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.
Nor do I but some people operate under a new progressive, liberal nonsense without morality. It's anything goes with them.
It's nothing new. People stole in the bible days before there truly was conservative, libertarian, progressive or liberal ideology. But hey, let's not let facts get in the way of religious conservatism talk points.
I certainly agree that bearing children within marriage is a real benefit to the people in question as well as to society at large.
As far as advocating in favor of it, yes, its the right thing to do.
But there are no *political* advantages to doing so, if the question is how to solve the GOP's demographic/electoral challenges, considering the number engaged in having children out of wedlock which is the question posted by the OP. Tens of millions are born out of wedlock, berating people for this alienates a lot more voters than other issues. The Census Bureau , for example, estimates there are a total of just 180,000 gay marriage nationwide. Alienating that relative drop in the bucket is somehow considered a death sentence for the Republicans, this alienates a whole lot more.
That's why a Democrat should do it. Maybe Bill Cosby? Just kidding. Well, not really.
I think the Republicans should mostly stick up for their principles, not put their finger in the wind to see what people want to be told. My core principles are free enterprise and small government.
That said, hostility to gay marriage seems to be a hot-button issue for a lot more than 180,000 people, including me, and I would just drop it. Support for marriage is different from berating people for not being married, and there's a way to do it - I think.
The GOP can't seem to grasp the reality of the situation. When your policies are racially discriminatory as a matter of course, you can't fool the minority groups (or women) you have disdain for by PRETENDING to be receptive to their needs just for the election.
The GOP is toast. The demographic/electoral problems they face are insurmountable because the GOP is the party of Dixie.
I think the GOP is thriving and the Democrats should be changing some things.
How are the GOP's policies racially or gender discriminative?
They're not. That's a fake narrative put on us by the left. It has worked for many many years.
Go look at whom started the Republican party, I'll give you a hint, Abraham Lincoln.
Now who started the Democratic party as we now know it? Andrew Jackson. He gave us the Indian Removal Bill, put a 50.00 bounty on an escaped slave and offered 10.00 for every 100 lashings up to 300 lashings, a death sentence. Oh, and he raped young slaves too.
Due to the New Deal.. oh wait, the Democratic Party also started the KKK, used it as their military arm, without repercussions from their Democratic government. .. oh yeah, New Deal. Some African-Americans went Democratic for economic reasons.
The Big Switch, a Big Lie.
Boy, those Democrats are like Professional liars.
History is wonderful stuff. No wonder Crooked Hillary wanted to Move On or Move Forward or whatever she do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LexusNexus
The GOP can't seem to grasp the reality of the situation. When your policies are racially discriminatory as a matter of course, you can't fool the minority groups (or women) you have disdain for by PRETENDING to be receptive to their needs just for the election.
The GOP is toast. The demographic/electoral problems they face are insurmountable because the GOP is the party of Dixie.
Oh yeah, women! Y'all have been lying to them for years too.
Sufferagettes, that's right, Republicans! Democrats voted again and again and again to keep them down and denying them the right to even vote!
The GOP can't seem to grasp the reality of the situation. When your policies are racially discriminatory as a matter of course, you can't fool the minority groups (or women) you have disdain for by PRETENDING to be receptive to their needs just for the election.
The GOP is toast. The demographic/electoral problems they face are insurmountable because the GOP is the party of Dixie.
You may want to rethink this post. Any change in your thought process?
If the GOP is 'toast', why are there more elected Republicans than at any time since 1928 and Republicans control the House, Senate, State Governors, and state Legislatures? The obvious answer is that the Democrats are closer to being 'toast' than are the Repubs.
As far as discrination, the Dems own discrimination going back to supporting slavery, supporting rcially discriminatory policies favoring whites, and then racially discriminatory policies favoring blacks when that got them more votes. Repubs are the non-discrimination Party and always have been.
Republicans do grasp the need to expand their base in Presidential years, let's see if they are able to do it with a great candidate, if yes, the Dems will be 'toasted.'
You nailed it 8 months ago. Good thing the Dems were clueless.
If the GOP is 'toast', why are there more elected Republicans than at any time since 1928 and Republicans control the House, Senate, State Governors, and state Legislatures? The obvious answer is that the Democrats are closer to being 'toast' than are the Repubs.
As far as discrination, the Dems own discrimination going back to supporting slavery, supporting rcially discriminatory policies favoring whites, and then racially discriminatory policies favoring blacks when that got them more votes. Repubs are the non-discrimination Party and always have been.
Republicans do grasp the need to expand their base in Presidential years, let's see if they are able to do it with a great candidate, if yes, the Dems will be 'toasted.'
The Republican Party's demographics problem has been solved by the rise of independent internet media. The rise of the Alt-Right destroyed the hegemony of the globalist/multicultural narrative. The rise of the manosphere destroyed the hegemony of the feminist narrative. At least half of America’s single men (mainly young men) think feminism is nonsense. I see more and more young men of all stripes rejecting leftist nonsense. My young Gen-Z cousins are notably more conservative than my Millennial generation.
The democrats did not listen to the critics, that their unpopular president Obama will be bringing them down since passage of the ACA.
Sure enough, since then Democrats have been losing power steadily across the country. Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi once were on such high horses are now sitting in the back of bandwagons.
2. None of the Blue Wall states (those 18 states that have voted Democratic since 1992) were on the list of biggest ad buys. They are all among those 43 states that received 16% of the money. The Blue Wall states of Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin weren't seriously contested by the GOP, despite the fact that their Presidential nominee was a native of Michigan and the son of a former Governor and his running mate was a Congressman from Wisconsin. If the GOP's internal polling was so bad in the Midwest in 2012 that it wasn't seen as a good investment to spend money there to support native sons from Michigan and Wisconsin against an unpopular black President running in a poor economy, what does that say about their prospects in the Midwest in the future? If the industrial Midwest isn't that promising for the GOP, what about the other areas where demographics are clearly turning against them?
.
Romney was pro free trade, including NAFTA.
Trump wasn't. Game, set, match in 2016 for GOP.
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.