From the desk of Newt :)

Damocles said:
Duh. This was my point to you earlier. All they had to do to take the power away from the (superhero voice) Religious "Conservative" (/superhero voice) was to simply agree.

If this is the measure of "conservative" and the only thing of importance to them, then you've lost and will continue to lose.
Click to expand...

Pshaw! Most Obama supporters don't even understand that he is anti gay marriage! Bush himself was only willing to support a constitutional amendment because of activist judges over stepping their judicial powers. His real desire was for states to work it out apart from the federal government. On this issue, states being the dicisive factor, he and Obama were on the same page.
 
Ice Dancer said:
Pshaw! Most Obama supporters don't even understand that he is anti gay marriage! Bush himself was only willing to support a constitutional amendment because of activist judges over stepping their judicial powers. His real desire was for states to work it out apart from the federal government. On this issue, states being the dicisive factor, he and Obama were on the same page.
Click to expand...
Those supporters who voted for him in California and for Prop 8 definitely knew he was against gay marriage.

And you are densely rejecting the idea that those who are not conservative in either way can be swayed back to the left if they just promise to make the marriage of Steve and Adam "important" to them too.

I reject any idea that conservatism is measured by "who most prays", and if we continue to measure it by that standard the republican party will forever be a minority. Reagan won by using personal freedom and responsibility as a standard, not by using anti-gay.
 
Damocles said:
Those supporters who voted for him in California and for Prop 8 definitely knew he was against gay marriage.

And you are densely rejecting the idea that those who are not conservative in either way can be swayed back to the left if they just promise to make the marriage of Steve and Adam "important" to them too.

I reject any idea that conservatism is measured by "who most prays", and if we continue to measure it by that standard the republican party will forever be a minority. Reagan won by using personal freedom and responsibility as a standard, not by using anti-gay.
Click to expand...

Those supporters in CA voted demographically exactly the same as the rest of black america! It had nothing whatsoever to do with gay marriage. That Black america is largely against gay marriage proves only that gay marriage is an issue for black America, who except on the gay marriage issue break over 90% of the time for a democrat..

I guarentee that the demographic on the democrat and independent vote had nothing whatsoever to do with gay marriage.

I have never been a proponent of "who prays the most" is, or should be, a standard of measuement for the GOP. What I have said is that to dismiss the family values constituency would be foolish on the part of the GOP. There really is a large faction of Americans on all sides, that desire traditional values candidates to be serving.
 
Ice Dancer said:
Those supporters in CA voted demographically exactly the same as the rest of black america! It had nothing whatsoever to do with gay marriage. That Black america is largely against gay marriage proves only that gay marriage is an issue for black America, who except on the gay marriage issue break over 90% of the time for a democrat..

I guarentee that the demographic on the democrat and independent vote had nothing whatsoever to do with gay marriage.

I have never been a proponent of "who prays the most" is, or should be, a standard of measuement for the GOP. What I have said is that to dismiss the family values constituency would be foolish on the part of the GOP. There really is a large faction of Americans on all sides, that desire traditional values candidates to be serving.
Click to expand...
Again, you are ignoring the fact that the left has stolen another of the "issues" from the religious right by simply agreeing. You can stand there and insist it was something that made them win in the past, but it doesn't recognize recent and consistent losses on the same principal.

And again, if you MEASURE CONSERVATISM by this, then conservatism is no more.

It seems to be the only part of "conservatism" you are concerned with. It is silly to take the whole party onto this track and ignore things like, "No nation-building wars", and "smaller government with more personal freedom".

If we continue to lack actual conservatism and pretend that the measure of conservatism (as it has been the past 8 years with Bush) be "who most prays" then we will fail. Period. And we'll deserve it.
 
you lost your ass because you preach family values and dozens of you republican congressman like gay sex.
 
Damocles said:
Again, you are ignoring the fact that the left has stolen another of the "issues" from the religious right by simply agreeing. You can stand there and insist it was something that made them win in the past, but it doesn't recognize recent and consistent losses on the same principal.

And again, if you MEASURE CONSERVATISM by this, then conservatism is no more.

It seems to be the only part of "conservatism" you are concerned with. It is silly to take the whole party onto this track and ignore things like, "No nation-building wars", and "smaller government with more personal freedom".

If we continue to lack actual conservatism and pretend that the measure of conservatism (as it has been the past 8 years with Bush) be "who most prays" then we will fail. Period. And we'll deserve it.
Click to expand...

I ignore it because it isn't true! The media never covered Obama's anti gay positition in any meaningful way that got anyones attention, most Obama voters don't even likely know his position! Show me some stats that show anti gay marriage voters broke for Obama becaue he was anti gay marriage.
 
Ice Dancer said:
I ignore it because it isn't true! The media never covered Obama's anti gay positition in any meaningful way that got anyones attention, most Obama voters don't even likely know his position! Show me some stats that show anti gay marriage voters broke for Obama becaue he was anti gay marriage.
Click to expand...
One more time. We lost the election previous to this one as well and Obama was not a factor. The reason we lost on that issue specifically this is because the Democratic Party's biggest candidates AGREE.

This CANNOT BE THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE FOR R'S any longer. As long as it is, and we ignore all other conservative ideas while pressing it like we have the past 8 years, then we will fail and deserve to fail.

If this is your most important issue and you think Bush has been great therefore, then you need to get out of the way, you are the dinosaur that led us into the smallest minority we've ever held since I have been alive.

Step aside if all you are is a religious "conservative" and let the Reagan republicans back into the fore. We've seen how it would be if you have prominence in the party. It sucks.

I understand that it cannot be ignored, but it can be put secondary to smaller government, larger personal responsibility, government within its proscribed bounds in the constitution... These issues must take the fore, they are the ones that gave us our largest majority since I have been alive. The Contract with America held far more of these principles than it did anti-gay and it led to our first majority in Congress in a long... long time.
 
Damocles said:
One more time. We lost the election previous to this one as well and Obama was not a factor. The reason we lost on that issue specifically this is because the Democratic Party's biggest candidates AGREE.

This CANNOT BE THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE FOR R'S any longer. As long as it is, and we ignore all other conservative ideas while pressing it like we have the past 8 years, then we will fail and deserve to fail.

If this is your most important issue and you think Bush has been great therefore, then you need to get out of the way, you are the dinosaur that led us into the smallest minority we've ever held since I have been alive.

Step aside if all you are is a religious "conservative" and let the Reagan republicans back into the fore. We've seen how it would be if you have prominence in the party. It sucks.

I understand that it cannot be ignored, but it can be put secondary to smaller government, larger personal responsibility, government within its proscribed bounds in the constitution... These issues must take the fore, they are the ones that gave us our largest majority since I have been alive. The Contract with America held far more of these principles than it did anti-gay and it led to our first majority in Congress in a long... long time.
Click to expand...

It is you that does not listen or read clearly!

WE DID NOT lose any election because of gay marriage nor did Obama win because of it. We lost in 2006 because of the PR campaign against the GOP and the Bush administrations allowing the dems to frame the arguments and then not even defeding themselves. After we had our asses handed to us in 2006 our reps acted like whipped dogs and raced to the middle. No one wants middle of the road politicians. To have real balance in government you need to have two opposing parties represented. Of course it goes without saying that this was only successful prior to 1992 because we basically had the unifying element where both sides ideological cores were based around a federal republic, whose economic system was capitalism. We are now in a new era of a polarized economic ideological battle of which it appears capitalism is losing. Gay marriage is merely a distraction. Not to say that the argument is unimportant, just not what the stakes are actually about.
 
Ice Dancer said:
It is you that does not listen or read clearly!

WE DID NOT lose any election because of gay marriage nor did Obama win because of it. We lost in 2006 because of the PR campaign against the GOP and the Bush administrations allowing the dems to frame the arguments and then not even defeding themselves. After we had our asses handed to us in 2006 our reps acted like whipped dogs and raced to the middle. No one wants middle of the road politicians. To have real balance in government you need to have two opposing parties represented. Of course it goes without saying that this was only successful prior to 1992 because we basically had the unifying element where both sides ideological cores were based around a federal republic, whose economic system was capitalism. We are now in a new era of a polarized economic ideological battle of which it appears capitalism is losing. Gay marriage is merely a distraction. Not to say that the argument is unimportant, just not what the stakes are actually about.
Click to expand...
We lost that election because the GOP had nothing other than anti-gay referendums to hope to get people out to vote. They were no longer trusted because they outspent even the drunkest democrat and did not act conservatively fiscally, or when speaking of personal responsibility. We lost because the party followed people like Ted Haggard into obscurity and hypocrisy and lost site of the best tenets of the party which are: Individual freedom, constitutionally bound government, fiscal conservatism, a hope for a smaller government... These are the things that get us elected, not Gay crap. We lost because we didn't force our elected leaders to act like republicans.

People are, wisely, rejecting people that act like people expect Democrats to act, except they pray more.

People question "conservatism" because we let people who think Steve and Adam's marriage is the most important issue get into power in the party and lead us away from the fundamental principals of the party.

We stopped acting like conservatives for so long, many conservatives began to think that the only thing that makes a "conservatism" is exactly how often they sit in the pew. We cannot let those people into the top echelon of the party again, we'll be doomed. We must center the party on very real conservative core values of fiscal responsibility, personal responsibility, individual freedom, constitutionally bound government.

That the smaller the government and the more local the more efficient it is...
 
My opinion is that the GOP candidates should state their positions clearly, telling the voters how they would vote. Assuming they will be in the minority regarding abortion and such. Should not be the primary focus, but should be consistent.

That is enough.

What I'm appalled at, is the number of 'conservatives' trying to sell ID as science. Talk about Luddites!
 
Annie said:
My opinion is that the GOP candidates should state their positions clearly, telling the voters how they would vote. Assuming they will be in the minority regarding abortion and such. Should not be the primary focus, but should be consistent.

That is enough.

What I'm appalled at, is the number of 'conservatives' trying to sell ID as science. Talk about Luddites!
Click to expand...

You might as well just throw away the Republican Parties charter. That's just an ideological litmus test trying to force conformity with in the party. It is the perfect recipe for shrinking the party. It would be tantamount to stating. We will not tolerate dissent. You will tow the party line and you will be a conservative no matter how extreme we define it.
 
Mottleydude said:
You might as well just throw away the Republican Parties charter. That's just an ideological litmus test trying to force conformity with in the party. It is the perfect recipe for shrinking the party. It would be tantamount to stating. We will not tolerate dissent. You will tow the party line and you will be a conservative no matter how extreme we define it.
Click to expand...

none of your givens at the end. It may be a lost cause, like I said shouldn't be a litmus, but may via the likes of you painted.
 
Damocles said:
We lost that election because the GOP had nothing other than anti-gay referendums to hope to get people out to vote. They were no longer trusted because they outspent even the drunkest democrat and did not act conservatively fiscally, or when speaking of personal responsibility. We lost because the party followed people like Ted Haggard into obscurity and hypocrisy and lost site of the best tenets of the party which are: Individual freedom, constitutionally bound government, fiscal conservatism, a hope for a smaller government... These are the things that get us elected, not Gay crap. We lost because we didn't force our elected leaders to act like republicans.

People are, wisely, rejecting people that act like people expect Democrats to act, except they pray more.

People question "conservatism" because we let people who think Steve and Adam's marriage is the most important issue get into power in the party and lead us away from the fundamental principals of the party.

We stopped acting like conservatives for so long, many conservatives began to think that the only thing that makes a "conservatism" is exactly how often they sit in the pew. We cannot let those people into the top echelon of the party again, we'll be doomed. We must center the party on very real conservative core values of fiscal responsibility, personal responsibility, individual freedom, constitutionally bound government.

That the smaller the government and the more local the more efficient it is...
Click to expand...

You are obviously going to promote and stand by your own prejudices as the reason for our 2006 losses even though exit polling and political opinion points to the reasons I stated in this thread, not traditional values, so be it.

Some references:

Here

Here

Here

Here
 
Ice Dancer said:
You are obviously going to promote and stand by your own prejudices as the reason for our 2006 losses even though exit polling and political opinion points to the reasons I stated in this thread, not traditional values, so be it.

Some references:

Here

Here

Here

Here
Click to expand...
Yes, I am. Exit polls are only as good as the questions asked.

Basically we agree, the Rs go back to being conservatives and run as conservatives and they'll win. What we don't agree on is the slavish devotion to the religious experience. It is wrecking the party.
 
Damocles said:
Yes, I am. Exit polls are only as good as the questions asked.

Basically we agree, the Rs go back to being conservatives and run as conservatives and they'll win. What we don't agree on is the slavish devotion to the religious experience. It is wrecking the party.
Click to expand...

bush ran as a conservative.
I think not many believe the running as conservatives when the empirical evidence says otherwise.

One must walk the talk.
 
uscitizen said:
bush ran as a conservative.
I think not many believe the running as conservatives when the empirical evidence says otherwise.

One must walk the talk.
Click to expand...
Bush ran as a "Compassionate Conservative" which was shown to be an overspender with no notion of conservatism other than pew time. But yeah, this is exactly what I am talking about. We ran ourselves out of business supporting larger government, overspending, nation-building wars (a direct promise broken), and not acting like conservatives.

It was mind-blowing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top