Bachmann versus Palin

[goldcatt]

neither did Reagan

That's the selective revisionist amnesia post of the week.

No it's not. The religious right were courted for their votes. During the presidency of Reagan, Bush 1 and Bush 2, how much of their social agenda was ever accomplished? The RR backed them beause of "shared values" in the hopes that their agenda would progress under the candidates leadership. Did it?

I fear the same thing with the tea party. They helped to get a bunch of Republicans elected......but it remains to be seen if the status quo will change. Time will tell.

The truth in both instances, the RR and the TP are not big enough to go it alone and get candidates elected. All they can do is be the tipping factor.

The TP and the RR have a lot in common. Both are more or less natural GOP constituencies, both are large enough to be actively courted (dare I say used?) for their money, foot soldiers and votes but not large enough to split off and be successful if disaffected, and both have or had a large portion of members even among the leadership becoming politically active for the first time. So they weren't necessarily astute enough to have the influence on the party machine they hoped.

Nor, let's face it, would actually resolving their issues keep the group in the GOP pocket. Having those RR wedge issues to keep running on year after year was and is a big sell for the GOP. Why would they want them to go away?

I suppose I shouldn't speak of the TP in the past tense that way, but early indications don't bode any better for their agenda than they did for the RR. Time will tell.

 

[Intense]

The Tea Party includes allot of Disillusioned Independents that voted for Obama. You guy's refuse to see that. There are aspects of the Tea Party, that even share some of the Concerns of the Nader Crowd. I have supported Nader in the past. Principle does not necessitate the abandonment of Representative Government or the Free Market Place. Once made aware of Injustices from Any source, the issue is what do we do to correctly identify it, and make the necessary change. Do we support the mechanism over the Ideal? Why? Where is our allegiance?

 

[goldcatt]

The Tea Party includes allot of Disillusioned Independents that voted for Obama. You guy's refuse to see that. There are aspects of the Tea Party, that even share some of the Concerns of the Nader Crowd. I have supported Nader in the past. Principle does not necessitate the abandonment of Representative Government or the Free Market Place. Once made aware of Injustices from Any source, the issue is what do we do to correctly identify it, and make the necessary change. Do we support the mechanism over the Ideal? Why? Where is our allegiance?

I don't refuse to see it at all. I've often said no group that size is monolithic, and I know the TP has a sizeable number of nonpartisans.

But let's face it, when we're speaking of the TP in general the majority are natural GOP constituents. Or at least, most of the time we're told it's a conservative movement. Whether that's straight fiscal conservatism or fiscal and social conservatism or straight social conservatism or right-trending libertarianism seems to be in the eye of the beholder. But generally speaking, the number who would be comfortable voting Dem at the national level is more the exception than the rule.

I've got nothing particularly against the TP, I think they've made some serious strategic errors and disagree with a lot of the agenda I hear from its members but they've got every right to get out there and more power to them. I just doubt they're any match for politics as usual in the sense that many want to take over or change the GOP. Ain't gonna happen, and if you're not careful as a movement you'll end up the same as the RR: Seen only as pre-counted GOP votes who get some lip service from time to time.

As an outsider it's interesting to watch.

 

[rightwinger]

 

[Intense]

The Tea Party includes allot of Disillusioned Independents that voted for Obama. You guy's refuse to see that. There are aspects of the Tea Party, that even share some of the Concerns of the Nader Crowd. I have supported Nader in the past. Principle does not necessitate the abandonment of Representative Government or the Free Market Place. Once made aware of Injustices from Any source, the issue is what do we do to correctly identify it, and make the necessary change. Do we support the mechanism over the Ideal? Why? Where is our allegiance?

I don't refuse to see it at all. I've often said no group that size is monolithic, and I know the TP has a sizeable number of nonpartisans.

But let's face it, when we're speaking of the TP in general the majority are natural GOP constituents. Or at least, most of the time we're told it's a conservative movement. Whether that's straight fiscal conservatism or fiscal and social conservatism or straight social conservatism or right-trending libertarianism seems to be in the eye of the beholder. But generally speaking, the number who would be comfortable voting Dem at the national level is more the exception than the rule.

I've got nothing particularly against the TP, I think they've made some serious strategic errors and disagree with a lot of the agenda I hear from its members but they've got every right to get out there and more power to them. I just doubt they're any match for politics as usual in the sense that many want to take over or change the GOP. Ain't gonna happen, and if you're not careful as a movement you'll end up the same as the RR: Seen only as pre-counted GOP votes who get some lip service from time to time.

As an outsider it's interesting to watch.

In the Same way Nader influences the Left, it has both effect and limits. The water line is not a constant. Things change all the time. None of us stop being who we are because a movement is shot down. You pick up and move on, at least the genuine ones do, on both sides of the equation. The same values that interested me before the Tea Party days, will exist long after it is gone.

 

[goldcatt]

The Tea Party includes allot of Disillusioned Independents that voted for Obama. You guy's refuse to see that. There are aspects of the Tea Party, that even share some of the Concerns of the Nader Crowd. I have supported Nader in the past. Principle does not necessitate the abandonment of Representative Government or the Free Market Place. Once made aware of Injustices from Any source, the issue is what do we do to correctly identify it, and make the necessary change. Do we support the mechanism over the Ideal? Why? Where is our allegiance?

I don't refuse to see it at all. I've often said no group that size is monolithic, and I know the TP has a sizeable number of nonpartisans.

But let's face it, when we're speaking of the TP in general the majority are natural GOP constituents. Or at least, most of the time we're told it's a conservative movement. Whether that's straight fiscal conservatism or fiscal and social conservatism or straight social conservatism or right-trending libertarianism seems to be in the eye of the beholder. But generally speaking, the number who would be comfortable voting Dem at the national level is more the exception than the rule.

I've got nothing particularly against the TP, I think they've made some serious strategic errors and disagree with a lot of the agenda I hear from its members but they've got every right to get out there and more power to them. I just doubt they're any match for politics as usual in the sense that many want to take over or change the GOP. Ain't gonna happen, and if you're not careful as a movement you'll end up the same as the RR: Seen only as pre-counted GOP votes who get some lip service from time to time.

As an outsider it's interesting to watch.

In the Same way Nader influences the Left, it has both effect and limits. The water line is not a constant. Things change all the time. None of us stop being who we are because a movement is shot down. You pick up and move on, at least the genuine ones do, on both sides of the equation. The same values that interested me before the Tea Party days, will exist long after it is gone.

Nader's a pompous ass, and he smells bad.

But I see your point. I think we're making an observation at two different levels. You're speaking more to the individual, I'm speaking to my observations of the movement in general.

 

[jillian]

I don't refuse to see it at all. I've often said no group that size is monolithic, and I know the TP has a sizeable number of nonpartisans.

But let's face it, when we're speaking of the TP in general the majority are natural GOP constituents. Or at least, most of the time we're told it's a conservative movement. Whether that's straight fiscal conservatism or fiscal and social conservatism or straight social conservatism or right-trending libertarianism seems to be in the eye of the beholder. But generally speaking, the number who would be comfortable voting Dem at the national level is more the exception than the rule.

I've got nothing particularly against the TP, I think they've made some serious strategic errors and disagree with a lot of the agenda I hear from its members but they've got every right to get out there and more power to them. I just doubt they're any match for politics as usual in the sense that many want to take over or change the GOP. Ain't gonna happen, and if you're not careful as a movement you'll end up the same as the RR: Seen only as pre-counted GOP votes who get some lip service from time to time.

As an outsider it's interesting to watch.

In the Same way Nader influences the Left, it has both effect and limits. The water line is not a constant. Things change all the time. None of us stop being who we are because a movement is shot down. You pick up and move on, at least the genuine ones do, on both sides of the equation. The same values that interested me before the Tea Party days, will exist long after it is gone.

Nader's a pompous ass, and he smells bad.

But I see your point. I think we're making an observation at two different levels. You're speaking more to the individual, I'm speaking to my observations of the movement in general.

i can't stand ralph nader. so how does he 'influence the left'?

 

[Intense]

I don't refuse to see it at all. I've often said no group that size is monolithic, and I know the TP has a sizeable number of nonpartisans.

But let's face it, when we're speaking of the TP in general the majority are natural GOP constituents. Or at least, most of the time we're told it's a conservative movement. Whether that's straight fiscal conservatism or fiscal and social conservatism or straight social conservatism or right-trending libertarianism seems to be in the eye of the beholder. But generally speaking, the number who would be comfortable voting Dem at the national level is more the exception than the rule.

I've got nothing particularly against the TP, I think they've made some serious strategic errors and disagree with a lot of the agenda I hear from its members but they've got every right to get out there and more power to them. I just doubt they're any match for politics as usual in the sense that many want to take over or change the GOP. Ain't gonna happen, and if you're not careful as a movement you'll end up the same as the RR: Seen only as pre-counted GOP votes who get some lip service from time to time.

As an outsider it's interesting to watch.

In the Same way Nader influences the Left, it has both effect and limits. The water line is not a constant. Things change all the time. None of us stop being who we are because a movement is shot down. You pick up and move on, at least the genuine ones do, on both sides of the equation. The same values that interested me before the Tea Party days, will exist long after it is gone.

Nader's a pompous ass, and he smells bad.

But I see your point. I think we're making an observation at two different levels. You're speaking more to the individual, I'm speaking to my observations of the movement in general.

That's one of the complaints about the Tea Party that I love. True Maverick Spirit. Hard to tame or mold. Isn't that part of what Liberty is about?

 

[Mr. Shaman]

It would behoove the left to concern themselves about the democrat candidate instead of venting their anger at republican women every day....

Please.

Palin & Bachmann are Republican-nothings.

They're merely a couple o' Bircher Bimbos.

"One founding member was Fred Koch, founder of Koch Industrieshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Birch_Society...."​

 

[Vanquish]

You can't deny Nader's been good for the country's consumer protections. That's well established.

 

[Intense]

In the Same way Nader influences the Left, it has both effect and limits. The water line is not a constant. Things change all the time. None of us stop being who we are because a movement is shot down. You pick up and move on, at least the genuine ones do, on both sides of the equation. The same values that interested me before the Tea Party days, will exist long after it is gone.

Nader's a pompous ass, and he smells bad.

But I see your point. I think we're making an observation at two different levels. You're speaking more to the individual, I'm speaking to my observations of the movement in general.

i can't stand ralph nader. so how does he 'influence the left'?

You need to get over 2000 and 2004. He has done allot of good throughout his life. If I were President I'd consider you Jillian for Attorney General and Nader for Secretary of the Interior. Don't fret GC you can play Chief of Staff.

 

[Intense]

The Green Party has influenced the Left consistantly. The Green Party of the United States

 

[goldcatt]

Nader's a pompous ass, and he smells bad.

But I see your point. I think we're making an observation at two different levels. You're speaking more to the individual, I'm speaking to my observations of the movement in general.

i can't stand ralph nader. so how does he 'influence the left'?

You need to get over 2000 and 2004. He has done allot of good throughout his life. If I were President I'd consider you Jillian for Attorney General and Nader for Secretary of the Interior. Don't fret GC you can play Chief of Staff.

I'm IN!

There may have been a time when Nader did good things, in fact I'd say there definitely was a time when he did. But he pretty well divorced himself from groups like the PIRGS and Common Cause long before 2000. Neither of them play much of a role in the "left's" thinking these days either, which in some ways might not be a good thing but it's reality. The Green Party marginalized itself with the mainstream left in 2000, like it or not Nader is persona non grata amongst a lot of liberals.

But did you really want to fight about Ralph "I never wear deodorant" Nader?

 

[Intense]

i can't stand ralph nader. so how does he 'influence the left'?

You need to get over 2000 and 2004. He has done allot of good throughout his life. If I were President I'd consider you Jillian for Attorney General and Nader for Secretary of the Interior. Don't fret GC you can play Chief of Staff.

I'm IN!

There may have been a time when Nader did good things, in fact I'd say there definitely was a time when he did. But he pretty well divorced himself from groups like the PIRGS and Common Cause long before 2000. Neither of them play much of a role in the "left's" thinking these days either, which in some ways might not be a good thing but it's reality. The Green Party marginalized itself with the mainstream left in 2000, like it or not Nader is persona non grata amongst a lot of liberals.

But did you really want to fight about Ralph "I never wear deodorant" Nader?

Oh My!!!This reminds me of my Daughter's Basket Ball Team, They'd hold a grudge for 5 years over a broken finger nail.
You nailed it though. The Left did lose it's identity in PC. Nader is Old School, like a Prophet. The Left won't succeed without a conscience. You all need to kiss and make up. Deodorant or not.

What is the first thing you would do as Chief of Staff?

 

[goldcatt]

You need to get over 2000 and 2004. He has done allot of good throughout his life. If I were President I'd consider you Jillian for Attorney General and Nader for Secretary of the Interior. Don't fret GC you can play Chief of Staff.

I'm IN!

There may have been a time when Nader did good things, in fact I'd say there definitely was a time when he did. But he pretty well divorced himself from groups like the PIRGS and Common Cause long before 2000. Neither of them play much of a role in the "left's" thinking these days either, which in some ways might not be a good thing but it's reality. The Green Party marginalized itself with the mainstream left in 2000, like it or not Nader is persona non grata amongst a lot of liberals.

But did you really want to fight about Ralph "I never wear deodorant" Nader?

Oh My!!!This reminds me of my Daughter's Basket Ball Team, They'd hold a grudge for 5 years over a broken finger nail.
You nailed it though. The Left did lose it's identity in PC. Nader is Old School, like a Prophet. The Left won't succeed without a conscience. You all need to kiss and make up. Deodorant or not.

What is the first thing you would do as Chief of Staff?

Nah, I worked for the guy. Long before 2000, by the way. That was enough. A Prophet, he most certainly is not. As far as deodorant goes, you go spend a day in a room with him and tell me whether it matters.

The very first thing I'd do as Chief of Staff? Make sure the coffee is up to Presidential standards, of course.

 

[Big Fitz]

Only ones I see snivvling are the libs freaking out and peeing their panties over the thought of Bachmann even coming near the presidency.

actually, no one's freaked out at all except for you and a couple of other palinistas who, for some reason i can't fathom, are terrified of discussing her at all.

it was a very simple thread. two women who share the same 'base' both aspire to run for the presidency. i didn't opine about either one and most of the posts actually talked about the political realities...

except for a couple of people who are so terrified of the mention of her who shall not be named that they have conniptions

Bzzzt.

Listened to callers on radio, and witnessed it in real life, and seen half a dozen threads on multiple message boards all captained by libs freaking out about how shes the devil in drag or hitler in a dress, or an incompetent liar all backing their 'facts' from fuckedcheck.org or some other radical leftist piece of shit "research".

You ladies doth protest too much.

 

[Rinata]

apparently michelle bachmann has a yen to run for the presidency in 2012... that might put her in direct competition with palin

thoughts?

I initially thought it was a joke. But it is the truth. I really don't know what to say. I can't wait. This is going to be better than any sit com.

 

[jillian]

Nader's a pompous ass, and he smells bad.

But I see your point. I think we're making an observation at two different levels. You're speaking more to the individual, I'm speaking to my observations of the movement in general.

i can't stand ralph nader. so how does he 'influence the left'?

You need to get over 2000 and 2004. He has done allot of good throughout his life. If I were President I'd consider you Jillian for Attorney General and Nader for Secretary of the Interior. Don't fret GC you can play Chief of Staff.

you made a comment about him 'influencing the left'. when he was a consumer advocate, he did a lot of good. that's one thing. but it has nothing to do with him 'influencing' the left. that has nothing to do with not getting over 2000 and 2004. if that's the measure, is perot an 'influence' on the right? i just don't see him as being of particular import. each was a blip but not something of resonance.

 

[Intense]

i can't stand ralph nader. so how does he 'influence the left'?

You need to get over 2000 and 2004. He has done allot of good throughout his life. If I were President I'd consider you Jillian for Attorney General and Nader for Secretary of the Interior. Don't fret GC you can play Chief of Staff.

you made a comment about him 'influencing the left'. when he was a consumer advocate, he did a lot of good. that's one thing. but it has nothing to do with him 'influencing' the left. that has nothing to do with not getting over 2000 and 2004. if that's the measure, is perot an 'influence' on the right? i just don't see him as being of particular import. each was a blip but not something of resonance.

Exactly. Perot, in his time did influence the Right. Even I voted for him the first time. It cost Bush his Re-election. How many people are still regularly using charts in political presentations? Glenn Beck even?

 

[geauxtohell]

The Green Party has minimal sway over the Democratic Party. They usually fail to make the ballot in most states.

About the only clout Nader has is costing Gore the 2000 election by splitting his vote.

Kind of like Perot and Bush I.