Conservative

Discussion in 'Politics' started by SolaSaint, Feb 15, 2012.

  1. SolaSaint

    SolaSaint
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2009
    Messages:
    2,824
    Likes Received:
    25
    Hi all,

    I'm confused about our conservatisim in America. Look at any statistics about politics and you will find that around 60% of Americans claim to be conservative, lees than 40% are democrat. Look at the nightly TV ratings to see who is tuning into politics and overwhelmingly conservative shows over double and in some cases triple the number of watchers. Around 80% of Americans are pro life and pro marriage. I could go on and on.

    So with this in mind how do we elect a radical communist leaning Marxist who even told us he was a socialist? And even now after showing us how socialy and fiscally liberal he is, Americans still favor him over a conservative candidate?

    Either our polls are whacked or our conservatives are too lasy to vote. Again, I'm confused.
     
  2. preachinjesus

    preachinjesus
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    7,406
    Likes Received:
    99
    :wavey:

    I would challenge these stats...particularly the 80% are pro-life part.

    Well one point is that most Americans don't weigh their values when they go and vote. Most Americans who vote simply take whatever is given to them in press, run it through their coherentist/pragmatist epistemology, and then see who appeals to them the most. Well...I should say this, the 20% of Americans who actually decide elections, this applies to them.

    The 40% Democrat and 40% Republican who vote that way always don't really matter to this conversation do they? So its the 20% we need to consider.

    Since I'm neither Democrat nor Republican, I can say that the candidates I support are carefully weighed. Yet when I talk to my fellow independents, I often see them evaluating candidates by purely ad hoc rationale that makes to sense. But that is how they make most decisions.

    So I guess my essential appeal here is to not try to understand this through a logical system...because electoral politics are anything but logical. Then consider the upcoming general election. After about $1 billion being spent this is the outcome: four more years of President Obama. Romney, the RNC nominee, will be trounced because he's got nothing to offer. The House will stay Republican, the Senate will stay Democrat but gain some Republican seats. So after billions of dollars of campaigning (that could be spent better elsewhere) we'll essentially have what we have right now. Why? Because the American public has no clue what they're doing in life or in making decisions. It isn't logical but it is our system.

    So, now that I've been a deputy downer...let me leave you in peace...:thumbs:
     
  3. SolaSaint

    SolaSaint
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2009
    Messages:
    2,824
    Likes Received:
    25
    Your probably right except it won't be Romney.
     
  4. J.D.

    J.D.
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2006
    Messages:
    3,553
    Likes Received:
    8
    The problem is that the republican party always rigs the primaries so that only the establishment (liberal) candidate gets nominated. Then conservatives stay home on the first Tuesday in November.

    The solution is to split the republican party so we conservatives will have someone we can vote for. What's left of the establishment after the split would eventually dissolve and be absorbed by the democrats because liberals of a feather should flock together.
     
  5. glfredrick

    glfredrick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    Messages:
    4,996
    Likes Received:
    0
    There are all sorts of issues that crop up when speaking about the populace in general concerning conservative/liberal political issues.

    Much of the vote is led by the national media who are psychological experts at manipulating public opinion. They do it every year when they help the Republical Party elect at best a moderate and if possible a McCain, Romney, etc. (we must bear in mind that Romney could not even outclass McCain last time, yet now he is the heir apparent?).

    I've shown people newspaper treatments of candidates. Once pointed out, they are shocked at the blatant aspects of the spin applied to any given candidate. We saw a little dose of that applied last cycle to Hillary when the media decided that Obama was their man. Even SHE was shocked at the treatment, but she should have known better. She and Bill perfected the product.

    Then there is the meme that stipulates that candidates are all alike anyway, which is also patently false. I wrote this in response to billwald in another thread:

    There is a difference and the difference is in the CORE PHILOSOPHY of the candidate, not in their position, stance, party platform, etc., though those issues will generally follow their worldview.

    We have become such an ignoramt electorate -- and that on purpose because the teachers union will not allow teachers to actually teach historically accurate civics. We are now almost born socialists and don't even realize it, until as Locke argued, tyranny finally is noted in the populace, who have long-suffererd the evils of their government in benevolence toward the status quo, until such time as they raise up and set in place a new government of, by, and for the people once again.

    WE ARE THERE...
     
  6. InTheLight

    InTheLight
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    16,265
    Likes Received:
    619
    Really? What about:
    Nineteen Fifty-Two
    Nineteen Sixty-Four
    Nineteen Eighty
    Nineteen Eighty-Four
     
    #6 InTheLight, Feb 15, 2012
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 15, 2012
  7. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,130
    Likes Received:
    221
    But many would say, "I am personally oppose to abortion, but it should be left up to the individual."
     
  8. Alcott

    Alcott
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2002
    Messages:
    7,457
    Likes Received:
    93
    Those percentages are really worthless. And I don't think "any statistics" show similar numbers, anyway. Opinion polls are dependent on the way the questions are worded. Assuming the numbers you state do come from some opinion poll, they can be explained like this: the questions may have been worded like "Do you think our present system of national, state, and local governments are worth conserving as they are now?" Most Americans would probably answer 'yes' or 'yes with minor changes,' and would then be labeled "conservative" by that answer. But the question says virtually nothing about the role of government at its various levels, which is a much greater divider between conservative and liberal, and has been for more than half a century. And the 'pro-life' and 'pro-marriage' number is easier than that to explain. If you simply ask a person at random, "Are you 'pro-life?'" what would you expect the compilation of answers to be? If the question is really "Are you for or against legal abortions?" it would not be anywhere close to 80% either way. But 'pro-life' can be understood to mean no abortions, no death penalty, no military action, or the best quality of life to anyone. And 'pro-marriage'-- wow, few people would say otherwise to that; but "gays" would say they are 'pro-marriage' because they want same-sex marriage, while those opposed to that would also say they are 'pro-marriage' because they support only one man/one woman marriage. You see? 80% even seems low for that question.
     
  9. J.D.

    J.D.
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2006
    Messages:
    3,553
    Likes Received:
    8
    1952: Eisenhower a conservative? :laugh: From Wikipedia:
    1964: Goldwater - let's see, why didn't he win? Could it be, as Wikipedia says, "The Republican candidate, Senator Barry Goldwater of Arizona, suffered from a lack of support from his own party"

    1980: Reagan might be the one exception. He certainly wasn't the choice of the country clubbers. But even with Reagan's success, the question remains, why did the government expand during his administration?

    1984: Reagan the incumbant.

    Now, can you come up with anything the republicans have done to further the conservative cause since 1984?
     
  10. InTheLight

    InTheLight
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    16,265
    Likes Received:
    619
    You said:

    Eisenhower was not the establishment candidate, nor was he liberal. Thomas E. Dewey was the eastern GOP establishment liberal candidate and he didn't get the nomination. My point stands.


    Goldwater was not the establishment liberal candidate and he got the nomination. My point stands.


    Contract with America, 1994. Welfare reform, 1996. Asked and answered.
     
    #10 InTheLight, Feb 16, 2012
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 16, 2012
  11. righteousdude2

    righteousdude2
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2007
    Messages:
    10,468
    Likes Received:
    138
    Conservatives Are Intimidated...

    ...and are voting for, that radical communist leaning Marxist who even told us he was a socialist, in order to be more politically correct in an outward attempt to reflect their leanings and support of tolerance. :laugh::laugh::laugh:
     
  12. J.D.

    J.D.
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2006
    Messages:
    3,553
    Likes Received:
    8
    Okay, you win. One conservative nomination FIFTY years ago and one weak reform SEVENTEEN years ago (welfare reform was part of the contract, so you don't get credit for two). I guess conservatives are winning after all.

    Oh, I just remembered - the nineties - that was the era of liberal Bush #1 and life-long country clubber Bob Dole who couldn't get elected in spite of the Republican Revolution in congress. (You have to remember that the presence of conservative republicans in congress does not mean the PARTY is conservative.)
     
  13. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,130
    Likes Received:
    221
    Dont know your age in '64 but the Libs had all seniors believing that Goldwater was going to end Social Security. Their big ad was showing a SS card being cut up with a pair of siccors. For a link, click here
     
    #13 Salty, Feb 16, 2012
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 16, 2012
  14. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    16,653
    Likes Received:
    158
    It is because the brand of conservatives we have in Congress now come across as pernicious and mean spirited, interested in only themselves and their money and more interested in non-cooperation with Obama than with the good of the country.
     
  15. InTheLight

    InTheLight
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    16,265
    Likes Received:
    619
    Stop moving the goalposts. You stated that the Republican establishment always rigs the primaries to nominate an establishment liberal as the candidate. That is the issue. You keep trying to change the argument, which is annoying.
     
  16. Michael Wrenn

    Michael Wrenn
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    4,319
    Likes Received:
    0
    It's simple really. Bottom line is that Americans vote their pocket books, regardless of what else they may claim. McCain was ahead in the polls until the economy crashed in the Fall of '08. Whereupon the people fell for the silver-tongued Marxist Obama and swept him into office.

    It will happen again if there's even a slight improvement in the economy -- real, or manufactured by the media.
     
  17. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,130
    Likes Received:
    221
    Sometimes I wonder if the old fashion of nominating a candidate the old fashion way - in a smoke-filled room.

    And remember - many primaries are decided by non-party members has States or Commonwealths have "open" primaries.

    And one other thing. The first primary was over a month ago. How many people would have voted for a different candidate today then they did last month?
     
  18. glfredrick

    glfredrick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    Messages:
    4,996
    Likes Received:
    0
    They do... Sometimes, in spite of their efforts a more conservative non-establishment candidate arrives. That does not necessarily mean that the candidate that beats the establishment is the most possible conservative of candidates. It does mean that in some cases the establishment candidate does not gain the nomination.

    I HIGHLY recommend a book that explains the difference:

    "Upstream" by Alfred Regnery. It is a great cited documentary of the condition of candidates to about the 1950s and whom it was that supported them.
     
  19. glfredrick

    glfredrick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    Messages:
    4,996
    Likes Received:
    0
    Santorum is now leading Romney in most polls by double digits. That signals a sea-change shift -- AND -- we're in the voting season, not just the posturing season.
     
  20. DaChaser1

    DaChaser1
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2011
    Messages:
    2,324
    Likes Received:
    0
    Currently running 4 points ahead of Mitt here in the Mittsters home state!

    the Christinas and social conservatives here rallying wound Rick , due tohis strong family catholic values, those into economy supporting Mittstir, good Morman!
     

Share This Page

Loading...