Can anyone please help me understand the Republican Party?

Zascar

I was never really into politics but recently I've become fascinated by it, the Presidential race especially. The one thing I really don't get however, is the Republican party. Now clearly I have very different views - I'm a big Bernie Sanders fan and the news sources I read (mostly links from Reddit) clearly lean to the left - but even when trying to be unbiased, I still can't get my head around 99% of the stuff I hear from the Republicans.

Now I'm sure if your rich, white and greedy the Republican party may represent your interests, but it dumbfounds me how they get such massive support from Ordinary people across america who really would not benefit from their policies much at all... But just watching the Republican debates and the sh1t they are spouting, how can Ordinary decent people still side with the party with all the craziness that goes on?

Off the top of my head, here are a few things of late that make me scratch my head: Still supportun Tax breaks for the Rich and trickle down economics, Trumps constant crazy comments which would end anyone elses career immediately. They deny climate change and evolution, they want to cut back Obamacare, Medicaid and Medicare. End concept of Minimum wage. End any gun control. Defunding Planned Parenthood when none of the government money goes into abortions. They are militantly pro life but don't care much when the baby is born - no parental leave, and then they cut school funding and education programs. Scott Walker slashes Education programs but gives a billionaire $500m for a stadium. They were against the Iran deal without even reading it and want to bomb them as soon as they get into office. They are massively racist and anti Islam. The Christians even hate the Pope. They want to keep poor Americans from voting. Generally blaming Obama for everything...

I mean do ordinary Republicans not just see all this from their party and think this is nuts? How can you stand by this and some of the even more crazy stuff that comes out of the party? The media mocks them constantly. The Democrats don't get anywhere near the mocking or criticism, does this mean nothing to them? Noam Chompski says the GOP is now basically just a Radical Insurgency. They basically seem to just want to oppose everything the democrats do - happy to **** down the government

Is there something I'm not getting? Genuinely, can anyone help me understand the Republican Party?

Brian?

Explain what they stand for or explain why they get votes?

blinding

Did Einstein say that the one thing he knew that was infinite was Human-kinds stupidity !

It could be said that the Republicans represent the interests of 5% of the people against the other 95% but they probable get a very large % of that 95% to vote for them. Its mad I tell Ya !

strelok

after this OP are you going to head over to stormfront and ask them to explain how obamas presidency has benefited america?

ECO_Mental

strelok wrote: »

after this OP are you going to head over to stormfront and ask them to explain how obamas presidency has benefited america?

I think the thread is about the GOP not Obama. The Republicans have this idea he was the worst president EVER, and that includes Sep Blatter as well:)

jank

Zascar wrote: »

Now I'm sure if your rich, white and greedy the Republican party may represent your interests,

Think the problem is your right there. Like the democratic party there are various strands and wings to them. Fine, if you do not agree but this 'they are all bat **** crazy' line we hear from social media outlets in Ireland is just nonsense really. Much of it is the echo chamber effect, which does a lot of harm to the debate on both sides.

Also the GOP is not the exclusive realm of 'white' people.

Off the top of my head, here are a few things of late that make me scratch my head: Still supportun Tax breaks for the Rich and trickle down economics, Trumps constant crazy comments which would end anyone elses career immediately. They deny climate change and evolution, they want to cut back Obamacare, Medicaid and Medicare. End concept of Minimum wage. End any gun control. Defunding Planned Parenthood when none of the government money goes into abortions. They are militantly pro life but don't care much when the baby is born - no parental leave, and then they cut school funding and education programs. Scott Walker slashes Education programs but gives a billionaire $500m for a stadium. They were against the Iran deal without even reading it and want to bomb them as soon as they get into office. They are massively racist and anti Islam. The Christians even hate the Pope. They want to keep poor Americans from voting. Generally blaming Obama for everything...

So many inaccuracies here but tbh I think you are a perfect example of someone who gets their news solely from one source/outlet and with the echo chamber effect, reinforces already held negative views against a political group or party. There in lies the problem of US politics and tbh world politics where the choice is binary.

Like by all means get your 'news' from Reddit but I certainly wouldn't take anything you regurgitate from there seriously.

I mean do ordinary Republicans not just see all this from their party and think this is nuts? How can you stand by this and some of the even more crazy stuff that comes out of the party? The media mocks them constantly. The Democrats don't get anywhere near the mocking or criticism, does this mean nothing to them? Noam Chompski says the GOP is now basically just a Radical Insurgency. They basically seem to just want to oppose everything the democrats do - happy to **** down the government

I do not know, but how about asking them. Have you traveled to the US? Have you ever worked with an American who has by Irish standards conservative views? I was very like you when I was say 20-21. Yea, the GOP are 'evil', Americans are thick, etc.etc.etc... However, a trip to the States blew these stupid teenage misconceptions away when I actually had mature adult conversations with Americans who are quite intelligent, kind and hard working.

I also take issue with Chomsky who is very willing to talk down the West, the US and anyone else he thinks is remotely to the right, while he gives Russia a free pass and thought the Khmer Rouge were great lads altogether and publicly went about denying the scale and magnitude of the Genocide perpetrated by that regime.

Zascar

So yes as I said I'm no expert in this and do get my news from specific sources which are clearly one sided, but I fail to see any of the other side of things - apart from Fox news which no one takes seriously. Say for example, today I read Paul Krugman's article in the New York Times - read it, it's hard to argue with his points. Jeb and the other Republicans constantly spout utter rubbish that is proved wrong by www.politifact.com constantly. But the Republicans don't seem to care about the truth or facts, it doesn't seem to bother them - they are going more and more fundamentalist - just look at what's happening now with Boehner resigning...

I do have a large bunch of American friends in work (American company) and I've asked them all. They are all democrats - they basically said that the reason I don't know any Republicans is because 'they rarely leave the country'. "Republicans are a small bunch of Rich white guys - and millions of brainwashed idiots from middle America" - is what the last person said to me. Now clearly I'm taking that with a pinch of Salt and wondering what the real answer is hence this post.

Amerika

The basic Republican principles...

A Belief in Smaller Government: To preserve the sanctity of liberty of the individual, it is our belief that government must necessarily be limited. Otherwise, the paternalism of the few would restrict the freedom of the many to decide what is best for themselves.

Support of the Federalist System of Government: To bring power closer to the people, it is imperative we restrict the growth of a centralized federal government....States ought to have the power to determine which programs and measures would be most appropriate and fitting for them.

Fiscal Conservatism: In keeping with our desires for the greatest individual liberty, we support policies of limited taxation and government spending.

Strong National Defense: We believe the best way to preserve the peace and protect our national interests abroad comes through a strong national defense.

Individual Liberties and Responsibilities: Along with individual liberties come individual responsibilities and duties. Government must act to preserve freedom, while individuals must exercise their responsibilities to preserve order.

Tolerance, Inclusiveness, and Optimism: We believe in the right of fellow Republicans to disagree on certain matters of principle and policy. We believe in being an open and inclusive party respectful of different points of view. We are indeed a "big-tent" party that offers no "litmus tests" or barriers to entry.

Pretty appealing!

blinding

The republicans believe in socialism for the wealth when they have been caught thieving and frauding.

ECO_Mental

Amerika wrote: »

The basic Republican principles...

.

Tolerance, Inclusiveness, and Optimism: We believe in the right of fellow Republicans to disagree on certain matters of principle and policy. We believe in being an open and inclusive party respectful of different points of view. We are indeed a "big-tent" party that offers no "litmus tests" or barriers to entry.

Pretty appealing!

You have got to laugh at this one:) yeah they are very Inclusive if....... you are not gay, muslim, Hispanic, a woman or black.

oh yeah god help you if you are poor, your on your own is your fault

Amerika

ECO_Mental wrote: »

You have got to laugh at this one:) yeah they are very Inclusive if....... you are not gay, muslim, Hispanic, a woman or black.

oh yeah god help you if you are poor, your on your own is your fault

Please explain… or is this just stereotypical left-wing hyperbolic blather?

ECO_Mental

Amerika wrote: »

Please explain… or is this just stereotypical left-wing hyperbolic blather?

Gay marriage - totaly against, a recent case where huckerbee (GOP canditate) supported that woman who wouldnt marry that gay couple even thought it was Federal law.

Muslim - Carison (GOP canditate)saying that no Muslim should ever bee president. Trump not correcting his suporters saying that they should kill all muslims

Women - Totally against womens choice regarding their reproductive systems

Black - Voter rights and voter ID problems making it as difficult as possible for them to vote.

Hipanics - Saying that they are all rapists and murders deport them all build a wall etc etc

Poor - Get a job, its your fault for being poor, not giving them supports to get them out of poverty apart from "Food stamps" and telling them to get 3 or 4 jobs look at me I made it my own eg the way Trump says it was all him even though hisold man gave him millons to start.

and so on... these examples are not made up but you would think they were:(

Overheal

Amerika wrote:

The basic Republican principles...

A Belief in Smaller Government: To preserve the sanctity of liberty of the individual, it is our belief that government must necessarily be limited. Otherwise, the paternalism of the few would restrict the freedom of the many to decide what is best for themselves.

Support of the Federalist System of Government: To bring power closer to the people, it is imperative we restrict the growth of a centralized federal government....States ought to have the power to determine which programs and measures would be most appropriate and fitting for them.

Fiscal Conservatism: In keeping with our desires for the greatest individual liberty, we support policies of limited taxation and government spending.

Strong National Defense: We believe the best way to preserve the peace and protect our national interests abroad comes through a strong national defense.

Individual Liberties and Responsibilities: Along with individual liberties come individual responsibilities and duties. Government must act to preserve freedom, while individuals must exercise their responsibilities to preserve order.

Tolerance, Inclusiveness, and Optimism: We believe in the right of fellow Republicans to disagree on certain matters of principle and policy. We believe in being an open and inclusive party respectful of different points of view. We are indeed a "big-tent" party that offers no "litmus tests" or barriers to entry.

Pretty appealing!

Yeah, except it's mostly bull****. No offense.

The Fiscally Conservative thing: before President Clinton, only Dwight D Eisenhower had issued a balanced budget - while building the Interstate System. Clinton provided balanced budgets in 1999, 2000, and 2001, with an initial reported surplus in 1998. The deficit has dipped under Obama but I don't think the budget was balanced.

“Conservative hero” Ronald Reagan didn’t do it—in fact, he quadrupled the national debt while in office. President George H. Bush added almost $2 trillion to it in his 4 years and President George W. Bush added just under $6 trillion (and it would be a lot more except the money he passed in 2008 gets charged to Obama since it went on the books in 2009–Obama’s first year in office).

http://www.forwardprogressives.com/want-to-shut-a-republican-up-just-show-them-this/
http://www.factcheck.org/2008/02/the-budget-and-deficit-under-clinton/

Federalist System of Government, and Individual Liberty: a vehement agenda to, among other things, restrict the right of a woman to govern her own body, and establish "traditional marriage" over the legislative actions of individual states like California for example. And a war on drugs which has less to do with personal harm than it does not aligning with the agenda of the tobacco/pharma lobbies that don't want people turning to medicine you can grow at home, it destroys their business models.

Tolerance, Inclusiveness, and Optimism: I'm sorry, this coming from the party that regularly calls its members RINOs and ousted Boehner over his views on the Planned Parenthood clusterdongle?

Zascar wrote:

Now I'm sure if your rich, white and greedy the Republican party may represent your interests, but it dumbfounds me how they get such massive support from Ordinary people across america who really would not benefit from their policies much at all... But just watching the Republican debates and the sh1t they are spouting, how can Ordinary decent people still side with the party with all the craziness that goes on?

Off the top of my head, here are a few things of late that make me scratch my head: Still supportun Tax breaks for the Rich and trickle down economics, Trumps constant crazy comments which would end anyone elses career immediately. They deny climate change and evolution, they want to cut back Obamacare, Medicaid and Medicare. End concept of Minimum wage. End any gun control. Defunding Planned Parenthood when none of the government money goes into abortions. They are militantly pro life but don't care much when the baby is born - no parental leave, and then they cut school funding and education programs. Scott Walker slashes Education programs but gives a billionaire $500m for a stadium. They were against the Iran deal without even reading it and want to bomb them as soon as they get into office. They are massively racist and anti Islam. The Christians even hate the Pope. They want to keep poor Americans from voting. Generally blaming Obama for everything...

Because most voters don't pay attention to the details.

Especially during election cycles and whenever a politically catalytic news story comes up, Republicans and pro-GOP outlets (like Rupert Murdoch's FOX) will spin up the rage machines. Democrats do this too, mind. Newtown CT was an excuse to polarize the country over gun legislation for example. Many such examples have taken place over the last decade but almost no new legislation ever happens. We're seeing it now with Planned Parenthood - google Carly Fiorina's comments on it; the GOP is drumming up the issue even when its a non-starter, there is no evidence in the videos but Carly says flat out 'the video shows live babies with beating hearts being kept alive to transport nerve tissue' - which fact-checkers have had a field day with. Even FOX tried to correct her on this. But that's not the point - the GOP motives have always been to divide/rile the voter base with social issues. Every election cycle, in some form or another, we hear about women's rights, gun control etc. even though typically nothing ever changes in those regards, it is only to scare those voters into electing these people. With enough money, most politicans will gladly turn a blind eye to common sense. Great example in Climate change. The Koch Brothers (big, big oil tycoons) are spending $889 Million this election to support politicians who deny that climate change is a problem for instance - because if climate change WAS a real, scientific issue (...it is) then that would mean oil companies would take a hit, either in demand or supply or regulatory costs. The longer they can keep global climate change 'a myth', the longer they can keep maximizing profits. Most voters will fall in line with what the right-wing outlet tells them, "it's all a myth, the democrats just want to help their crony solar industry" etc.

Most people believe in trickle down economics, bizarrely. Even though all the numbers point to a huge (and getting huger) divide, people think "but yeah, if I can just get up to the top 10% or whatever, I'll be filthy rich! The American Dream!" Because our economy is convoluted and not simple to understand, our stock market has become a day-trading bazaar, etc. that its easier to just take what the people on television are telling you at face value.

Bottom line, the republicans have figured out if you can terrify people into voting based on a thick social issue (like Obamacare, like Abortion, like Gay Marriage) then you can win. Obamacare for instance, the GOP made a big media circus during a critical midterm, got in on the promise of ending obamacare (surely knowing it would never work) and have wasted legislative time trying to repeal it well over 40 times. I've lost count. But as long as they're seen doing it, their supporters will keep supporting them.

As far as the minimum wage though, it's risky to raise it over time like Sanders proposes, but at the same time he is also discussing our trade agreements: right now we have to compete with workers overseas that work for pennies an hour, even at $7.25/her (as it is), is still a competitive issue.

edit: by the way, how long has this sort of populist manipulation been going on? To give you an idea, pre Civil War, at it's apex, only 385,000 individuals owned slaves - less than 2% of the white population (less than 5% of the southern white population), yet they were able to entice about half the US (about 31 million people total US pop at the time) to fight a war for the right to own slaves among other things, and 620,000 people died - and people still wave that flag today...

Amerika

ECO_Mental wrote: »

Gay marriage - totaly against, a recent case where huckerbee (GOP canditate) supported that woman who wouldnt marry that gay couple even thought it was Federal law.

Muslim - Carison (GOP canditate)saying that no Muslim should ever bee president. Trump not correcting his suporters saying that they should kill all muslims

Women - Totally against womens choice regarding their reproductive systems

Black - Voter rights and voter ID problems making it as difficult as possible for them to vote.

Hipanics - Saying that they are all rapists and murders deport them all build a wall etc etc

Poor - Get a job, its your fault for being poor, not giving them supports to get them out of poverty apart from "Food stamps" and telling them to get 3 or 4 jobs look at me I made it my own eg the way Trump says it was all him even though hisold man gave him millons to start.

and so on... these examples are not made up but you would think they were:(

So a couple of statements by a few people represents how the GOP stands on the issues? Looks like I was right… stereotypical left-wing hyperbolic blather. The other things you mention would lead us to believe the GOP believes in our rule of law... Shock! Horror!

Using your arguments I guess we can say Democrats stand for Entitlement, Deceit and Lies, based on Hillary Clinton, right?

Overheal

The GOP and/or Tea Party did nothing of much to allay fears that our President was the Muslim Antichrist, either. Or rage-inducing rhetoric like "Kill the Bill" "Don't Retreat, Reload" we all saw at rallies.

You're picking apart the fact that Mentalist quoted Carson though: what about the party stance on Marriage and Women's Rights? Those aren't just off-the-wall quotes, those are legislative actions/attempts with registered votes in congress.

Amerika

Overheal wrote: »

The GOP and/or Tea Party did nothing of much to allay fears that our President was the Muslim Antichrist, either. Or rage-inducing rhetoric like "Kill the Bill" "Don't Retreat, Reload" we all saw at rallies.

Wasn't it Hillary Clinton that started all that Obama is a Muslim thing back in 2008?

You're picking apart the fact that Mentalist quoted Carson though: what about the party stance on Marriage and Women's Rights? Those aren't just off-the-wall quotes, those are legislative actions/attempts with registered votes in congress.

I believe the GOP wants the decision on Marriage to be left up to the states, as is covered by our Tenth Amendment. And if I recall, the majority of Democrats also believe that only a few short years ago, until the political winds changed, that is. And in regards to abortion, the GOP believes the Fourteenth Amendment's protections apply to unborn children. You might believe that to be an affront to women's rights while many others believe it is a stance on the sanctity of life.

The Randy Riverbeast

Amerika wrote: »

So a couple of statements by a few people represents how the GOP stands on the issues? Looks like I was right… stereotypical left-wing hyperbolic blather. The other things you mention would lead us to believe the GOP believes in our rule of law... Shock! Horror!

Using your arguments I guess we can say Democrats stand for Entitlement, Deceit and Lies, based on Hillary Clinton, right?

I never understood how everything becomes a conspiracy instead of putting facts showing just how tolerant and inclusive the republicans are.

Overheal

Wasn't it Hillary Clinton that started all that Obama is a Muslim thing back in 2008?

You go ahead and tell me: was she?

You might believe that to be an affront to women's rights while many others believe it is a stance on the sanctity of life.

Roe v Wade is still the law of the land, and the GOP is not actually looking to change that afaik, they just want to piggyback on the hot-button issue, again, to rile up voter support.

Amerika

Overheal wrote: »

You go ahead and tell me: was she?

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2015/09/21/scarborough_the_obama_is_a_muslim_controversy_originated_with_hillary_clinton_in_2008.html

Roe v Wade is still the law of the land, and the GOP is not actually looking to change that afaik, they just want to piggyback on the hot-button issue, again, to rile up voter support.

No. Without the benefit of a constitutional amendment, what is done by a SCOTUS can be undone by a SCOTUS.

Overheal

That's a link to a morning talk show host's opinionated comment about the situation, where is more substantial evidence that she had anything to do with it? Either way, it's not the dems that continue to let that viewpoint fester.

edit: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2015/sep/25/obama-muslim-myth-clinton-connection/

The topic got play two days in a row on MSNBC’s Morning Joe. On Monday, Sept. 21, 2015, host Joe Scarborough and a guest stated firmly that the rumor actually began with Clinton during the bruising race for the Democratic nomination.

"This started with Hillary Clinton, and it was spread by the Clinton team in 2008," Scarborough said.

The next day, the show dialed it down a bit.

[con'td]

Aside from one-off county-level campaign operators for the Clinton Campaign in 2007, they did not propagate the rumour. Emails regarding the rumor spread to less than 20 people and were quickly stamped by higher ups in her campaign organization, calling the claim racist and ignorant.

ECO_Mental

Amerika wrote: »

So a couple of statements by a few people represents how the GOP stands on the issues? Looks like I was right… stereotypical left-wing hyperbolic blather. The other things you mention would lead us to believe the GOP believes in our rule of law... Shock! Horror!

Using your arguments I guess we can say Democrats stand for Entitlement, Deceit and Lies, based on Hillary Clinton, right?

Ok so, out of al the POTUS GOP canditates who are the leadership of the Reps and therefore the spokes people of the GOP and I am including all 16 or so still in the race so it would be a broad snaphot



How many of them would publically support gay marriage (1 or 2 out of 16)

How many would would publically support pro-choice 0/16

How many would support the legalising of all the mexicans wo have being living in america for the past 20 30 years 2-3/16 (Bush cruz? maybe)

How many would like a muslim to be POTUS (I am laughing as I type this) 0/16

How many of them would relax the strict voter reg leglisation in some sates 2-3/16

How many would extend some social benfits that the poor (medicare medicaid etc )get 0/16

One other note is thatt anytime I ever look at a GOP conference 95 of the audiance are white you will never see rainbow flags (maybe outside:D)

Datallus

Wasn't Abraham Lincoln a Republican?

Amerika

Overheal wrote: »

That's a link to a morning talk show host's opinionated comment about the situation, where is more substantial evidence that she had anything to do with it? Either way, it's not the dems that continue to let that viewpoint fester.

edit: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2015/sep/25/obama-muslim-myth-clinton-connection/

Aside from one-off county-level campaign operators for the Clinton Campaign in 2007, they did not propagate the rumour. Emails regarding the rumor spread to less than 20 people and were quickly stamped by higher ups in her campaign organization, calling the claim racist and ignorant.

Well, it is MSNBC you know... The unofficial media arm of the Democrats.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/feb/25/barackobama.hillaryclinton

Overheal

Amerika wrote: »

Well, it is MSNBC you know... The unofficial media arm of the Democrats.



http://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/feb/25/barackobama.hillaryclinton

I didn't quote MSNBC - you did? So you're just going to cite articles and people that you will later dismiss with ad hominems? Right :rolleyes:


'the photo' did not become a talking point until months after the aforementioned squelched email chain: She did not start anything. Your link also doesn't establish that Clinton explicitly knew or authorized a staffer to forward the photo on to Drudge Report.

Amerika

Datallus wrote: »

Wasn't Abraham Lincoln a Republican?

Northeastern Illinois University. One of our fine liberal arts institutions.

They sure have an odd way of spelling 'Republican.'

Datallus

I never really thought the GOP would stoop so low as to claim one of the founding fathers as their own.

Amerika

Overheal wrote: »

I didn't quote MSNBC - you did?


'the photo' did not become a talking point until months after the aforementioned squelched email chain. She did not start anything. Your link also doesn't establish that Clinton explicitly knew or authorized a staffer to forward the photo on to Drudge Report.

You noted MSNBC rolled back on the piece.

And we can all trust Hillary Clinton at her word, right? :rolleyes:

Amerika

ECO_Mental wrote: »

Ok so, out of al the POTUS GOP canditates who are the leadership of the Reps and therefore the spokes people of the GOP and I am including all 16 or so still in the race so it would be a broad snaphot



How many of them would publically support gay marriage (1 or 2 out of 16)

How many would would publically support pro-choice 0/16

How many would support the legalising of all the mexicans wo have being living in america for the past 20 30 years 2-3/16 (Bush cruz? maybe)

How many would like a muslim to be POTUS (I am laughing as I type this) 0/16

How many of them would relax the strict voter reg leglisation in some sates 2-3/16

How many would extend some social benfits that the poor (medicare medicaid etc )get 0/16

One other note is thatt anytime I ever look at a GOP conference 95 of the audiance are white y
ou will never see rainbow flags (maybe outside:D)

And the only real question is... what is the GOP's platform on all these issues you noted?

And in fair play... So, would it be fair to question of the two candidates (that only really matter) in the Democratic primary, how many believe they are above the law, are allowed to obstruct justice, and we should ignore their serial lies to the American people? 50% seems reasonable, don't you think?

The Randy Riverbeast

Amerika wrote: »

And the only real question is... what is the GOP's platform on all these issues you noted?

If the republicans are all for things like same sex marriage why are so many of its presidential candidates against it? Why are an inclusive tolerant group putting forward people who dont follow what the party stands for?

Amerika

The Randy Riverbeast wrote: »

If the republicans are all for things like same sex marriage why are so many of its presidential candidates against it? Why are an inclusive tolerant group putting forward people who dont follow what the party stands for?

I believe you will find that the majority of GOP candidates (that have a chance of winning the GOP primary) may be personally against gay marriage, but are politically ambiguous to it.

The Randy Riverbeast

Amerika wrote: »

I believe you will find that the majority of GOP candidates (that have a chance of winning the GOP primary) may be personally against gay marriage, but are politically ambiguous to it.

Why would they join a party which they are personally against?

Its not very tolerant or inclusive to promote segregation or treating another group as lesser. Why were those supporting a person refusing to provide marriage licenses to those entitled to one republicans?

For an inclusive and tolerant group very few of its members come across as either of those things.

Overheal

I never really thought the GOP would stoop so low as to claim one of the founding fathers as their own.

Lincoln was certainly not a founding father....

Amerika

The Randy Riverbeast wrote: »

Why would they join a party which they are personally against?

Its not very tolerant or inclusive to promote segregation or treating another group as lesser. Why were those supporting a person refusing to provide marriage licenses to those entitled to one republicans?

For an inclusive and tolerant group very few of its members come across as either of those things.

Tolerance, Inclusiveness, and Optimism: We believe in the right of fellow Republicans to disagree on certain matters of principle and policy. We believe in being an open and inclusive party respectful of different points of view. We are indeed a "big-tent" party that offers no "litmus tests" or barriers to entry.

And some candidates supported that person, some didn't.

FreshCoffee

Amerika wrote: »

Northeastern Illinois University. One of our fine liberal arts institutions.

They sure have an odd way of spelling 'Republican.'

Geez.. anyone with even rudimentary knowledge of US history knows Abraham Lincoln was a Republican president.

The above plaque was derided on Twitter for it's error.
www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/nov/4/abraham-lincoln-democrat-northeastern-illinois/

The Randy Riverbeast

Amerika wrote: »

And some candidates supported that person, some didn't.

Fair enough, it's like Irish being the first language of Ireland.

On paper its one thing but in practice it isn't and to claim that it isnt has people yelling about the democrats/British.

20Cent

FreshCoffee wrote: »

Geez.. anyone with even rudimentary knowledge of US history knows Abraham Lincoln was a Republican president.

The above plaque was derided on Twitter for it's error.
www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/nov/4/abraham-lincoln-democrat-northeastern-illinois/

The plaque is on that building over 100 years and refers to Lincons advocacy for democracy rather than a party affiliation.

Amerika

20Cent wrote: »

The plaque is on that building over 100 years and refers to Lincons advocacy for democracy rather than a party affiliation.

Okay, LOL. Well then, they sure have an odd way of spelling 'Democracy.' 'Republic' would have been more accurate. :rolleyes:

20Cent

Amerika wrote: »

Okay, LOL. Well then, they sure have an odd way of spelling 'Democracy.' 'Republic' would have been more accurate. :rolleyes:

Wouldn't it be democrat if referring to a single person rather than Abraham Lincon Democracy?

Anyway there is no democrat party it's the Democratic Party. Democrat is usually used as a slur when referring to Democratic Party members.

ECO_Mental

Amerika wrote: »

I believe you will find that the majority of GOP candidates (that have a chance of winning the GOP primary) may be personally against gay marriage, but are politically ambiguous to it.

So are you admitting that the GOP aren't the most inclusive bunch of lads because you didn't refute my other arguments and you are admitting that they discriminate against the lgbt of your country at least.

This is a big problem for the GOP I have mentioned this here before, but they are alienating vast swathes of the population and there is no future for the GOP if they continue down this line

The Black Oil

Amerika wrote: »

The basic Republican principles...

Tolerance, Inclusiveness, and Optimism: We believe in the right of fellow Republicans to disagree on certain matters of principle and policy. We believe in being an open and inclusive party respectful of different points of view. We are indeed a "big-tent" party that offers no "litmus tests" or barriers to entry

I think that's true within the boundaries of the party, for the most part. Forina said it in an interview I heard a while back - the current slew of candidates reflects libertarians to social conservatives and you may not get a similar spread on the Democratic side because they're expected to tow the line.

As to tolerance in general, that's more a problematic issue for Republicans, imo. Question their Official Version of America (™) even in a small way, and you better believe you'll catch heat for it i.e. tolerance, but solely on their terms. Speak a language other than English at some media event or similar, oh boy. Ponder a little about guns or Christianity, hmm, good luck there. Sure, some of this is theatrics, the election cycle, mud-slinging and having to live up to narratives pushed by Fox News, but I do think tolerance and Republicans raises a serious question mark, at times.

Zascar

From Robert Reich:

Actually I’m amazed John Boehner survived as long as he has. His one virtue as Speaker of the House has been his total lack of principle, which has enabled him to cobble together majorities or pluralities out of a Party that’s gone off the rails, becoming increasingly misogynist, homophobic, anti-immigrant, and anti-Muslim; filled with paranoid whackos, voodoo economists, anti-science half-brains, creationists, and white supremists; while being financed by billionaires, Wall Street, and big business.

The problem for the rest of us right now is they’re still a majority in Congress, and many are aiming to close down the government unless Planned Parenthood is defunded -- and then to default on the nation’s debt rather than lift the debt limit.

John Boehner will not go down in history as one of America's greatest Speakers of the House, but at least he served as something of a buffer between the Republican crazies and the rest of America. (This morning when Marco Rubio announced Boehner's plan to retire, attendees at the Values Voter Summit in Washington roared their approval and then rose in a standing ovation.) After the end of October, that buffer is gone.

These words from Clinton's Secretary of Labour - gotta make you wonder..

Overheal

well, he's not wrong.

also idk if you broke the firewall @ work for facebook or its just coincidence, but cheers for that.

20Cent

Zascar wrote: »

From Robert Reich:



These words from Clinton's Secretary of Labour - gotta make you wonder..

Can't tell if you agree or disagree with it!

Fr Tod Umptious

jank wrote: »

Think the problem is your right there. Like the democratic party there are various strands and wings to them. Fine, if you do not agree but this 'they are all bat **** crazy' line we hear from social media outlets in Ireland is just nonsense really. Much of it is the echo chamber effect, which does a lot of harm to the debate on both sides.

Also the GOP is not the exclusive realm of 'white' people.



So many inaccuracies here but tbh I think you are a perfect example of someone who gets their news solely from one source/outlet and with the echo chamber effect, reinforces already held negative views against a political group or party. There in lies the problem of US politics and tbh world politics where the choice is binary.

Like by all means get your 'news' from Reddit but I certainly wouldn't take anything you regurgitate from there seriously.



I do not know, but how about asking them. Have you traveled to the US? Have you ever worked with an American who has by Irish standards conservative views? I was very like you when I was say 20-21. Yea, the GOP are 'evil', Americans are thick, etc.etc.etc... However, a trip to the States blew these stupid teenage misconceptions away when I actually had mature adult conversations with Americans who are quite intelligent, kind and hard working.

I also take issue with Chomsky who is very willing to talk down the West, the US and anyone else he thinks is remotely to the right, while he gives Russia a free pass and thought the Khmer Rouge were great lads altogether and publicly went about denying the scale and magnitude of the Genocide perpetrated by that regime.

Nail on the head right there.

It's only by spending some time there that your realize the people who support the GOP, or at least are not Obama cheerleaders, are far more intelligent and dare I say it 'normal' than many this side of the water are willing to give them credit for.

The one thing that really pisses me off when it come to US politics coverage this side of the water is how the media outlets are so so biased towards the Democrat point of view and so unwilling to countenance that normal everyday Americans see a lot of merit in the GOP.

InTheTrees

Zascar wrote: »

I do have a large bunch of American friends in work (American company) and I've asked them all. They are all democrats - they basically said that the reason I don't know any Republicans is because 'they rarely leave the country'. "Republicans are a small bunch of Rich white guys - and millions of brainwashed idiots from middle America" - is what the last person said to me. Now clearly I'm taking that with a pinch of Salt and wondering what the real answer is hence this post.

I think thats a pretty accurate description of your average demorats view of republicans.

jank

Zascar wrote: »

So yes as I said I'm no expert in this and do get my news from specific sources which are clearly one sided, but I fail to see any of the other side of things - apart from Fox news which no one takes seriously.

There lies the problem me thinks.

Say for example, today I read Paul Krugman's article in the New York Times - read it, it's hard to argue with his points.

I could argue with many of his points, particularly this.

No doubt I, like anyone who points out ethical lapses on the part of some companies, will be accused of demonizing business. But I’m not claiming that all businesspeople are demons, just that some of them aren’t angels.

There are, it turns out, people in the corporate world who will do whatever it takes, including fraud that kills people, in order to make a buck. And we need effective regulation to police that kind of bad behavior, not least so that ethical businesspeople aren’t at a disadvantage when competing with less scrupulous types. But we knew that, right?

a) He wrongly assumes that only the corporate world attracts a few bad apples. Should we ditch democracy because of some corrupt politicians?

b) He then assumes that 'better' regulation will make above problem go away. But does not define what 'better' is.

c) Does not recognise at all that the source of these problems often lie in the regulation of particular markets e.g. the FDA involvement in licensing Daraprim exclusively to one manufacturer.

d) Basically a business person cannot be trusted so must be policed while these regulator and legislators are free from moral corruption, benevolent, altruistic and will 'police' a market for the betterment of all!

In summary, yes one can argue that the basic premise of Krugman is indeed back to front.

Jeb and the other Republicans constantly spout utter rubbish that is proved wrong by www.politifact.com constantly. But the Republicans don't seem to care about the truth or facts, it doesn't seem to bother them - they are going more and more fundamentalist - just look at what's happening now with Boehner resigning...

You mention Jeb Bush for example, well according to politifact his 'True' to 'Pants on fire' score is 21% vs 3%/
Obama's score in this regard is 21% vs 2%
A negabile difference it must be said but it is interesting you singled out Jeb Bush 'spouting rubbish' yet never compare him to the sitting president. The eye sees what the eye wants.

The Democrats are not the upholders of truth, morality and virtue.

I do have a large bunch of American friends in work (American company) and I've asked them all. They are all democrats - they basically said that the reason I don't know any Republicans is because 'they rarely leave the country'. "Republicans are a small bunch of Rich white guys - and millions of brainwashed idiots from middle America" - is what the last person said to me. Now clearly I'm taking that with a pinch of Salt and wondering what the real answer is hence this post.

Again, there in lies the problem. If you hang around with people with the same political leanings, then asking them about the GOP is not going to reveal much success.

Also, if they are that small then why do they control Congress. The GOP do enjoy widespread support in the US. Looking at media in Ireland its hard to know that. Again, which feeds into a negative feedback loop about everything GOP.

Brian?

I've lived in the USA and am friends withe several registered Republicans. I know many more then I'm friends with. The vote republican in spite of the crazies we hear about, not because of them. They also display alarming ignorance about the world, but I don't know if that has anything to do with their voting preference.

The majority of republican voters are not far right Christians or libertarians or ignorant red necks. They're simple working people who've been bamboozled into believing the GOP has their best interests at heart. Neither political party in the US has their best interest at heart really, but I'd give a slight edge to the Dems as they need the Unions.

Zillah

I think it's mostly derived from fear. That's the nature of conservative thinking: you spend more on the military because you fear foreign enemies; you demand smaller, weaker government because you fear despotism; you fear crime so you want a gun; you favour policies that discriminate against people who are different - gay, muslim, atheist, foreign, whatever - because their difference is threatening. It's easy to find the unknown threatening, and the less well-traveled you are, and the less well-educated you are, the more you will find threatening - hence conservative voting.

The real problem is that politicians shamelessly manipulate and perpetuate those fears to get into power.

Conservative policies are about giving a short term feeling that the thing that scares me is being dealt with, rather than actually solving the problem. You fear loss of wealth so you demand lower taxes - instead of understanding that trickle down economics don't work. You fear foreign enemies so you want to bomb them - instead of realising that you just make more enemies, with more power and more support, by doing so. You feel safer from criminals with a gun, even though more guns makes the world more dangerous. It's all about short-term thinking.

It's also why these conversation have such animosity, because anyone opposing these policies must surely be in league who whoever it is that scares you: hence Obama being a socialist Muslim foreigner - why else would he have the policies that he has?

jank

Zillah wrote: »

I think it's mostly derived from fear. That's the nature of conservative thinking: you spend more on the military because you fear foreign enemies; you demand smaller, weaker government because you fear despotism; you fear crime so you want a gun; you favour policies that discriminate against people who are different - gay, muslim, atheist, foreign, whatever - because their difference is threatening. It's easy to find the unknown threatening, and the less well-traveled you are, and the less well-educated you are, the more you will find threatening - hence conservative voting.

The real problem is that politicians shamelessly manipulate and perpetuate those fears to get into power.

Conservative policies are about giving a short term feeling that the thing that scares me is being dealt with, rather than actually solving the problem. You fear loss of wealth so you demand lower taxes - instead of understanding that trickle down economics don't work. You fear foreign enemies so you want to bomb them - instead of realising that you just make more enemies, with more power and more support, by doing so. You feel safer from criminals with a gun, even though more guns makes the world more dangerous. It's all about short-term thinking.

It's also why these conversation have such animosity, because anyone opposing these policies must surely be in league who whoever it is that scares you: hence Obama being a socialist Muslim foreigner - why else would he have the policies that he has?

This fear works both ways. Ever hear on the 'War on Women' spouted by Democrats for example.

I do also find it ironic that you speak about republicans spouting fear when they are arguably more aspirational then the democrats, Ronald Reagan being a prime example of this, "The shining city on a hill" speech.

There is plenty of fear displayed here towards the GOP/Republicans, sure they are all bat $hit crazy hicks that want to blow up the world and bring us back to the dark ages with their religion and Dickinson labour laws.

Fear is a powerful political tool no doubt but look at the whole picture as many seem to be falling for it hook line and sinker

20Cent

jank wrote: »

This fear works both ways. Ever hear on the 'War on Women' spouted by Democrats for example.

The Republicans want to defund planned parenthood one of the biggest providers of women's healthcare in the country particularly the poor. They are accusing them of harvesting babies body parts for sale!! They are against any legislation for equal pay for women. They want to ban abortion even in the case of rape. A prominent republican Todd Aiken said that women couldn't get pregnant from "legitimate" rape. Certainly more real than the "war on Christmas".

Permabear

This post has been deleted.