Conservative base and Palin ?

[I'm Cleo!]

The assertion that the Republicans and Democrats can't be told apart is really rather ignorant at face value, as it is very typical of people who don't even bother to stay informed. If not that, it's often just a segue into promotion of some minority viewpoint that isn't represented well by either of the two parties, and I deplore this tactic, whether it's by communists, libertarians, theocrats, or whomever. On most issues, and even the philosophical principles behind them, the Republicans and Democrats can be told apart very, very well, and I'd say this holds true for vast portions of the electorate they each aim to represent as well.

Well, I think someone (and by "someone," I mean "me," of course) can be excused for thinking this during the 1990s. We had just come off the presidency of H.W. Bush, a moderate center-right Republican, and entered the Clinton era, who, at least on economic policy, was a centrist. It was hard for me to imagine that the difference between Clinton and his successor would be as great as it was -- I assumed Bush would be more likely to support rich folks and big business than Clinton and Gore, but that the difference would be small. I didn't figure that Bush would start a war to invade and occupy another nation, set up a network of secret torture prisons around the world, engage in a massive program of illegal wiretapping of American citizens, and fail to oversee financial regulation (much of the power to do so stripped away by the Clinton administration, bear in mind) to such an extent that it would destroy the world economy. I was certainly naive (up until "Shock & Awe," for example, I didn't think we'd actually invade Iraq), but I think I might be given some leeway.

I guess it just depends on what you determine right or left wing issues. I don't see big government like Bush and the republicans having been giving the past 8 years to be a 'right' or 'conservative' thing.

This highlights a characteristic of conservatism (shared by communism) whereby conservative leaders are excised from the history of conservatism when they become unpopular. But for the tiniest handful of exceptions, conservative thinkers of all types were praising the Bush administration's efforts while he was popular, and proclaiming him a conservative hero. But when his policies failed massively and he became an albatross around the neck of "conservatism," those same policies all-of-a-sudden weren't "conservative" anymore.

I'm just making the point generally, though; I have no idea what you thought at the time. Perhaps you were claiming that Bush's policies were "too liberal" back in 2002-03, when he was phenomenally popular.

To your point, as Bill3000 said, there are issues other than "big vs. small government." Most of the increase in government under Bush was in defense spending. As a conservative, would you then support a large decrease in defense spending?

Cleo

 

[Cutlass]

Blame the Europeans. I see them constantly insisting that both our parties are practically the same thing and both in reality far right compared to their standards.

Both parties are considerably right of center as far as the average European are concerned. Both are still right of center as far as the average American are concerned, there's just more difference. In that the Democrats are slightly right of center and the Republicans are extremely right of center.

I guess it just depends on what you determine right or left wing issues. I don't see big government like Bush and the republicans having been giving the past 8 years to be a 'right' or 'conservative' thing.

See here you fail to separate rhetoric from reality. You cannot point to any time in US history when conservatives had a small government philosophy.

 

[Ulyaoth]

This highlights a characteristic of conservatism (shared by communism) whereby conservative leaders are excised from the history of conservatism when they become unpopular. But for the tiniest handful of exceptions, conservative thinkers of all types were praising the Bush administration's efforts while he was popular, and proclaiming him a conservative hero. But when his policies failed massively and he became an albatross around the neck of "conservatism," those same policies all-of-a-sudden weren't "conservative" anymore.

I'm just making the point generally, though; I have no idea what you thought at the time. Perhaps you were claiming that Bush's policies were "too liberal" back in 2002-03, when he was phenomenally popular.

To your point, as Bill3000 said, there are issues other than "big vs. small government." Most of the increase in government under Bush was in defense spending. As a conservative, would you then support a large decrease in defense spending?

Cleo

I never really liked anything Bush did specifically, not that I can think of. He set us down the road to being crap, but it was reversible until the country decided to put in the putzes we have now simply to spite the republicans. I just don't see how trillions and trillions of dollars in debt is going to help anything. I wouldn't know if I'd be conservative really anyway though, that would mean I like the status quo, which right now is for big government and corporatism.

For defense spending, yeah I'd be fine with a large decrease, even with a massive decrease in spending we'd still have the best army in the world from what I've seen. Come back from Iraq, stop unconditionally supporting Israel, and we'd probably lose a lot of our enemies anyway.

Both parties are considerably right of center as far as the average European are concerned. Both are still right of center as far as the average American are concerned, there's just more difference. In that the Democrats are slightly right of center and the Republicans are extremely right of center.

There's more difference now that republicans reeling from the past few losses are trying to find some base in ultra neo-cons or reagonism or whatever, same as the democrats had been doing except going slightly left from losing the presidency twice and the congress for however many years it was.

 

[sumit1207]

To the people saying the Democratic Party is more conservative than the average American: what the hell are you talking about?
As if somehow the political interests of over half the country is completely disregarded. In case you haven't noticed, Americans are indeed very conservative(40+%), and liberals (myself included) are a small minority (20% at most).

 

[Cutlass]

There's more difference now that republicans reeling from the past few losses are trying to find some base in ultra neo-cons or reagonism or whatever, same as the democrats had been doing except going slightly left from losing the presidency twice and the congress for however many years it was.

The point that's missed is that the Democrats have moved to the right steadily since Reagan was elected. They did so because the perception was that the party was too liberal, and that's why they were loosing elections. But moving to the right failed to improve their possition in elections, and they didn't get back to prominence until the Republicans moved vastly to the right, and failed miserably in governing the country at the same time.

We really could use some liberals about now, but there are none to be found.

 

[Ulyaoth]

To the people saying the Democratic Party is more conservative than the average American: what the hell are you talking about?
As if somehow the political interests of over half the country is completely disregarded. In case you haven't noticed, Americans are indeed very conservative(40+%), and liberals (myself included) are a small minority (20% at most).

That's just what they call themselves. Non conservatives were 60% obviously if you're going on the poll I think you're referring to. Most of the moderates are probably just liberals afraid to call themselves such, though probably many conservatives doing the same as well.

And the democrats moved slightly to the right economically, socially they moved left, in wanting the healthcare and welfare and things like that. I'm curious as to what you deem liberal?

 

[Cutlass]

To the people saying the Democratic Party is more conservative than the average American: what the hell are you talking about?
As if somehow the political interests of over half the country is completely disregarded. In case you haven't noticed, Americans are indeed very conservative(40+%), and liberals (myself included) are a small minority (20% at most).

Well, for example, the public wants universal health care, and the Democratic party is too conservative to push it through.

 

[sumit1207]

That's just what they call themselves. Non conservatives were 60% obviously if you're going on the poll I think you're referring to. Most of the moderates are probably just liberals afraid to call themselves such, though probably many conservatives doing the same as well.

And the democrats moved slightly to the right economically, socially they moved left, in wanting the healthcare and welfare and things like that. I'm curious as to what you deem liberal?

At least some combination of pro-choice/gay marriage/environment/universal health care/anti-war. 4/5 is good enough.

Well, for example, the public wants universal health care, and the Democratic party is too conservative to push it through.

Yeah, the public may want lots of things the country can't pay for without higher taxes. Once that's mentioned, the public probably turns against it. The majority may favor a public option, but then again, so does the White House, and I believe a majority in both House and Senate, but I doubt more than 1/3 want a single-payer system, which I'm guessing only about 20-25 senators and 80ish representatives would support.

 

[Ulyaoth]

Well my question was directed at Cutlass but you just mentioned what I've gotten liberal to basically be in America.

 

[Bill3000]

To the people saying the Democratic Party is more conservative than the average American: what the hell are you talking about?
As if somehow the political interests of over half the country is completely disregarded. In case you haven't noticed, Americans are indeed very conservative(40+%), and liberals (myself included) are a small minority (20% at most).

That's self identification, oddly enough. People's positions on issues hasn't really changed that much. It should be pretty obvious that "conservative" is considered a positive word since the 80s and so people identify with it. Besides, there's plenty of people who identify as conservatives who are Democrats.

 

[Cutlass]

And the democrats moved slightly to the right economically, socially they moved left, in wanting the healthcare and welfare and things like that. I'm curious as to what you deem liberal?

First, liberals should stop putzing around and say once and for all that gay marriage is a fundamental Constitutional right of all Americans. No more pandering to the bigot vote. Second, no more pandering to special interests. We have a party of big business in the US, and that's the Republicans. We don't need another. We need someone who will stand up for labor and consumers. A liberal party wouldn't be such wussies about the environment. Liberals understand that unregulated capitalism is the road to economic disaster. But regulating every single thing you can think of is no good either. Thee is a middle ground that works, and it's been lost. Liberals understand that universal healthcare flat out costs so much less than what we are currently paying that it would in effect be free to nationalize the whole mess. Liberals understand, or at least once upon a time in the pre-Reagan era they did, that if you're going to have big government, then pay for the damned thing. Don't just deficit spend because it's politically easier than acting responsibly is.

 

[MobBoss]

Well, for example, the public wants universal health care, and the Democratic party is too conservative to push it through.

The public isnt willing to pay what it costs.

 

[Coral]

Well, for example, the public wants universal health care, and the Democratic party is too conservative to push it through.

People want it, but they don't really want to pay for it. If it really were something that would be popular in the longterm, the Democrats would have already pushed it through.

Romney came to a reasonable compromise on healthcare because he had to deal with a massive Democratic majority. So he had to develop a system that pleased both himself and the legislature, and he managed it. Unfortunately, ever since he started running for President, he stopped supporting the plan to please the conservative base, even though he managed to increase participation without seriously ballooning the costs.

If the Republicans want to seriously offer a compromise with the Democrats, they should look to Romney's plan.

 

[Cutlass]

The public isnt willing to pay what it costs.

Even though it costs far less than what we currently pay? It's effectively free.

 

[JollyRoger]

The public isnt willing to pay what it costs.

Yes they are, they just don't realize they are already paying it.

 

[Neonanocyborgasm]

IMHO, the Republican Party would do well to split itself apart. They try too hard to be conservative on such a broad range of issues, from religion to foreign policy to the economy and government, while it quickly becomes clear that these ideas are too conflicting to be held by a single party. E.g. Bush, who expanded the government tremendously and embarked on a policy of rampant fiscal irresponsibility. A more socially liberal while economically conservative party composed of moderate Republicans would do very well and take a very large chunk of the independent vote. That's why Romney won in Massachusetts and why Republican governors tend to do well in blue states--a lot of people want both fiscal responsibility and social progressivism.

The official Republican party platform amounts to favoring the interests of the wealthy while supporting conservative social issues in order to appeal to the rest of the voters. Those candidates you speak of, form what I've observed, deviate significantly from party lines. If the party were to split, I don't see how they would be viable.

 

[Formaldehyde]

The assertion that the Republicans and Democrats can't be told apart is really rather ignorant at face value, as it is very typical of people who don't even bother to stay informed.

You should learn to read and understand what I post before attacking it. They can certainly be told apart by a number of petty issues that everybody harps upon, but for the most part they are quite similiar. They promote what is essentially the American status quo with no major revisions.

OTOH political parties in other countries are quite different by comparison. Most countries span the entire range of political parties from communists to nazis, and most of them can't agree on anything. The Roman Catholic Church even has its own political party in most countries. And when a different political party gains control of the government there are typically fundamental changes, unlike the American systems which promotes stability through compromise and consensus.

Anybody who runs for office and actually wants fundamental change doesn't stand a chance in this country. He is immediately vilified by even his own party:


Link to video.

To use your own absurd personal attack against you, the assertion that Republicans and Democrats are as different as night and day is rather ignorant at face value and it is very typical of people who can't think at all.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/09/080923125138.htm

“The one thing that struck me the most was that the value differences were rather small - really, people were more alike than different, in that almost everybody favored intrinsic values more than extrinsic values,” Sheldon said.

“It was just a small relative difference between the two parties. Still, these data suggest that economic conservatives have been ”drafting” on the values of religious conservatives, using conservative Christians” willingness to care for less fortunate others as a cover for their own willingness to exploit the situation,” he added.

Link to video.

http://fromthepew.blogspot.com/2008/01/democrats-and-republicans-are-same.html

The Democrats and The Republicans Are The Same

Once upon a time, a Democrat was president. But he brought us a war. Fed up, the people elected a Republican. But he brought us scandal and shame. Fed up, the people elected a Democrat. But he was incompetent. Fed up, the people elected a Republican. Although he did some good things, he also brought us scandal. But the people weren't fed up enough to elect a Democrat. But his VP successor broke a promise and hurt the economy. Fed up, the people elected a Democrat. But he brought us scandal and shame. Fed up, the people elected a Republican. But he brought us war and an attack on personal freedom. Fed up... well, I'll have to wait until November. This same story could be written about the Congress, or about all 50 states, or about thousands of counties.

The political pendulum swings back and forth between parties. What most people miss is that no matter which direction the pendulum swings, at either end the pendulum is still connected to the same clock. In a nutshell, the Democrats stand for big government programs, while the Republicans stand for big business. But as I pointed out in my recent post, corporations are created by the state and are simply doing big business of a big government. Or as James Leroy Wilson points out in a recent comment of a Michael Kinsley critique of libertarianism, I quote: "...at least Kinsley doesn't resort to the finger-wagging about morality from the Right and the 'corporate greed! corporate greed!' mantra of the Left. (When will the Left realize that the modern Corporation is an invention of government?)"

Contrary to perception the real argument between Democrats and Republicans is not whether the American people should be kept on a leash. The debate is always about how long the leash should be. When big government programs are fashionable, the government profits. When big government corporations are fashionable, the government profits. All the fighting between Democrats and Republicans will never accomplish anything because they have the same goal: government is in control. This is what makes the Democrats and Republicans the same. They both hold the same leash.