U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-09-2015, 06:54 PM
 
9,229 posts, read 4,249,659 times
Reputation: 11010

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by dechatelet View Post
Interesting responses to my original post so far.

The most challenging one said that conservatives who stayed home instead of voting delivered us another four years of Obama. I guess the only good reply to that is that sometimes the best way to support the conservative cause is to let the Democrats screw things up until the voters get it and see the need for a different path.
At what point will the country and our Constitutional Republic be so "screwed up" that we cannot recover?
One of the main ways is allowing (D) to nominate the fill federal judgeships. Remember that it is not just the SCOTUS that counts, since many lower court rulings hold because the SCOTUS only takes a very limited number of cases. Obama has been very busy filling all sorts of vacancies over the last 6+ year, well beyond what most people are aware of. Add to that the likelihood of 2-3 more SCOTUS nominations in the next 4 years, and the balance of power could very well undermine the foundation of our country.

Lastly, if the future does get bleak with more far leftists in charge of the courts, and by extension our way of life, even a future moderate will seem more conservative than one would today.
So if people think someone like Jeb are moderates, I cannot imagine what will pass for an electable candidate to an (R) after another 4-8 years of a (D) president.

`
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-09-2015, 07:04 PM
 
78,225 posts, read 33,343,867 times
Reputation: 15657
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vector1 View Post
At what point will the country and our Constitutional Republic be so "screwed up" that we cannot recover?
One of the main ways is allowing (D) to nominate the fill federal judgeships. Remember that it is not just the SCOTUS that counts, since many lower court rulings hold because the SCOTUS only takes a very limited number of cases. Obama has been very busy filling all sorts of vacancies over the last 6+ year, well beyond what most people are aware of. Add to that the likelihood of 2-3 more SCOTUS nominations in the next 4 years, and the balance of power could very well undermine the foundation of our country.

Lastly, if the future does get bleak with more far leftists in charge of the courts, and by extension our way of life, even a future moderate will seem more conservative than one would today.
So if people think someone like Jeb are moderates, I cannot imagine what will pass for an electable candidate to an (R) after another 4-8 years of a (D) president.

`
Roberts was the vote that upheld Obamacare.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2015, 07:38 PM
 
5,556 posts, read 5,038,470 times
Reputation: 3943
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
Roberts was the vote that upheld Obamacare.
Amazing, isn't it? Everything the repubs blame dems for, they created themselves. They just about hand the dems the knives to carve 'em up with.

Rumor has it that Roberts was blackmailed, something about an irregularity in the adoption of his foreign born children. The story goes that he had written his opinion against the ACA, and then changed his mind at the last minute and justified it as a tax. And thus, we have Obamacare, courtesy of a Republican appointee. Is this a great country, or what?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2015, 07:41 PM
 
Location: Grove City, Ohio
10,113 posts, read 12,346,613 times
Reputation: 13871
Voted republican every single time since 1972 when I voted for Nixon.

The idiots put Romney, Christie or the mummified remains of Bob Dole up for election and my wife and I will both stay home.

Romney, the idiot ran a horrible campaign last time. No conviction, no beliefs... just a ... well... not much.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2015, 07:53 PM
 
5,556 posts, read 5,038,470 times
Reputation: 3943
Quote:
Originally Posted by nicet4 View Post
Voted republican every single time since 1972 when I voted for Nixon.

The idiots put Romney, Christie or the mummified remains of Bob Dole up for election and my wife and I will both stay home.

Romney, the idiot ran a horrible campaign last time. No conviction, no beliefs... just a ... well... not much.
Romney had the best republican consultant advice money could buy. Just awful. He really was sabotaged.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2015, 08:12 PM
 
Location: Buckeye, AZ
27,179 posts, read 15,706,154 times
Reputation: 9830
Quote:
Originally Posted by nicet4 View Post
Voted republican every single time since 1972 when I voted for Nixon.

The idiots put Romney, Christie or the mummified remains of Bob Dole up for election and my wife and I will both stay home.

Romney, the idiot ran a horrible campaign last time. No conviction, no beliefs... just a ... well... not much.
I don't get the "stay home vote" logic. Why not just vote Democrat, write-in or third party?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2015, 09:03 PM
 
Location: Schererville, IN
171 posts, read 180,606 times
Reputation: 179
And you're okay with unlimited campaign contributions by corporations and SuperPACS?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2015, 09:41 PM
 
1,721 posts, read 1,003,593 times
Reputation: 1117
Quote:
Originally Posted by dechatelet View Post
The second most challenging response said that Republicans can't win with a conservative "extremist." They need to nominate moderates. Well, both Romney and McCain are establishment Republicans who could fairly be called moderate. So the idea that Republicans need to nominate moderates in order to win over a centrist electorate has been tried in the last two presidential elections and failed.
That's an oversimplification. Remember, they both had to present themselves as highly conservative during the primaries in order to get the nomination and garner at least a modicum of enthusiasm from the base.

Prior to 2008, McCain had a reputation as an independent, principled and practical moderate who was at least occasionally will to work with Democrats and criticize his own Party. [A reputation that I think was mostly well-deserved.] Unfortunately, he largely squandered his reputation during the primaries and presidential campaign. He came of as curmudgeonly, stubborn, and anachronistic. At the time it would have been implausible for any Republican to win because of the political climate (W pretty much spoiled it), but McCain made it awfully easy for Obama.

Romney was largely undone by a long, bitter primary battle, and the relentless criticisms of his rivals. He was often referred to as a corporate raider and a "vulture capitalist", who dismantled and sold off companies at the expense of works for the benefit of plutocrats. This criticism was so persistent that the Obama campaign was able to exploit it after Romney was nominated; a strategy that worked perfectly. And of course Romney was personally unlikable, coming across as a duplicitous phony.

For 2016 it probably won't matter anyway. If Republicans nominate a more moderate candidate they still probably lose by around 3-5%, and if they nominate a conservative ideologue they'll probably lose by at least 10%. So it's only a matter of degree anyway.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2015, 09:49 PM
 
Location: Buckeye, AZ
27,179 posts, read 15,706,154 times
Reputation: 9830
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTYD View Post
And you're okay with unlimited campaign contributions by corporations and SuperPACS?
If that is to me, NO WAY. I don't like what the Koch brothers and others who are trying to push for their agendas are doing one bit. It is vile and shouldn't be constitutional at all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2015, 09:58 PM
 
Location: Buckeye, AZ
27,179 posts, read 15,706,154 times
Reputation: 9830
Quote:
Originally Posted by PanapolicRiddle View Post
That's an oversimplification. Remember, they both had to present themselves as highly conservative during the primaries in order to get the nomination and garner at least a modicum of enthusiasm from the base.

Prior to 2008, McCain had a reputation as an independent, principled and practical moderate who was at least occasionally will to work with Democrats and criticize his own Party. [A reputation that I think was mostly well-deserved.] Unfortunately, he largely squandered his reputation during the primaries and presidential campaign. He came of as curmudgeonly, stubborn, and anachronistic. At the time it would have been implausible for any Republican to win because of the political climate (W pretty much spoiled it), but McCain made it awfully easy for Obama.

Romney was largely undone by a long, bitter primary battle, and the relentless criticisms of his rivals. He was often referred to as a corporate raider and a "vulture capitalist", who dismantled and sold off companies at the expense of works for the benefit of plutocrats. This criticism was so persistent that the Obama campaign was able to exploit it after Romney was nominated; a strategy that worked perfectly. And of course Romney was personally unlikable, coming across as a duplicitous phony.

For 2016 it probably won't matter anyway. If Republicans nominate a more moderate candidate they still probably lose by around 3-5%, and if they nominate a conservative ideologue they'll probably lose by at least 10%. So it's only a matter of degree anyway.
The popular vote don't matter, it's about electoral. If they go with a conservative, I see winning Arizona, Texas and the south and the midwest. THAT'S it. It will be about 2008 levels of a beating. Now do I think a moderate Republican maybe can win but it depends on who is selected in the primaries by both parties and how the nation goes. If it is a Reagan second term, we'll see a Democrat wins hands down but if it's a W second term, we'll see a moderate republican in office. Right now, it is hard to tell if Obama is a bad president on the whole. Sure there are people that rail on him but I am sure liberals railed on Reagan too...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:35 AM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top