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.
As it stands now, there's not a chance in hell I'd give this year's GOP a hearing on any of their views this year. If they ditched the Tea Party/Birther/Radical constituency in from the party, then they might attract more swing voters. At the very least, we might have a REAL debate about America's troubles instead of talking about the definition of "legitimate rape"
As it stands now, there's not a chance in hell I'd give this year's GOP a hearing on any of their views this year. If they ditched the Tea Party/Birther/Radical constituency in from the party, then they might attract more swing voters. At the very least, we might have a REAL debate about America's troubles instead of talking about the definition of "legitimate rape"
Any thoughts?
The DNC has p
This is what the liberty movement is all about. Check out PAUL Fest, the Liberty Classroom (Dr. Tom Woods' site), and The Ludwig Von Mises Institute.
Michael Bloomberg is a conservative on immigration reform? Isn't he the one that recently said we should move all illegal immigrants to Detroit and have them live there for 7 years?
Look, I am an advocate for a split in the GOP (and some centrist Democrats as well). I think the far-right members should form their own party (call it The Tea Party for all I care) and allow a resurgence of the 'Yankee Republicans' who care a lot about fiscal responsibility but recognize the role of government in promoting education and environmental standards in this country. I have a feeling that after this election, should the GOP lose (and the odds are still against them), there is going to be clamor for a much different direction for the GOP. And I hope that this means there will be a split and a third or fourth party emerges.
Michael Bloomberg is a conservative on immigration reform? Isn't he the one that recently said we should move all illegal immigrants to Detroit and have them live there for 7 years?
Look, I am an advocate for a split in the GOP (and some centrist Democrats as well). I think the far-right members should form their own party (call it The Tea Party for all I care) and allow a resurgence of the 'Yankee Republicans' who care a lot about fiscal responsibility but recognize the role of government in promoting education and environmental standards in this country. I have a feeling that after this election, should the GOP lose (and the odds are still against them), there is going to be clamor for a much different direction for the GOP. And I hope that this means there will be a split and a third or fourth party emerges.
I agree with this, especially in regards to the radical right forming their own party. It would make a real choice for us independents in regards to a major party - real Republicans who focus on real political issues instead of religious crap that has nothing and should have nothing to do with government.
Michael Bloomberg is a conservative on immigration reform? Isn't he the one that recently said we should move all illegal immigrants to Detroit and have them live there for 7 years?
Look, I am an advocate for a split in the GOP (and some centrist Democrats as well). I think the far-right members should form their own party (call it The Tea Party for all I care) and allow a resurgence of the 'Yankee Republicans' who care a lot about fiscal responsibility but recognize the role of government in promoting education and environmental standards in this country. I have a feeling that after this election, should the GOP lose (and the odds are still against them), there is going to be clamor for a much different direction for the GOP. And I hope that this means there will be a split and a third or fourth party emerges.
I think it will after but not after this election. The Republicans still think they can win elections with the same playbook they have been using for the past 48 years. It won't REALLY sink in that changes need to be made until about 2016 or 2020. In the interim I look for the party to get EVEN MORE CONSERVATIVE. I'm fact they will blame Mitt Romney for not being conservative enough to fire up the base.
As it stands now, there's not a chance in hell I'd give this year's GOP a hearing on any of their views this year. If they ditched the Tea Party/Birther/Radical constituency in from the party, then they might attract more swing voters. At the very least, we might have a REAL debate about America's troubles instead of talking about the definition of "legitimate rape"
Any thoughts?
Friedman is wrong. Tea party/birther/radicals are conservatives. All those tea partiers say they are conservatives. Nearly all birthers say they are conservatives.
What we need is a rational republican party that minimizes the views of conservatives and deals with reality in America and not these fantasies that have gripped people who call themselves conservatives.
This is a mainstream conservative view, Obama hates America, Obama is trying to destroy America, Obama is an anti-colonist. Obama is a socialist, communist, black radical. They believe that Obama has apologized for America, is either a muslim sympathizer, or a muslim. They believe he wants the terrorists to win. They believe that Obama is protecting the NBPP because he secretly hates white people.
They believe that America's universities are anti-American and teach anti-American history. They believe that American university professors are anti-American.
They believe that public schools indoctrinate Americans to hate America. They think that history books are anti-American
They think Hollywood and the media are anti-American and want to destroy it
They believe that black people are on a democratic plantation. They believe black people vote for Democrats because of handouts. They believe that a huge percentage of black people don't want to work and are lazy and are waging a race war against white people which is being covered up by the media.
They believe that many American muslims are trying to get sharia law and destroy America. They believe that many Mexican immigrants don't want to speak English and are trying to turn America into Mexico and are trying to destroy America.
They believe that the founders were all christian conservatives who'd agree with them.
They don't believe in global climate change, evolution, they believe that liberal scientists are trying to destroy America
Again these are mainstream conservative views. These ideas are not considered insane amongst those who call themselves conservatives. The republican party doesn't need more of that stuff.
Michael Bloomberg is a conservative on immigration reform? Isn't he the one that recently said we should move all illegal immigrants to Detroit and have them live there for 7 years?
Look, I am an advocate for a split in the GOP (and some centrist Democrats as well). I think the far-right members should form their own party (call it The Tea Party for all I care) and allow a resurgence of the 'Yankee Republicans' who care a lot about fiscal responsibility but recognize the role of government in promoting education and environmental standards in this country. I have a feeling that after this election, should the GOP lose (and the odds are still against them), there is going to be clamor for a much different direction for the GOP. And I hope that this means there will be a split and a third or fourth party emerges.
It's a misnomer that just because someone is against the Dept. of Education that means they are against education. First and foremost the DOE is failing our children, it's a money pit. It's a broken system but they only know how to call for more money. The DOE should be abolished. The Federal government has no business being involved in education, it's unconstitutional. Does that mean I'm against public education? Well I think privately handled education could thrive however I'm not opposed to states or local governments having a public option for poor students.
I care greatly about the environment. I do truly believe in conserving the earth and making sure we shepherd the earth smartly. However the EPA is unconstitutional and largely ineffective. Protecting the environment can be done by state and local governments, but also private citizens. It's mostly a property issue. If some giant corporation is dumping toxic waste into a river or a lake, those who hold river front and lake front property can sue that company but also the local government and/or the state government can step in and levy penalties.
What I dislike is the idea that because I'm against federal intrusion I don't care. I care greatly about education and the environment I just believe the federal government is ineffective at protecting either.
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 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.
