Jump to content

2012: The Issues


Johnny Reb

Recommended Posts

It took someone like Bill Clinton to come in and shut down the more ideaological suicide wing of the party. Now everything has shifted. I dont know if it will happen in 2016, but at some point, a centrist, pro gay marriage, pro choice anti-extremist candidate will emerge from the right.

 

I wouldn't expect a pro-choice candidate. Whereas the numbers are strong and improving re: gay marriage approval, I don't see such a shift regarding abortion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pro-life can be justified. Anti-gay marriage cannot.

 

What I mean by that is... scientifically, there's an argument to abortion and what you believe there. Personally, I'm pro-choice. I still frown upon abortions and think they're wrong, but I feel as though it's not my call to make (however very dependent on the situation).

 

WIth gay marriage though, there's no logic you can place forth to deny it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It took someone like Bill Clinton to come in and shut down the more ideaological suicide wing of the party. Now everything has shifted. I dont know if it will happen in 2016, but at some point, a centrist, pro gay marriage, pro choice anti-extremist candidate will emerge from the right.

 

I wouldn't expect a pro-choice candidate. Whereas the numbers are strong and improving re: gay marriage approval, I don't see such a shift regarding abortion.

 

I expect Hillary Clinton to run in the next 8 years.

 

I'm afraid to say it but I think she can win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Republican Party needs to actually define what it stands for. There needs to be some ideological consistency within the Party. You can't pretend to stand for small-government and have no real plan for cutting spending. I think Rand Paul would be a great candidate in 2016. He's more willing to compromise than his father, and he's more articulate and charismatic. I just hope the Republicans move in that direction and not towards a more moderate one with pragmatism being the driving ideology. That's undefinable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Republican Party needs to actually define what it stands for. There needs to be some ideological consistency within the Party. You can't pretend to stand for small-government and have no real plan for cutting spending. I think Rand Paul would be a great candidate in 2016. He's more willing to compromise than his father, and he's more articulate and charismatic. I just hope the Republicans move in that direction and not towards a more moderate one with pragmatism being the driving ideology. That's undefinable.

 

Exactly.

 

Thinking back on this, the primaries were a succession of "anybody but Romney" -- Santorum, Bachmann, Cain, Perry, Gingrich.

 

Romney beat 'em all, one after another. He countered his reputation for philosophical mush by picking Ryan and was starting to sound like an actual conservative. Until he went moderate and "reasonable" -- don't want scare scare the wimmin or the horses -- late in the game.

 

And he wound up like other faux conservatives Dole and McCain and Bush 41 (and Bush 43 for that matter, even though he squeaked by in '00.) While he got a few more votes in some of the contested states than did McCain, the fact that he'll wind up with many million fewer total votes than McCain got in '08 is just more evidence that mushy conservatism doesn't excite voters in the least. Turn-out was a failure, which only demonstrates that people won't bother to vote without good, clearly stated reasons.

 

So, yeah, Rand Paul or Marco Rubio or Paul Ryan or some other hard-core conservative with principles who actually will do some real slicing of the budget and who actually understand the imperative of growth and the effects of marginal tax rates is needed. Enough of the moderate schmucks. And enough of the bible-thumpers.

 

The country will be ready for a real conservative after 4 more years of economic disaster.

 

The only good thing about this defeat is that Big Bird-in-chief gets to deal with what he has wrought in the last 4 years. The next 4 years will be painful, but they'll put an end to the idiocy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rand Paul is probably close to Rubio and Ryan on economic issues - but on social issues, which is really the cause for the rejection of the Republican party among Hispanics and women, he's where we need to be. People like Rubio and Ryan, however, don't seem too fixed on social beliefs and would eventually come around if the Party decides to take the libertarian route.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is coming up with things to actually cut that are politically palatable. If you saying you're cutting defense, that's a problem with large segments of the electorate. The same is true should you attempt to cut Medicare or Social Security. As long as Democrats have socially liberal stances too, it will be difficult for a fiscal libertarian to gain the consensus needed to win a general election.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The right kind of charismatic messenger can deliver a "cut it all" approach until it is fixed. You answer the stupid "won't prioritize" canard with "My priority is the fiscal survival of the Republic, we can fight over what we are going to spend money on when we have money to spend"

 

I think that's pretty dubious, but time may tell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...