"Far Right" can't win for GOP? ...BS!

[Boss]

You've still failed to define what "far right" means other than "conservative."

Obvious nonsense:

Back in reality, Cruz is definitely far right. Most of the positions he holds are far, far right of the general electorate, or even most republicans. On the DW Nominate scale, where 1.0 is the most extreme conservative position possible while -1.0 is the most extreme liberal position possible and 0.0 is a moderate position....

....Cruz scored a 0.95. That's nearly the most extreme right wing score that the DW Nominate scale has measured in its 30 year history.

Far Right can t win for GOP ...BS Page 102 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

You insist none of that was ever posted. Anyone can verify that it was.

And I'm right of course.

Oh, your propaganda is being posted. You're not defining what you mean by "far right" and that hasn't been defined in this thread other that to mean "conservative." It's as though they are the same thing.

Your DW Nominate scale simply shows Cruz is a conservative. His voting is on the conservative side. He's not "far" or "extreme" anything, he's just a true conservative while others around him aren't.

 

[Boss]

...tell us again how every poll ever conducted shows that most people are conservatives.

Well, I'll be glad to tell you as many times as you need to hear it. Every poll ever conducted in any free democratic society, shows most people are conservative. Your Gallup poll which you've flooded the board with, shows more people identify as Conservative than anything else. When you divide moderates fairly, the conservatives are the plurality. You want to LIE and claim all moderates for yourself as if moderates are not conservative. Moderates are MOSTLY conservative. But then... Conservatism is not an ideology.

 

[Boss]

The far Right is characterized by pigheaded, uncompromising stubbornness, like you.

And yet another empty post with no definition of "far right" and delusional ranting by someone who wants to stereotype people and attack them personally, based on those false stereotypes and prejudices.

 

[edthecynic]

The far Right is characterized by pigheaded, uncompromising stubbornness, like you.

And yet another empty post with no definition of "far right" and delusional ranting by someone who wants to stereotype people and attack them personally, based on those false stereotypes and prejudices.

As you well know, I not only defined it I gave YOU as an example, which is why you edited that example out of my post!

What needs to be rejected are rigid ideologues. ...
I am DONE with Republicans telling me they are "conservative" then capitulating every chance they get to Democrats while telling me "it's the best we could do." It's time for someone with some balls to stand up and reject the liberal nonsense and false narrative regarding Conservatism. If you don't want to be a part of that, fuck off. I couldn't care less.

 

[HappyJoy]

...tell us again how every poll ever conducted shows that most people are conservatives.

Well, I'll be glad to tell you as many times as you need to hear it. Every poll ever conducted in any free democratic society, shows most people are conservative. Your Gallup poll which you've flooded the board with, shows more people identify as Conservative than anything else. When you divide moderates fairly, the conservatives are the plurality. You want to LIE and claim all moderates for yourself as if moderates are not conservative. Moderates are MOSTLY conservative. But then... Conservatism is not an ideology.

First, you need to look up the word plurality. (psst, if you do look up the definition you'll think it helps your argument but it really doesn't)

Second, what happened to conservative not being an ideology but being a philosophy? Why are you now attempting to define the Gallup poll? You completely gave up on your (bullshit) argument.

Dude, you need a rape kit and a band aid stat, you're losing your shit in this thread.

 

[thanatos144]

Of course no one wants a "far right" conservative... they don't exist in reality. The term simply means "a conservative" to you and the liberal left. And you've defined ALL Conservatives as "far right" by applying false stereotypes of the most undesirable ideological extremes you can find and calling that "conservative ideology." I agree.... not many people are going to support "racist, homophobic, bigoted assholes, who want to starve school kids and push old people off the cliff while giving tax breaks to the rich." Unfortunately (for you), that's NOT Conservative philosophy and never will be.

Progressives project a lot . they can't understand anything different from themselves

 

[HappyJoy]

Of course no one wants a "far right" conservative... they don't exist in reality. The term simply means "a conservative" to you and the liberal left. And you've defined ALL Conservatives as "far right" by applying false stereotypes of the most undesirable ideological extremes you can find and calling that "conservative ideology." I agree.... not many people are going to support "racist, homophobic, bigoted assholes, who want to starve school kids and push old people off the cliff while giving tax breaks to the rich." Unfortunately (for you), that's NOT Conservative philosophy and never will be.

Progressives project a lot . they can't understand anything different from themselves

You mean like straight liberals emphasizing with gays about equality? Or white liberals not alienating minorities?

Or do you mean your kind of differences like giving the benefit of the doubt to people who are incapable of understanding a simple poll based on political ideology because you agree with their politics?

 

[Boss]

First, you need to look up the word plurality. (psst, if you do look up the definition you'll think it helps your argument but it really doesn't)

Second, what happened to conservative not being an ideology but being a philosophy? Why are you now attempting to define the Gallup poll? You completely gave up on your (bullshit) argument.

Dude, you need a rape kit and a band aid stat, you're losing your shit in this thread.

1) I am familiar with what words mean. More people are Conservative than anything else. Doesn't matter how you want to say it. It's not an argument, it's a statement of fact.

2) Nothing happened to conservatism being a philosophy. I didn't define anything or give up on anything. Even the Gallup poll, which incorrectly compares conservatism as ideology, shows more people are conservative.

3) You're not the Simon Cowell of USMB threads. The number of "agrees" this thread has received begs to differ with your unfounded 'expert' opinion. What has happened is, this thread struck a nerve with liberals because it's true. This causes liberals to 'declare victory' via anal sexual assault because they can't really form a coherent response.

 

[Boss]

As you well know, I not only defined it I gave YOU as an example, which is why you edited that example out of my post!

You didn't define anything. When someone asks "what is meant by 'far right'" and your reply is "you are!" that is NOT defining anything except your incompetence.

 

[edthecynic]

As you well know, I not only defined it I gave YOU as an example, which is why you edited that example out of my post!

You didn't define anything. When someone asks "what is meant by 'far right'" and your reply is "you are!" that is NOT defining anything except your incompetence.

Except I said a lot more than that and quoted YOU as an example. You dishonestly edited that out. Dishonesty is yet another characteristic of the far Right ideology.

The far Right is characterized by pigheaded, uncompromising stubbornness, like you.

And yet another empty post with no definition of "far right" and delusional ranting by someone who wants to stereotype people and attack them personally, based on those false stereotypes and prejudices.

As you well know, I not only defined it I gave YOU as an example, which is why you edited that example out of my post!

What needs to be rejected are rigid ideologues. ...
I am DONE with Republicans telling me they are "conservative" then capitulating every chance they get to Democrats while telling me "it's the best we could do." It's time for someone with some balls to stand up and reject the liberal nonsense and false narrative regarding Conservatism. If you don't want to be a part of that, fuck off. I couldn't care less.

 

[Boss]

As you well know, I not only defined it I gave YOU as an example, which is why you edited that example out of my post!

You didn't define anything. When someone asks "what is meant by 'far right'" and your reply is "you are!" that is NOT defining anything except your incompetence.

Except I said a lot more than that and quoted YOU as an example. You dishonestly edited that out. Dishonesty is yet another characteristic of the far Right ideology.

The far Right is characterized by pigheaded, uncompromising stubbornness, like you.

And yet another empty post with no definition of "far right" and delusional ranting by someone who wants to stereotype people and attack them personally, based on those false stereotypes and prejudices.

As you well know, I not only defined it I gave YOU as an example, which is why you edited that example out of my post!

What needs to be rejected are rigid ideologues. ...
I am DONE with Republicans telling me they are "conservative" then capitulating every chance they get to Democrats while telling me "it's the best we could do." It's time for someone with some balls to stand up and reject the liberal nonsense and false narrative regarding Conservatism. If you don't want to be a part of that, fuck off. I couldn't care less.

No, I honestly edited out your dishonesty.

 

[Mac1958]

The GOP should just run Cruz/Palin or Palin/Cruz and let's get past this.

Hillary is neck deep in controversy and still leads all Republicans in the polls.

Shouldn't that say something?

.

 

[Seawytch]

Yep...I'm with Mac on this one. Run the far right candidate, please, and end this "debate" once and for all. The liberals won't nominate Bernie.

 

[Mac1958]

Yep...I'm with Mac on this one. Run the far right candidate, please, and end this "debate" once and for all. The liberals won't nominate Bernie.

I suspect that's what it would take to end this insanity. 100% pure Tea Party ticket, no fluff, no excuses.

A small percentage of that party has 90% of the energy and influence.

.

 

[Seawytch]

Yep...I'm with Mac on this one. Run the far right candidate, please, and end this "debate" once and for all. The liberals won't nominate Bernie.

I suspect that's what it would take to end this insanity. 100% pure Tea Party ticket, no fluff, no excuses.

A small percentage of that party has 90% of the energy and influence.

.

I must admit, however, that a Bernie Sanders/Ted Cruz debate would be amazing. Wonder how they'd match up if those were the two candidates.

 

[Mac1958]

Yep...I'm with Mac on this one. Run the far right candidate, please, and end this "debate" once and for all. The liberals won't nominate Bernie.

I suspect that's what it would take to end this insanity. 100% pure Tea Party ticket, no fluff, no excuses.

A small percentage of that party has 90% of the energy and influence.

.

I must admit, however, that a Bernie Sanders/Ted Cruz debate would be amazing. Wonder how they'd match up if those were the two candidates.

Yes, it would.

Personally, the one ticket that would interest me most would be Webb/Warren, so I suspect I'm stuck voting third party again. A Webb/Warren vs. Kasich/Rubio or Paul series of debates would probably be the most stimulating.

.

 

[sealybobo]

Okay, to start with... I take considerable exception to the left-wing incarnation of "the far right" because it essentially means "conservative." In a political context, the "far right" would be fascists or neo-confederates like Tim McVeigh. These radicals make up about .02% or less in the US, they are not a factor in any election because most of them don't vote. But the left has campaigned to instill this image of conservatives as "far right" when that simply isn't the case. So right off the bat we need to clarify that "far right" means hard core conservatives.

Conservatism is a philosophy and not an ideology. Unlike Liberalism, Conservatives have a wide range of personal beliefs on various issues of social and foreign policy nature, and perhaps even a little bit on economic issues. Most are pro life and believe in God. Most are believers in the Constitution and original intent of the founders. It's not a prerequisite to be a Conservative, you can oppose any of these and still be one.

The "debate" raging among the Republicans at this time is between what the left calls "far right" and the GOP establishment elite. In fact, the elites are even adopting the leftist rhetoric and calling conservatives "far right" in an attempt to marginalize them. So we keep coming back to this "far right" tag which simply refers to people who are passionately committed to conservative philosophy.

In 2008 and 2012, the establishment pushed the idea that only a "moderate" could defeat the Democrats. Both times, the moderate got clocked. Once again, we have the same elite establishment pushing the rhetoric that we need to nominate someone who isn't "far right" because they just can't win the general election. I say BULLSHIT!

The last "far right" conservative was Ronald Reagan... he won two of the largest landslides in political history. There is no evidence that a "far right" candidate cannot win the general election.... NONE! To the contrary, when nominated, they win by landslides.

Now the Elites are very powerful and have influence in the media, so they are pointing to all these polls showing how 47% of America is "politically independent" ...so we have to 'run to the middle' and be more 'moderate' which simply means, less conservative or less committed to conservative principles. The major flaw with this thinking is, most "politically independent" voters are Conservatives! A Conservative (far right) candidate is going to appeal to most of those voters. This is precisely what happened with Reagan and we called them "Reagan Democrats" because they represented the Conservatives who has previously voted Democrat.

What has been missing for Conservatives is a voice. Someone who believes in Conservative philosophy passionately and can articulate what it's all about to the masses. We've allowed people like John McCain and Mitt Romney to carry the water for Conservatism and along with the left, morph it into some backward ideology that must be defeated, or at the very least, apologized for! Conservatives have an uphill battle to change this dynamic but it can be done, it has been done before.

To the GOP Elites: You better get on board with a solid Conservative or the Democrats will win in 2016. This idea that we have to nominate someone "more moderate" is simply surrendering to the liberal left. It is telling every "independent voter" out there that you stand for absolutely nothing and will do whatever you can to capitulate to the left on every issue. You will not win with that strategy!

But the far right is doing their job pulling us to the right even though most americans dont agree.
How do they do it? The majority of americans dont vote.

 

[Seawytch]

Yep...I'm with Mac on this one. Run the far right candidate, please, and end this "debate" once and for all. The liberals won't nominate Bernie.

I suspect that's what it would take to end this insanity. 100% pure Tea Party ticket, no fluff, no excuses.

A small percentage of that party has 90% of the energy and influence.

.

I must admit, however, that a Bernie Sanders/Ted Cruz debate would be amazing. Wonder how they'd match up if those were the two candidates.

Yes, it would.

Personally, the one ticket that would interest me most would be Webb/Warren, so I suspect I'm stuck voting third party again. A Webb/Warren vs. Kasich/Rubio or Paul series of debates would probably be the most stimulating.

.

Well, you might get Webb. I can see Hillary going with him as a VP pick. He's likely on the short list.

 

[Mac1958]

Yep...I'm with Mac on this one. Run the far right candidate, please, and end this "debate" once and for all. The liberals won't nominate Bernie.

I suspect that's what it would take to end this insanity. 100% pure Tea Party ticket, no fluff, no excuses.

A small percentage of that party has 90% of the energy and influence.

.

I must admit, however, that a Bernie Sanders/Ted Cruz debate would be amazing. Wonder how they'd match up if those were the two candidates.

Yes, it would.

Personally, the one ticket that would interest me most would be Webb/Warren, so I suspect I'm stuck voting third party again. A Webb/Warren vs. Kasich/Rubio or Paul series of debates would probably be the most stimulating.

.

Well, you might get Webb. I can see Hillary going with him as a VP pick. He's likely on the short list.

Yeah, could be. I also think Rubio is running for VP.

.

 

[Seawytch]

Yep...I'm with Mac on this one. Run the far right candidate, please, and end this "debate" once and for all. The liberals won't nominate Bernie.

I suspect that's what it would take to end this insanity. 100% pure Tea Party ticket, no fluff, no excuses.

A small percentage of that party has 90% of the energy and influence.

.

I must admit, however, that a Bernie Sanders/Ted Cruz debate would be amazing. Wonder how they'd match up if those were the two candidates.

Yes, it would.

Personally, the one ticket that would interest me most would be Webb/Warren, so I suspect I'm stuck voting third party again. A Webb/Warren vs. Kasich/Rubio or Paul series of debates would probably be the most stimulating.

.

Well, you might get Webb. I can see Hillary going with him as a VP pick. He's likely on the short list.

Yeah, could be. I also think Rubio is running for VP.

.

Well, pissing off the likely front runner isn't the way to do it...or is it just the media narrative that the former colleagues, Rubio and Bush, have been at odds?