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.
I love it! "Liberals" are destroying the nation! OMG what nonsense. Please NEVER forget that it was liberals who got women the right to vote, the right to equal opportunity, and much more. It's old angry white guys who want to keep women in second class status; which side do you stand on?
Bush was a one-man national wrecking crew with his "conservative" ways that have left us bankrupt and scorned, but you would deflect the blame via that old smoke screen of "the liberals did it." When it comes to kids and cowards, it's always the other guy who's guilty.
Crowds drawn by Beck and Palin indicate only that racism and stupidity run rampant and are getting worse. Staged train wrecks always drew a huge crowd too; sadly today's GOP is a never ending train wreck, with real carnage.
The purity pledge appeals to small mindedness; if the buffoons leading the GOP had followed those ten items they WOULDN'T be in the mess they're in now as a party in near total disgrace, scorn and ridicule.
Kicking out of the GOP the few remaining non-radicals is not going to help the GOP one bit, it'll continue to weaken them. They're on their way to being a 20% solution within a 100% electorate. Brilliant.
__________________
- Please follow our TOS.
- Any Questions about City-Data? See the FAQ list.
- Want some detailed instructions on using the site? See The Guide for plain english explanation.
- Realtors are welcome here but do see our Realtor Advice to avoid infractions.
- Thank you and enjoy City-Data.
1. Independent voters won't find many of those things objectionable.
Ok, how does that contradict the contention that the things on that list won't attract independents? Not finding something objectionable isn't remotely the same as finding something attractive.
2. Independent voters are starting to blame Obama, Reid and Pelosi for the current problems facing the country.
Ok, how does that contradict the contention that the things on that list won't attract independents? So they felt negatively towards Bush, and now may feel negatively towards Obama et al. That doesn't mean that they'll like or agree with a single thing on that list. There's no correlation.
So basically you still haven't given any reason that these policies, or the demand that any contender for public office who calls themselves a Republican must adhere to a minimum of 8 of them, will draw in independents.
What you don't factor in is the resentment they have about the current direction of the country. As time goes by, and another year will pass before the 2010 elections, the resentment against Bush fades out. The independent voters will evaluate Republican candidates who object to the current direction, and Democrats will attempt to paint them as "fringe". These issues spell out the issues, and the independent voters can determine if they truly are out of the mainstream, or are objectionable.
The current baseline will place the Democrats more on the defense here. For example, if Afghanistan isn't going well, the lack of Democrats following the advice of the General's in charge of the combat area can be brought up as a wedge issue.
I love it! "Liberals" are destroying the nation! OMG what nonsense. Please NEVER forget that it was liberals who got women the right to vote, the right to equal opportunity, and much more. It's old angry white guys who want to keep women in second class status; which side do you stand on?
Bush was a one-man national wrecking crew with his "conservative" ways that have left us bankrupt and scorned, but you would deflect the blame via that old smoke screen of "the liberals did it." When it comes to kids and cowards, it's always the other guy who's guilty.
Crowds drawn by Beck and Palin indicate only that racism and stupidity run rampant and are getting worse. Staged train wrecks always drew a huge crowd too; sadly today's GOP is a never ending train wreck, with real carnage.
The purity pledge appeals to small mindedness; if the buffoons leading the GOP had followed those ten items they WOULDN'T be in the mess they're in now as a party in near total disgrace, scorn and ridicule.
Kicking out of the GOP the few remaining non-radicals is not going to help the GOP one bit, it'll continue to weaken them. They're on their way to being a 20% solution within a 100% electorate. Brilliant.
All I have to say is watch and see. America is waking up and standing up to the demise of America at the hands of left wingers.
Last edited by dcsldcd; 11-24-2009 at 06:54 PM..
Reason: p
Not really, those who find these 10 listed items to be objectionable are the same posters who have discussed in multiple threads their disdain for Republicans. I can tell you that Republicans in California would generally support those items.
That isn't the target audience, even though they are the posters generally participating in this thread discussion. The RNC isn't interested in persuading those folks to support their candidates, rather they want to reactivate their base and a chunk of the independent voters.
It's not the ten listed items that are objectionable.
It's a party requiring loyalty that trumps the relationship between an elected official and his constituents.
The elected official should be answerable to his constituents, not to his party. Threatening to withhold financial support unless the elected official goes along with the party, even when the party tenets DON'T match the constituents' wants, is coercion.
I disagree with you here, I believe that a lot of the independent voters won't find many of those objectionable, especially if the "current" economic environment hasn't significantly improved by the next election cycle.
Quite a bit of Obama's support was a negative reaction to Bush. Despite the drumbeats of folks like Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann, most independent voters are now viewing the current circumstance the result of decisions being made by Obama, Reid and Pelosi.
And again, the ten items are not what's objectionable. It's a "purity" pledge that is objectionable. Loyalty oaths to a political party are objectionable. Loyalty oaths that are a form of coercion are even more objectionable. The oath of office our elected officials take is to the Constitution, not to some political agenda. Purify the Republican party, and you will lose members.
I think that anyone who has had sex outside of marriage should be expelled immediately. Those of you inside marriage we will need photographic evidence that you are doing it correctly
So you think your elected representative to Congress should be loyal to the party rather than loyal to the people in your district who elected him or her?
I think our elected representatives to Congress should be loyal to their constituents as well as to the ideals of the party that suported them. You see some sort of disconnect there, while I do not. If, while running for office, a candidate gains the support of a party by claiming to support that party's platform and ideals, then it's not a conflict at all to infer that the people who voted him into office want him to support that platform and those ideals. If the voters disagreed with that platform and those ideals, they wouldn't have elected him. If, once elected, he turns away from those positions, then he is abandoning his party as well as the constituents. In that case, why should the party continue to support him financially, instead of seeking someone who does in fact support their platform?
The GOP being beaten line is getting old. I know you want to beat your chest and really hope it happens, but this isn't Alice in wonder land just because you tap your shoes and want something really bad doesn't mean it will come true.
Sad thing is it's going to be till 2010 - 12 until we see what really happens. I'd be careful declaring the GOP beaten.
Quote:
I love it! "Liberals" are destroying the nation! OMG what nonsense. Please NEVER forget that it was liberals who got women the right to vote, the right to equal opportunity, and much more. It's old angry white guys who want to keep women in second class status; which side do you stand on?
Wow, the brain washing is strong in you. Liberals didn't get women the right to vote women got women the right to vote. What other myths do you subscribe to? Bill Clinton surplus? That if you are black you must vote democrat?
Destroying the nation is nonsense, it's a bit harsh i mean isn't it just California?
Fresh from their defeat in the NY 23rd Congressional District, the RNC is happily at work crafting their latest fantasy and sticking Ronald Reagan's name all over it, as if that confers sacred status and certain vote getting. Amazing for its stupidity. Simply amazing. The RNC comes up with it's version of "Back to the Future" starring Ronald Reagan's memory. Truth is, neither Reagan nor the idiot G. W. Bush would pass the GOP Purity Pledge, that's the twisted beauty of this latest execrable piece of GOP hypocrisy.
Item #1 of the GOP Purity Pledge calls for GOP candidates to support: "Smaller government, smaller national debt, lower deficits and lower taxes." Reagan FAILED on all four legs of this lame elephantine joke. The idiot Bush failed outright on all four, though he cut taxes in 2001, he did it with red ink and the deficits he left are a form of higher tax in that we're gonna pay that bill later and pay double for it by the time all the interest on that debt is added to the principal.
Item #5 of the GOP Purity Pledge calls for GOP candidates to support: "Legal immigration and assimilation into American society by opposing amnesty for illegal immigrants." Hell, it was a massive FAIL by Reagan who gladly gave amnesty to 6M illegals in 1986. I recall the lines of people that went clear around the local INS office as people lined up to apply for amnesty. The idiot Bush did nothing but turn a blind eye to the problem.
Source, MSNBC. Click to see all ten planks in the GOP stupidity pledge. These GOP guys haven't a clue. None. A race to the bottom.
Call it what you will. But the proposed pledge is likely the RNC's reading the writing on the wall. Party members are tired of sending money to the national committee only to see that money doled out to candidates (like Scozzafava in NY-23) whose Republican bona fides do not extend beyond placing an "R" after their name. And so they have been refusing to contribute in droves. Living in Maine and having two senators like Snowe and Collins I know what that is like. Let's turn the question around and ask if you (and I'm assuming that you're a Democrat) would like to see your campaign contributions go to re-elect Joe Lieberman?
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.
