap you for typing that.

User avatar
EsotericWombat
Colorful Orator
Posts: 2567
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 4:36 pm UTC
Location: Boston, MA
Contact:

Re: U.S. Republican Primary

Postby EsotericWombat » Thu Nov 24, 2011 7:23 pm UTC

Whether he means it or not, the Republicans in Congress mean it. And odds are, in this fantasy world where Huntsman is the President, Republicans would almost certainly control both houses of Congress. It would be a disaster. They'd chicken out of the defense cuts that are now scheduled to happen because of sequestration, gut Medicare and Medicaid, and maybe pass an even more absurd tax plan to replace Bush tax cuts that will expire before the first session of the new House. They could do this all in one package with even 50+1 in the Senate so long as it netted a reduction in the deficit.

Huntsman would be in a position to either violate his loyalty oath-- that he would have repeated over and over again during the election season or else lose the base and thus the election-- as his first act as President, or sign off on a completely disastrous economic plan.

"Don't worry, he's probably lying" is not a ringing endorsement under any circumstances, but in this case he will be under enormous pressure to sign on to the wrecking crew, and I have yet to see evidence that he's strong enough to keep the worst from happening.
Image

User avatar
Vaniver
Posts: 9422
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 2:12 am UTC

Re: U.S. Republican Primary

Postby Vaniver » Fri Nov 25, 2011 1:42 am UTC

The wording of Qaanol's question amused me. How many posters in this thread are actually registered as Republican?
I mostly post over at LessWrong now.

Avatar from My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic, owned by Hasbro.

User avatar
Triangle_Man
WINNING
Posts: 1500
Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 8:41 pm UTC
Location: CANADA

Re: U.S. Republican Primary

Postby Triangle_Man » Fri Nov 25, 2011 1:51 am UTC

Vaniver wrote:The wording of Qaanol's question amused me. How many posters in this thread are actually registered as Republican?

I'm not, but I'm also a Canadian so it doesn't really matter.
I really should be working right now, but somehow I don't have the energy.

The Mighty Thesaurus wrote:My moral system allows me to bitch slap you for typing that.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10548
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: U.S. Republican Primary

Postby CorruptUser » Fri Nov 25, 2011 1:58 am UTC

Vaniver wrote:The wording of Qaanol's question amused me. How many posters in this thread are actually registered as Republican?


I am. Mostly because I think they have more potential for redemption than the Democrats. Just break the unholy satanic alliance with the hyper-Christians, and the Republicans are practically tolerable.

Well, that and I'm somewhat paranoid that each party is trying to create the society that will maximize the number of people that would vote for said party, rather than appealing to the greatest number of people. Which society would have more Republican/Democrat voters; a society with just a few CEOs of mega-corporations and masses of poor, or a society with lots and lots of family-owned small businesses?

If the Democrats ever actually solved the problems they harp on about, they'd be SooL. <insert statement how Affirmative Action prolongs racism/inequality here>

User avatar
Lucrece
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:01 am UTC

Re: U.S. Republican Primary

Postby Lucrece » Fri Nov 25, 2011 7:58 am UTC

How can a party with that current batch of candidates be redeemed in any reasonable amount of time?
Belial wrote:That's charming, Nancy, but all I hear when you talk is a bunch of yippy dog sounds.

User avatar
netcrusher88
Posts: 2166
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 4:35 pm UTC
Location: Seattle

Re: U.S. Republican Primary

Postby netcrusher88 » Fri Nov 25, 2011 9:06 am UTC

Also curious what you find irredeemable about the Democratic party.

I have a question kind of tangent to Lucrece's: how can a party (Republicans) with that base be redeemed in any reasonable amount of time?

If the Republican party jettisons any part of their platform which is an absolute deal-breaker for people who do not vote for them, they lose big chunks of their base. This is a hole the party has dug itself, because they've neglected to even try to temper the extremity of their platform. Most of the base belongs to five categories: the selfish (fuck you, got mine), the privileged (support the party because of some policies, having the privilege to ignore the effects of others - Log Cabin Republicans come to mind), the foolish (where to start... birthers, practically any sociological minority, your "government hands off my medicare" type, the anti-science sort that seem to run the damn party), the hateful (evangelicals and nationalists primarily), and some variant of Libertarian. Very large crossover between the first two, and between them in general. I'm also of the opinion that Libertarians are usually selfish privileged fools, the later universally applying to those Libertarians who vote Republican. The only two Republicans can fuck with without losing them are the selfish and the privileged, and they can't fuck with the policies they like (it seems Republicans are, very reasonably, terrified of even considering moderate economic policy).

The Republican party has played to fools and *phobes for so long that they've alienated those who disagree (and the Democratic party has welcomed them with open arms... or at least their votes) and changing tune would cause them to lose all of their current base (good luck changing the base to support your new position that you've spent 30 years telling them is destroying America, whatever the fuck that means) with less than equal gain because so much of their platform is so unpalatable that even a number of new policy positions could not get liberals and progressives to vote Republican, plus I doubt people would trust them.
Sexothermic
I have only ever made one prayer to God, a very short one: "O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous." And God granted it. -Voltaire
They said we would never have a black president until Swine Flu. -Gears

User avatar
clockworkmonk
I'm on a horse!
Posts: 649
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2007 12:53 am UTC
Location: Austin

Re: U.S. Republican Primary

Postby clockworkmonk » Fri Nov 25, 2011 4:10 pm UTC

I am a registered republican because I live in Texas. My vote has more impact on who represents me in the republican primary than the general election mainly dealing with in state stuff. still vote democrat (generally) in the general election.
418 I'm a teapot

User avatar
podbaydoor
Posts: 7548
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 4:16 am UTC
Location: spaceship somewhere out there

Re: U.S. Republican Primary

Postby podbaydoor » Fri Nov 25, 2011 6:27 pm UTC

netcrusher88, there are people who were or still are registered Republican, who in reality skew more towards independent or moderate on any of those issues you mentioned, and I've met several who admit they're unhappy with the party, but don't agree with Democrats enough to switch. I remember when David Frum resigned his position as a columnist for Marketplace because he felt that he was no longer a good representative of "current" Republicans, and apparently he recently criticized party conservatives for losing touch with reality. Why tar them with the same brush?
tenet |ˈtenit|
noun
a principle or belief, esp. one of the main principles of a religion or philosophy : the tenets of classical liberalism.
tenant |ˈtenənt|
noun
a person who occupies land or property rented from a landlord.

User avatar
netcrusher88
Posts: 2166
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 4:35 pm UTC
Location: Seattle

Re: U.S. Republican Primary

Postby netcrusher88 » Fri Nov 25, 2011 8:07 pm UTC

I covered that. Privileged. The positions the Republican party abuses to hold evangelicals (etc) to heel are unpalatable to so many people that if they all voted based on that the party would be slipping into irrelevance and within a few cycles you'd see a new party emerge from a bloc of Republicans that aren't big on extremism and Democrats that aren't big on progressive ideals (there are quite a few). But they like certain other positions, or more likely dislike a handful of Democrats' positions, or just vote Republican because they always have, or maybe they think they're voting for "the party of Reagan" (foolish too, that) and have the privilege to look past the Republican platform elements that are all about hatred and intolerance because they don't affect them.

I don't really care about registration (it's completely meaningless when actually electing people) or happiness with the party, it's not possible, right now, to vote for a Republican without voting for the entire Republican platform. With very few exceptions.
Sexothermic
I have only ever made one prayer to God, a very short one: "O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous." And God granted it. -Voltaire
They said we would never have a black president until Swine Flu. -Gears

User avatar
Jave D
chavey-dee
Posts: 1042
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2010 4:41 pm UTC

Re: U.S. Republican Primary

Postby Jave D » Fri Nov 25, 2011 8:20 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:If the Democrats ever actually solved the problems they harp on about, they'd be SooL. <insert statement how Affirmative Action prolongs racism/inequality here>


Well sure, and if the Republicans ever actually won the War on Drugs, the War on Terror, the War on Crime or any other "war" they'd be similarly shit out of luck. Both parties center themselves around solving problems, and without problems, what would they do? Serve cake? Fortunately for all parties involved, none of these problems are truly solvable, none of these wars are actually winnable, and so we can all continue happily chasing the carrots they hold up for us.

LtNOWIS
Posts: 371
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2010 4:21 pm UTC
Location: Fairfax County

Re: U.S. Republican Primary

Postby LtNOWIS » Sat Nov 26, 2011 8:40 pm UTC

EsotericWombat wrote:"Don't worry, he's probably lying" is not a ringing endorsement under any circumstances...

Isn't it what liberals said when Barack Obama said that he was against gay marriage?

So yeah, it's usually best to take candidates at their word.

User avatar
Lucrece
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:01 am UTC

Re: U.S. Republican Primary

Postby Lucrece » Sun Nov 27, 2011 8:13 am UTC

No, they said it was "necessary to win" *cough* bullshit he won by a landslide against McCain and SSM would not even come close to reversing that *cough*. That is, progressives will be happy to plunder the gAyTM and when the crunch comes they'll always retreat behind what saintly cause merits more attention.

This is why coalitions have never worked for gay people. They are small enough a block that their interests will be eclipsed by the other minorities in said organizations. Equality California suddenly no longer is pushing for Prop 8 repeal -- they're "broadening" their view of social justice and placing emphasis on illegal immigration coalitions, becoming a progressive organization instead of the one that advertised it would advocate for the gay community.

It's a reverse of the Republican party being co-opted by the Religious Right. The gay community is being evangelized and co-opted by the Democrat party, and gay skeptics are waved off with "the Republicans would be worse" and "they've got a lot on their plate" and "if we donate more money and campaign and get more Democrats elected, things would be better" whenever Democrats throw the community under the bus. It's always that "if we get more Democrats elected!", which is bullshit because it'll be another decade before Democrats get the House and Senate at the point they were pre-2010 -- and even at those numbers back then they didn't bother to push any legislation besides hate crimes and DADT, no job and hoursing/services discrimination bills, no DOMA repeal. Democrats can get gay money when the President doesn't go to a gay dinner the day before the vote in NY for marriage equality passed and tells them he's still against same-sex marriages.
Belial wrote:That's charming, Nancy, but all I hear when you talk is a bunch of yippy dog sounds.

User avatar
netcrusher88
Posts: 2166
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 4:35 pm UTC
Location: Seattle

Re: U.S. Republican Primary

Postby netcrusher88 » Sun Nov 27, 2011 8:59 am UTC

I'll take the party that will support someone who can open their fucking mouths without slandering me thanks. If I can't support people I like I can't in good conscience not support the ones I can tolerate.
Sexothermic
I have only ever made one prayer to God, a very short one: "O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous." And God granted it. -Voltaire
They said we would never have a black president until Swine Flu. -Gears

User avatar
Lucrece
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:01 am UTC

Re: U.S. Republican Primary

Postby Lucrece » Sun Nov 27, 2011 9:12 am UTC

Define support. I'm obviously not withdrawing my vote from Democrats, but that's just what they get, and still they're getting the better deal in the relationship while they dangle that carrot.
Belial wrote:That's charming, Nancy, but all I hear when you talk is a bunch of yippy dog sounds.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests