U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
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 01-05-2011, 07:54 AM
Location: West Michigan
3,076 posts, read 5,450,297 times
Reputation: 4319


A decline in social conservatism isn't going to result in the decline of the United States. It would merely be a change in culture.

If fiscal conservatism cannot be revived, our future is VERY cloudy.

Unfortunately, "conservatism" in the United States has been labeled by the left as the social type, because this type of conservatism can be defeated. Fiscal conservatism has proven to be a superior form of governing, so the left has little interest in framing the debate as fiscally liberal vs. fiscally conservative. Unfortunately, there are very few from either party that practice fiscal conservatism. If our young people don't figure out that liberal economics are not in their best interest, we are in trouble.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

Old 01-06-2011, 07:27 AM
2,755 posts, read 11,764,529 times
Reputation: 1464
All this talk of "permanent majorities" is sheer nonsense. In 2008 the Democrats publicly made such a claim, and two years later the shoe is on the other foot. In 2004 the Republicans were about to banish the Democrats from the political spectrum. 4 years later, we had a Democratic president and Democrats in both houses of congress.

A few cycles out in the cold causes parties to pretty much throw out whatever wasn't working for them and start adopting something that will. A few cycles in power generally leads to corruption and the voters grow tired of that.

The fact is that parties pivot around issues that they think will gain traction for them. Today's issues are not likely to be issues tomorrow. There is some loyalty to parties among populations, but there's a big group of voters that, depending on the circumstances, will vote either way. About every two or three decades there tends to be a realignment in which the cards get shuffled and re-dealt again.

Bottom line: there's no such thing as a permanent majority. Two years is an eternity in politics, and if anything, the cycles are getting shorter and shorter.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-06-2011, 05:53 PM
Location: 30-40N 90-100W
13,856 posts, read 22,966,872 times
Reputation: 6679
I'm a social conservative, but I agree there are other factors. According to Pew Research members of "Historically Black Churches" are strongly socially conservative, but 72% of them favor "a Bigger Government with more services." I think of blacks in general the majority support "a bigger government." On the flip-side blacks who lean toward "smaller government", at least the ones I've seen, are more socially liberal than the Republican Party.

Comparative Religions - U.S. Religious Landscape Study - Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life

Another issue is law&order. I think many blacks see "Law&Order" issues as code for "lets put more black men in prison" or at least are aware an affluent white cocaine addict will be treated as a person with an illness while a black "Crack-head" will be treated solely as a criminal. (Don't get confused I'm basically for the "War on Drugs", I'm really meaning we should be tougher or more interventionist on rich white drug-dealers or addicts than we are now.) Also blacks tend to oppose the death penalty. A socially conservative person who opposes abortion, euthanasia, and the death penalty while favoring more services to minority communities could maybe do well with black voters but would likely annoy or alienate traditional Republicans or just not be able to run as Republican. Lower-taxes/Reduce-spending is a core principle in the modern GOP.

Hispanics are a bit more mixed on those issues, but part of that might be a tad deceptive. Hispanic is a blanket term encompassing several groups. Mexican-American and Puerto-Rican Catholics I think come out somewhat Left on economic and "Law&Order" issues. Although they can swing Republican more than black voters will, they don't swing all that much as I recall. Latino Protestants seem to be a bit more of a swing group as they are, I believe, more to the Right on economics. South Americans I think come out more conservative as do Cubans of course. Although Cubans are interesting in that, as I recall, they come out less socially conservative than Mexicans yet more Republicans. So possibly Republicans should make it easier for South Americans to come to the US and do more to appeal to Hispanic Protestants. I'd like to think there is also a way they could propose things to help the "working poor" without sacrificing their fiscal-conservative element.
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.

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

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 > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

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