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.
At least someone else on here recognizes that social issues take a backseat when you're freezing in winter because they shut your heat off for lack of payment and the fridge is looking empty lately because your boss in your right to work state fired you because he was in a bad mood last night and decided to fire people to make himself feel better.
That right to work issue you stated is actually a social issue. Did you know that?
Don't mind the culture warriors, they've come out in droves to make sure no one finds out that all their shouting is really meant to be a distraction.
So stop trying to pass bat poop crazy legislation, and everyone else won't scream about it. That's the point--you radical nuts start this stuff, and then you complain that people aren't focusing on the ECONOMY instead when they oppose it. You don't get it both ways.
The other piece that some of you miss is that although most social policy is passed on a state by state basis, we live in a 24/7 cable news cycle world where people have instant access to information from everywhere. When you do something nutty in one state, everyone in the country knows about it. When you do something nutty in numerous states, everybody knows about it. The longer you keep doing nutty things, and the more widespread it becomes, the more it becomes part of your identity as a party, or your BRAND. That means that people start viewing all republicans as fools by association, and not just people like Todd Akin.
It's taken decades, but as the nuttiness has intensified, especially since the advent of the tea party and the evangelical right, the R brand is turning into trash. Once it's trashed, it can take a generation to gain your reputation back. The democrats dealt with the same situation in the late 70s--they were considered weak on the military, political ideologues, and big taxers and spenders, and it was tough for them to win a race. It's all cycling through on the R end now. You guys blew it.
So stop trying to pass bat poop crazy legislation, and everyone else won't scream about it. That's the point--you radical nuts start this stuff, and then you complain that people aren't focusing on the ECONOMY instead when they oppose it. You don't get it both ways.
Like the 2010 elections when GOP ran on "JOBS" and proceeded to spend the entire next two years trying to repeal Obamacare and looking for jobs in women's vaginas. It ended so well for the party, didn't it?
Like the 201 elections when GOP ran on "JOBS" and proceeded to spend the entire next two years trying to repeal Obamacare and looking for jobs in women's vaginas. It ended so well for the party, didn't it?
Exactly. That was the beginning of the end, where they started to really lose the support of moderate conservatives, especially women.
I think that oncve we actually start poaying for spening that created the deficit plus cut spending as part of it;social issues will start to take a backseat. As one person from a poor country once told me ;when your hungary little else matters but youyr next meal.
Social issue not so much, economic one yes. Right to work is a union busting measure, so it's more economic than social
Actually, right to work is not a union-busting measure at all. It's a worker's rights measure, and a variant of anti-trust legislation, where unions monopolize labor sources and compel dues to line their pockets.
Right-to-work legislation forces them to earn their dues by providing tangible beneficial services and competing for the worker's dues. Those that do not pay dues should be prevented from partaking in union services.
In other words, unions will now be forced to compete. I see that as a positive thing, and will ultimately empower some unions, turning them into strong service providers and advocates working on behalf of employees. The only ones that have something to fear are the ones that depend on compelling dues and fees by force and have little interest in actually representing the interests of their membership. Unfortunately there are too many unions like this...of course, even one is too many. Anyway, they'll be in trouble, and frankly they should be.
I see it as both a social issue and an economic one.
Exactly! As i've stated throughout this thread, the two are intertwined.
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.
Like the 2010 elections when GOP ran on "JOBS" and proceeded to spend the entire next two years trying to repeal Obamacare and looking for jobs in women's vaginas. It ended so well for the party, didn't it?
