Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Standard member bill718
    Enigma
    09 Dec '09 19:21
    http://www.unitedliberty.org/articles/problems-of-the-republican-party

    As President Obama and the Democrats wrestle with the issues facing America they are going to run into many roadblocks along the way. These problems however, are small compared to the disorganized mess that faces the Republican party today, among these are:

    * A hypocritical attitude concerning spending: Republicans like to use the term "tax and spend Liberal". If one looks at the spending records of the Administrations of Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, and George W. Bush, taxes and spending increased just as much under these presidents, as under Democrats in the last 30 years.

    * Lack of Respect for the Rule of Law: The Republican party used the guise of National Security as an excuse to break the law concerning defence contracts, and privacy laws.

    * A preference for preemptive war: Against the will of most American voters Republican administrations tend to minimize the use of diplomacy, while using military force to try to solve international disputes.

    The Republican party has grown very inflexible, and generally ignores the will of most American voters. As long as this is the case, the Republican party of today runs a very real risk of losing there place as a national political party, and becoming a regional party dominated by southern white men.
  2. 09 Dec '09 19:34
    Originally posted by bill718
    http://www.unitedliberty.org/articles/problems-of-the-republican-party

    As President Obama and the Democrats wrestle with the issues facing America they are going to run into many roadblocks along the way. These problems however, are small compared to the disorganized mess that faces the Republican party today, among these are:

    * A hypocritical attitude ...[text shortened]... s a national political party, and becoming a regional party dominated by southern white men.
    it happens to both parties every now and then, today the republicans are having a hard time, tomorrow it may be the democrats.

    Have you seen Obama's approval rating recently? Its nothing to be proud of.
  3. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    09 Dec '09 19:44
    Originally posted by bill718
    http://www.unitedliberty.org/articles/problems-of-the-republican-party

    As President Obama and the Democrats wrestle with the issues facing America they are going to run into many roadblocks along the way. These problems however, are small compared to the disorganized mess that faces the Republican party today, among these are:

    * A hypocritical attitude ...[text shortened]... s a national political party, and becoming a regional party dominated by southern white men.
    I don't get it.

    What do you hope to accomplish when you start these threads just mindlessly repeating tired, archaic and overly simplistic Democratic talking points without any support or discussion?

    If anyone follows politics at all (and it stands to reason that most of us do), you know we've all heard those cliches a thousand times. Do we really need to hear them for the thousand and first?

    Really, why bother?
  4. 09 Dec '09 19:47
    Originally posted by sh76
    I don't get it.

    What do you hope to accomplish when you start these threads just mindlessly repeating tired, archaic and overly simplistic Democratic talking points without any support or discussion?

    If anyone follows politics at all (and it stands to reason that most of us do), you know we've all heard those cliches a thousand times. Do we really need to hear them for the thousand and first?

    Really, why bother?
    bill781 is aroused by the false belief that the republican party is dead, and that he had been right all along.

    his smiley face clearly indicates his level of arousal everytime he repeats these cliches.
  5. Standard member DrKF
    incipit parodia
    09 Dec '09 19:57 / 1 edit
    In what is at best an interesting hypothetical, Rasmussen recently conducted a poll which I thought was quite interesting:

    In a three-way Generic Ballot test, the latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds Democrats attracting 36% of the vote. The Tea Party candidate picks up 23%, and Republicans finish third at 18%. Another 22% are undecided.
    Among voters not affiliated with either major party, the Tea Party comes out on top. Thirty-three percent (33% ) prefer the Tea Party candidate, and 30% are undecided. Twenty-five percent (25% ) would vote for a Democrat, and just 12% prefer the GOP.
    Among Republican voters, 39% say they’d vote for the GOP candidate, but 33% favor the Tea Party option.
    For this survey, the respondents were asked to assume that the Tea Party movement organized as a new political party. In practical terms, it is unlikely that a true third-party option would perform as well as the polling data indicates. The rules of the election process—written by Republicans and Democrats--provide substantial advantages for the two established major parties. The more conventional route in the United States is for a potential third-party force to overtake one of the existing parties.

    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/december_2009/tea_party_tops_gop_on_three_way_generic_ballot
  6. Standard member DrKF
    incipit parodia
    09 Dec '09 20:14
    Extrapolating, conventional thinking suggests that a third party is unlikely to usurp either of the established parties - but polling data like this does tend to suggest a likely rightwards lunge by the Republicans towards the Tea Party agenda. I gather the Governor of Florida is facing a Tea Party endorsed candidate in the primary, and the New York special election debacle sent a clear signal that the GOP needs to toe the (Tea Party) line - to the point that a Republican loss was a win not only for the Democrats, but also fr the TP wing.

    The trouble with this is, of course, how many current Republican inclined voters will be prepared to stomach such a shift.

    It will (probably) bode ill for the Republicans if the shift does happen: this is an old scenario, repeated in many countries at many times, and it rarely ends particularly well.
  7. Standard member Esoteric
    Cognitive Junta
    10 Dec '09 00:36
    You know this thread won’t get no airplay because these forums are full of right wing douche-bags. They should re-name this site Red Hot Republican.
  8. 10 Dec '09 01:35 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by bill718


    * A hypocritical attitude concerning spending: Republicans like to use the term "tax and spend Liberal". If one looks at the spending records of the Administrations of Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, and George W. Bush, taxes and spending increased just as much under these presidents, as under Democrats in the last 30 years.
    Although the statement is true, you would have to be a numbskull to think it means anything. Oh and lets not forget about inflation of the dollar either. Lets see in 1977 a pack of smokes were 75 cents for name brand. Now 4.50. Gas 60 cents now 2.70 average.


    P.S. But lets see how the numbers total out after the current Dem is finished with his term. Bet you probably won't be posting rubish such as this then.
  9. 10 Dec '09 01:44
    Originally posted by DrKF
    Extrapolating, conventional thinking suggests that a third party is unlikely to usurp either of the established parties - but polling data like this does tend to suggest a likely rightwards lunge by the Republicans towards the Tea Party agenda. I gather the Governor of Florida is facing a Tea Party endorsed candidate in the primary, and the New York special ele ...[text shortened]... an old scenario, repeated in many countries at many times, and it rarely ends particularly well.
    The seeds of this elephant graveyard where planted in the south long ago during the struggle for civil rights when Democratic southern racists fled the Founder's Party when it felt compelled to stand up for what my parents told me then, "was right." The Republican Party had the misfortune (actually since inception) of representing the interests of industrialists - a misfortune at that time only because these southern snakes were looking for an ideology they could bend to maintain their status. They have succeed beyond their wildest dreams. The Party of Lincoln is no more. A putrid corpse of the walking-dead, luddites, naysayers, knuckedraggers, klan-klowns, grifters, and carnival-barkers is all that lies in the smoldering landscape that their rapacious policies have created. If we cannot find the strength to bury this odious husk and move on together we all may not survive. And, if we can't all trust each other that much then indeed why bother?
  10. 10 Dec '09 01:48
    Originally posted by DrKF
    Extrapolating, conventional thinking suggests that a third party is unlikely to usurp either of the established parties - but polling data like this does tend to suggest a likely rightwards lunge by the Republicans towards the Tea Party agenda. I gather the Governor of Florida is facing a Tea Party endorsed candidate in the primary, and the New York special ele ...[text shortened]... an old scenario, repeated in many countries at many times, and it rarely ends particularly well.
    I wouldn't say it is the TP wing. To me it is the republicans of the past. The republicans of today are just democrats that call themselves republicans.
  11. 10 Dec '09 03:46
    Originally posted by bill718
    http://www.unitedliberty.org/articles/problems-of-the-republican-party

    As President Obama and the Democrats wrestle with the issues facing America they are going to run into many roadblocks along the way. These problems however, are small compared to the disorganized mess that faces the Republican party today, among these are:

    * A hypocritical attitude ...[text shortened]... s a national political party, and becoming a regional party dominated by southern white men.
    Vietnam War - started by a Democrat, ended by a Republican.

    are we even at war now? the Iraq and Afghanistan wars have long since turned into occupations with guerrilla action.
  12. Standard member bill718
    Enigma
    10 Dec '09 09:09
    Originally posted by sh76
    I don't get it.

    What do you hope to accomplish when you start these threads just mindlessly repeating tired, archaic and overly simplistic Democratic talking points without any support or discussion?

    If anyone follows politics at all (and it stands to reason that most of us do), you know we've all heard those cliches a thousand times. Do we really need to hear them for the thousand and first?

    Really, why bother?
    ...sorry if the truth hurts!
  13. 10 Dec '09 12:57
    Originally posted by bill718
    http://www.unitedliberty.org/articles/problems-of-the-republican-party

    As President Obama and the Democrats wrestle with the issues facing America they are going to run into many roadblocks along the way. These problems however, are small compared to the disorganized mess that faces the Republican party today, among these are:

    * A hypocritical attitude ...[text shortened]... s a national political party, and becoming a regional party dominated by southern white men.
    I have gone on record saying that the Republican party has crossed the line in terms of spending and taxing. It is why they are where they are now. I have also gone on record opposing such legislation as the Patriot Act. As for the bit about the preemptive war, who voted along side "W" to go to war? That's right, the Dems. Who is still in Iraq and now escalating the war in Afghanistan? That's right, the Dems. Who is continuing the spend thrift ways of the Republicans times 10? That's right, the Dems.

    Sickening, is'nt it? So what do you propose, a third party?
  14. 10 Dec '09 13:01
    Originally posted by zeeblebot
    Vietnam War - started by a Democrat, ended by a Republican.

    are we even at war now? the Iraq and Afghanistan wars have long since turned into occupations with guerrilla action.
    Who was president for:

    WW1: Woodrow Wilson (Dem)
    WW2: FDR (Dem)
    Korea: Harry Truman (Dem)
    Vietnam: JFK and LBJ (Dem)
    Iraq: "W" (a closet Dem)
  15. 10 Dec '09 14:43
    Originally posted by whodey
    Who was president for:

    WW1: Woodrow Wilson (Dem)
    WW2: FDR (Dem)
    Korea: Harry Truman (Dem)
    Vietnam: JFK and LBJ (Dem)
    Iraq: "W" (a closet Dem)
    You're conveniently leaving out a host of other military "activities".

    W was not even a closet Dem, he's all yours whether you care to acknowledge it or not. He ain't mine.