Is the Republican Party or conservative ideology dead?

[DavidS]

The idea of returning this country to the way it was back in the 1940s and 1950s when men were men and women were women and moral values mattered is dead... at least on a government level.

The social conservative movement is defined by three main areas:

1. Make abortion illegal
2. Do not fund embryonic stem cell research
3. Gay people should not be allowed to be married

Thus two out of three is government interference in our personal lives and the last limits federal funding of scientific research that can save millions of lives. The reason why Bush won and Gore didn't was because of the outlandish things Bill Clinton did in office during the 1990s. Many Americans, even left-wing ones, were disgusted by this and wanted a clean break from all of these investigations and sexual harassment cases, etc. And Bush ran on a moral platform. If Clinton had not had sexual relations with Monica or Bush had not run on a social conservative platform, Gore would've been president. This country is not center-right, it is center-left and drifting to the left every year.

Fiscal conservatism is defined as:

1. Reducing the size of the government
2. Cutting taxes for the rich and raising them on the lower and middle class
3. Limited government regulation

Americans overall are OK with increasing the size of the government, are angry at the rich for causing all of these problems and want more government regulation to ensure something like this never happens again.

Now, when the economy recovers again, and we're beginning to see some signs of life, I do see people's opinions of fiscal conservatism changing and liking some of the ideas. Tax cuts for EVERYONE, smaller government and less regulation, though not as extreme as some would believe.

Social conservatism belongs in people's homes and Churches. It does not belong in the federal government. Thus social conservatism is DEAD. Fiscal conservatives have to re-think the extremes in their policies and modify them.

If you had a socially moderate and fiscally conservative Republican run in 2012, he might give Obama a run for his money. BUT - right now, let me tell ya'... there is very little chance of anyone getting within 10 points of Obama if the economy is recovering nicely in 2012. People will remember how bad this recession is and like they did with Dubyah in 2004, they will not want to risk someone different.

 

[Old Rocks]

i give this a c- old socks.
you didn't work rushpublican into it.
disappointing

Dang! I forgot

i blame bush.

Naw, I go back a bit further than that. You will have to blame Roosevelt. I was conceived during his last term.

 

[del]

i give this a c- old socks.
you didn't work rushpublican into it.
disappointing

Dang! I forgot

i blame bush.

Naw, I go back a bit further than that. You will have to blame Roosevelt. I was conceived during his last term.

you're 100! wow, those are old rocks.
bully for you!

 

[Maple]

is that the republican party GOT AWAY from it's conservative principles. Most people live their lives conservatively, they pay their bills, they don't buy things that can't afford, they work hard everyday, they pay their taxes and they are decent law-abiding citizens. What they don't seem to realize is that they are CONSERVATIVES. Conservatives are demonized and the general public has bought into that. Conservatives are very generous people, they give to their churches and people in need, in fact, they give much more than your rich liberal does.

The general public wants that kind of responsiblity represented in our government.,The only reason that republicans lost the house and the senate was that they drifted away from the fiscal responsibliity and spent like a bunch of drunken sailors. This non-sense about Reagan being a moderate is a bold face lie. There was nothing moderate about Reagan yet he won two landslide elections, he was an ultra-conservative. He was able to speak to the people and make them understand that BIG GOVERNMENT is not the solution IT IS THE PROBLEM.

Today, we have a socialistic President with a democratic house and senate. This economy might get a slight bump upwards but it's not going to last. Inflation will set in and it will remind everyone who lived during Jimmy Carter's presidency just how bad it was. He was a very, very weak president who was also far left of mainstream Americans. He was not only weak fiscally he was weak in foriegn policy.

Republicans need to take advantage of this, they need to promote conservative candidates, not moderates. Sarah Palin is a great example of a person with conservative ideas, she wants to drill here and drill now, she is certainly fiscally responsible as is shown in her leadership as the governor of Alaska. SHE HAS EXECUTIVE EXPERIENCE, OBAMA DOES NOT!!!! He has been a legislator. If you will notice the great majority of Presidents were first governors NOT LEGISLATORS. There is a reason for this, a legislator does not have to make any important decisions, all they do is vote or bring up new legislation to vote on.

OBAMA HAS NO LEADERSHIP EXPERIENCE, as time goes on this will become more and more evident. He has already caved to the extreme left in his party by signing that stimulus bill, the omnibus bill, gave our enemies information of interrogation tactics against the advise of his own CIA director and 4 former ones. It is going to get worse. As time goes on more and more Americans will see this first hand. I have already heard many people, many of them in my own family, who regret voting for Obama. They have woken up, it will take more time for the rest of America to wake up, but when they do we need a conservative candidate to inspire them and turn this country around.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Is the Republican Party or conservative ideology dead? It certainly is weak. How can it recover? I think that it will be a long time before conservatives and/or Republicans gain significant strength in Federal government. We have a far left president leading his executive branch. Congress just lost another Republican (though a moderate Republican or RINO as some may call him). We just lost a Republican selected Supreme Court Justice. Obama will probably select a more left-leaning person for judge.

The conservatives have moved away from the Republicans (disappointed in the Republican’s alleged move to the left). The conservatives are abandoning the Republicans or the Republicans are abandoning the conservatives or the separation was mutual (take your pick). Anyway, it practically results in a split ticket – helping the Democrats that much more.

Will conservative talking heads be able to convince Republican politicians to be more conservative and earn their vote or will there be a new right-wing party? Will conservatives be able to convince the general voting public to demand that elected officials be more conservative? Will the conservatives compromise, hold their noses, and vote for moderate Republicans (as in voting for the better of two evils). Even though McCain was not a far right-wing conservative, I think that most conservatives would agree that they would have rather had him as president than Obama as president. No matter what strategy or strategies the conservatives use, I think that it will be a very long time before we have a Ronald Reagan – like administration in Washington.

Perhaps the only chance for conservatives is if Obama really really screws up America in the eyes of the public. As liberal as he may be, I’ don’t see that happening any time soon.

I've said before, perhaps on this board, that the Republicans are not Conservatives. This was especially true under W. I always found it laughable that the party line Dems hated Bush due to his Conservatism when he was more Liberal in most respects than Billy C.

Republicans cannot win when they are just Democrat-lite. Either become a Democrat or act like a Republican. Spectre, Arlan or Phil, should never have been a Republican in the first place.

Now, does that mean that to be a Republican, you have call abortion murder? No. It means don't spend every dime you can imagine out to the third generation away. Run on fiscal Conservative values and forget about Abortion. Don't be holier than thou. Just stop bouncing checks.

But, morally speaking, murder is precisely what abortion is... and that is simply a demonstrable fact.

But setting that aside... you're exactly right...

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

The idea of returning this country to the way it was back in the 1940s and 1950s when men were men and women were women and moral values mattered is dead... at least on a government level.

The social conservative movement is defined by three main areas:

1. Make abortion illegal
2. Do not fund embryonic stem cell research
3. Gay people should not be allowed to be married

Thus two out of three is government interference in our personal lives and the last limits federal funding of scientific research that can save millions of lives. The reason why Bush won and Gore didn't was because of the outlandish things Bill Clinton did in office during the 1990s. Many Americans, even left-wing ones, were disgusted by this and wanted a clean break from all of these investigations and sexual harassment cases, etc. And Bush ran on a moral platform. If Clinton had not had sexual relations with Monica or Bush had not run on a social conservative platform, Gore would've been president. This country is not center-right, it is center-left and drifting to the left every year.

Fiscal conservatism is defined as:

1. Reducing the size of the government
2. Cutting taxes for the rich and raising them on the lower and middle class
3. Limited government regulation

Americans overall are OK with increasing the size of the government, are angry at the rich for causing all of these problems and want more government regulation to ensure something like this never happens again.

Now, when the economy recovers again, and we're beginning to see some signs of life, I do see people's opinions of fiscal conservatism changing and liking some of the ideas. Tax cuts for EVERYONE, smaller government and less regulation, though not as extreme as some would believe.

Social conservatism belongs in people's homes and Churches. It does not belong in the federal government. Thus social conservatism is DEAD. Fiscal conservatives have to re-think the extremes in their policies and modify them.

If you had a socially moderate and fiscally conservative Republican run in 2012, he might give Obama a run for his money. BUT - right now, let me tell ya'... there is very little chance of anyone getting within 10 points of Obama if the economy is recovering nicely in 2012. People will remember how bad this recession is and like they did with Dubyah in 2004, they will not want to risk someone different.

Hey... if ya got nothing MAKE IT UP!

ROFLMNAO... Sweet mother that's pathetic...

 

[Toro]

No, its not dead. But right now, its irrelevant.

 

[Iriemon]

Unless the economy remains in a rut, I predict that the hard core element will be a far right candidate on for '12, someone like Palin where the ideology is masked by a pretty smile. Then they'll get crushed in the general election (a la Barry Goldwater in '64) and out of that fiasco a more moderate Republican party will emerge.

All rank speculation.

is that the republican party GOT AWAY from it's conservative principles. ... Republicans need to take advantage of this, they need to promote conservative candidates, not moderates. Sarah Palin is a great example of a person with conservative ideas, she wants to drill here and drill now, she is certainly fiscally responsible as is shown in her leadership as the governor of Alaska...

Speculation on my part -- but as our friend Maple shows, not without a basis.

You read it here first. : )

 

[frazzledgear]

Is the Republican Party or conservative ideology dead? It certainly is weak. How can it recover? I think that it will be a long time before conservatives and/or Republicans gain significant strength in Federal government. We have a far left president leading his executive branch. Congress just lost another Republican (though a moderate Republican or RINO as some may call him). We just lost a Republican selected Supreme Court Justice. Obama will probably select a more left-leaning person for judge.

The conservatives have moved away from the Republicans (disappointed in the Republican’s alleged move to the left). The conservatives are abandoning the Republicans or the Republicans are abandoning the conservatives or the separation was mutual (take your pick). Anyway, it practically results in a split ticket – helping the Democrats that much more.

Will conservative talking heads be able to convince Republican politicians to be more conservative and earn their vote or will there be a new right-wing party? Will conservatives be able to convince the general voting public to demand that elected officials be more conservative? Will the conservatives compromise, hold their noses, and vote for moderate Republicans (as in voting for the better of two evils). Even though McCain was not a far right-wing conservative, I think that most conservatives would agree that they would have rather had him as president than Obama as president. No matter what strategy or strategies the conservatives use, I think that it will be a very long time before we have a Ronald Reagan – like administration in Washington.

Perhaps the only chance for conservatives is if Obama really really screws up America in the eyes of the public. As liberal as he may be, I’ don’t see that happening any time soon.

The majority of people are already pissed off at Congress for its out-of-control, nonstop bloated, wasteful spending spree. After Congress passed that horrendous "stimulus" bill without even bothering to READ it, Congress' approval ratings dropped to 9% at one point. A new record low for Congress since they started tracking approval ratings. Do you think it has such a low approval rating for the few Republicans who aren't voting for all the bloated, wasteful spending the Democrats are doing or what? Even among Democrats this Congress has abysmal approval ratings.

Obama took his first drop in his approval ratings when he signed that bloated, wasteful stimulus bill -but not as much a hit as Congress took. (And Congress deserved to take a hard hit on it. I expect my representatives to actually READ the bills before they vote to inflict it on me. Most people expect their representatives to do so as well -even if liberals don't.) Obama still has good approval ratings -but I think it is very telling that Clinton and Bush were both several points higher in their approval ratings at this same point in their administrations. And Obama didn't face a contentious, prolonged challenge to his win like Bush did -so that difference in approval ratings at the same point is probably very significant.

People WANT to give a new President the benefit of the doubt and they extend that benefit of the doubt until they just can't ignore the reasons why they shouldn't any longer. The fact that the overwhelming majority of Americans disapprove of the job being done by Congress should worry Obama a lot. It is his party in power and he is unlikely to benefit again at the polls from politically ignorant people -as he did this time. That level of disapproval for this Democrat Congress doesn't bode well for how long Democrats will continue controlling both houses of Congress and the affect it will have for Obama's chances at re-election. If people were REALLY so unhappy with Republicans and the majority of people had REALLY taken this sharp turn to liberalism - then Obama's win would have been a real landslide -on the level of Reagan's landslide. THAT was a real landslide BECAUSE of the overwhelming dissatisfaction with both Carter and Democrats. No way to miss it. But that isn't true here though. With an open White House and heavy dissatisfaction with Republicans -McCain would never have been ahead in the polls -but he was. It was only after the stock market tanked that he dropped and never recovered. If people had rejected Republicans, Palin would NEVER have gotten such sharply high approval ratings after her speech at the convention. Clearly a significant percent of this country were receptive to what she said that night -even though her approval ratings later tanked. They didn't tank because of what she said that night but because of perceptions of poor performance in other public appearances that followed. It required an all out effort and highly selective editing by the liberal media to go after that woman -all while deliberatey and repeatedly ignoring the nonstop IDIOCIES of Joe Biden.

The majority of Obama voters were politically IGNORANT people who didn't even know which party controlled Congress. They were driven primarilty by the historic nature of that election and wanting to be a part of it. As was our media -with people starting to get really sick of seeing the media continue to pander to this guy even after the election instead of doing their job. Which is why Fox's ratings are more than CNN and MSNBC combined now for every time period. People can't stand for very long to see the media pretend to be unbiased even while engaged in all that blatant asskissing - and at some point want to see some real reporting with the tough questions being asked instead of this phony fluff being foisted off on them! (What it will take for our liberal media to understand the hit THEY are taking by refusing to report in an unbiased manner and without inserting their own personal political beliefs -and pretending they can't figure out why their ratings and circulation just keep dropping - is another topic.)

So what's Obama got next time around? Politically ignorant people are not reliable voters and neither are those who were driven by a desire to participate in a one-time historical event. People who vote in midterm elections are more politically aware than those who only vote in Presidential elections and it is a fact that Republicans are more likely to vote than Democrats. And those who vote in midterm elections are certainly more politically aware than the majority of Obama voters who didn't even know who controlled Congress. These will be the same people who are most unhappy with Congress already who will be coming out at midterm.

It won't be near long enough for Obama before people stop making a distinction between the out-of-control ultra-liberal Democrat Congress they already can't stand -and the ultra-liberal Democrat President who eagerly signs into law their massive spending sprees and bills that only expands the power and reach of government.

 

[DavidS]

The idea of returning this country to the way it was back in the 1940s and 1950s when men were men and women were women and moral values mattered is dead... at least on a government level.

The social conservative movement is defined by three main areas:

1. Make abortion illegal
2. Do not fund embryonic stem cell research
3. Gay people should not be allowed to be married

Thus two out of three is government interference in our personal lives and the last limits federal funding of scientific research that can save millions of lives. The reason why Bush won and Gore didn't was because of the outlandish things Bill Clinton did in office during the 1990s. Many Americans, even left-wing ones, were disgusted by this and wanted a clean break from all of these investigations and sexual harassment cases, etc. And Bush ran on a moral platform. If Clinton had not had sexual relations with Monica or Bush had not run on a social conservative platform, Gore would've been president. This country is not center-right, it is center-left and drifting to the left every year.

Fiscal conservatism is defined as:

1. Reducing the size of the government
2. Cutting taxes for the rich and raising them on the lower and middle class
3. Limited government regulation

Americans overall are OK with increasing the size of the government, are angry at the rich for causing all of these problems and want more government regulation to ensure something like this never happens again.

Now, when the economy recovers again, and we're beginning to see some signs of life, I do see people's opinions of fiscal conservatism changing and liking some of the ideas. Tax cuts for EVERYONE, smaller government and less regulation, though not as extreme as some would believe.

Social conservatism belongs in people's homes and Churches. It does not belong in the federal government. Thus social conservatism is DEAD. Fiscal conservatives have to re-think the extremes in their policies and modify them.

If you had a socially moderate and fiscally conservative Republican run in 2012, he might give Obama a run for his money. BUT - right now, let me tell ya'... there is very little chance of anyone getting within 10 points of Obama if the economy is recovering nicely in 2012. People will remember how bad this recession is and like they did with Dubyah in 2004, they will not want to risk someone different.

Hey... if ya got nothing MAKE IT UP!

ROFLMNAO... Sweet mother that's pathetic...

Instead of insulting me, why don't you take the time to refute what I said? If the social conservatives are not concerned with what I said above, then what are they concerned about besides running our personal lives and dictating to us how we should run our lives? And where in the constitution does it say it's OK for the government to be our mommies and daddies?

 

[mattskramer]

Is the Republican Party or conservative ideology dead? {edit}

no.

Yep. I thought about it some more. Unless Obama and the ultra left come close to destroying America in our view or unless the conservatives and Republicans can unite, I think that conservative ideology is over for America. Reaganism is gone forever.

 

[del]

Is the Republican Party or conservative ideology dead? {edit}

no.

Yep. I thought about it some more. Unless Obama and the ultra left come close to destroying America in our view or unless the conservatives and Republicans can unite, I think that conservative ideology is over for America. Reaganism is gone forever.

sure thing. forgive me for laughing, but i've heard this song before....

Published on Sunday, March 11, 2001 in the Washington Post
They Aren't 'Just Resting'
The Democratic Party is Dead
by Robert B. Reich

If I were a political consumer, I would -- with apologies to the late Monty Python parrot -- be going back to the store right about now and registering a complaint: "This political party -- the Democratic Party. It's dead."

"No, no, no no," he replies, "it's just resting."

But I know a dead party when I see one, and I'm looking at a dead party right now. Just consider the past eight years: lost the presidency, both houses of Congress, almost all its majorities in state legislatures, most governorships. Will lose additional House seats in the next redistricting. Most of the current justices of the Supreme Court appointed by Republicans, also most current federal judges. And the interminable Bill Clinton scandals. The Democratic Party is stone dead. Dead as a doornail.

Not at all, he says. After all, the Democrats are only one seat away from taking over the Senate. If Katherine Harris and the Supreme Court hadn't mucked it up, Al Gore would be in the White House right now. He won the popular vote by a half-million. Democrats and Greens together won more than 3 million more votes than the Republicans. And the Dems raised as much soft money as the Republicans for the first time in history. Forget the Clinton unpleasantness. The public will forget it. It always does. The party's not dead, "just resting."

Maybe, or perhaps it's stunned, lying there inert with less than two years to go until the midterms. Simply can't get over not having Bill Clinton in the White House.

But just you wait, say the party's salesmen: Someone will emerge to bring it back to life.

Look, the only reason the Democratic Party is sitting upright is that it's been nailed there, like the Python parrot. Who speaks for the Democrats? Clinton is utterly disgraced. Gore ran a lousy campaign. Terry McAuliffe heads the Democratic National Committee only because he raised a ton of money for Clinton.

The Democratic Party is Dead

 

[foggedinn]

Instead of insulting me, why don't you take the time to refute what I said? If the social conservatives are not concerned with what I said above, then what are they concerned about besides running our personal lives and dictating to us how we should run our lives? And where in the constitution does it say it's OK for the government to be our mommies and daddies?

You've been insulted by the village idiot. Every board has at least one. Please consider the source

 

[ItsFairmont]

I know the answer:

1. Conservatism is not dead.

2. Aside from the Muslim Nations, the USA is the most conservative in the world. Liberals have lots of places they could move to if fed up with the USA, but where would conservatives go? New Zealand, Australia, Sweden, Norway, France, Britain, Germany, etc? Nope, those countries are more liberal than we are.

3. Given the above, conservatives have no choice but to stay and fight. This is it for them. They have nowhere else to go (unless they convert to Islam, move to Saudi Arabia and find out what real social conservatism is about).


4. The problem is that conservatives want to eat their cake and have it too, and that isn't possible. Here's what I mean:

A. They talk about smaller government, yet have never once successfully pulled it off (federally, of course).

B. They talk about morals and values, but their leaders are adulterers, drinkers, homosexuals, and many of them are non-churched. Heck, even the very-churched ones (Ted Haggart) end up being meth-addicted gay guys.

C. Most of them are as liberal socially as liberals. They drink, smoke, live with girlfriends, gamble, engage in pre-marital sex, don't attend church (most of them), curse, swear, lie, cheat, and engage in all kinds of immoral behavior like pornography and strip clubs. When confronted on this they say things like, "not all conservatives are alike," or "listen to a liberal tell us what a conservative is."

Hey, I'm sorry folks, but a conservative is actually someone who lives a conservative lifestyle. Don't give us your "I'm pro-life" schtick if you watch porn on the internet. Give us a break. We don't buy it and you shouldn't be selling it.

D. They talk about fiscal conservation, but no Republican does it. Most are out on debt themselves, living beyond their means, and the Republican Party has always increased the federal budget, including Reagan. Sure they cut taxes, and that's a good thing, but they don't control spending. Republicans like to live rich, whether they can afford it or not.


So a little consistency might help. Just like America was fed up with Clinton and his mess, America is now fed up with Bush. But I think it will take longer to get over it this time, because while Clinton fooled over Monica, Bush screwed the nation.

E. Finally, it's even worse that now you guys have turned into teabaggers and are out protesting against the very thing you defended for eight years: overspending.


Like I said: America's not buying it and you shouldn't be selling it.


You want to make a comeback? Be sincere.

And remember: Republicans desperately needed corporate money. Obama beat you 200 bucks at a time from individual donors, and only a very small percentage of his campaign contributions came from corporations.


It might also help to develop a sense of humor. Liberals have Tom Hanks, John Stewart, Bill Maher and more. Who do you guys have, Dennis Miller?


Yikes. I don't think that guy has ever really held down a job. He lasted, what, three games on Monday night Football?

Again.....yikes.


But at least you have John Voight. Now there's a smile. While he runs around bitching about his taxes and such, his daughter (Angelina Jolie) adopts children from third world nations.

 

[Xenophon]

When the bill comes due for all this feel good largeese of BO, the political winds will again shift.

 

[ItsFairmont]

When the bill comes due for all this feel good largeese of BO, the political winds will again shift.

True.


The Democrats are the worst political party in the world.


Well, except for the Republicans.

 

[Gunny]

Is the Republican Party or conservative ideology dead? It certainly is weak. How can it recover? I think that it will be a long time before conservatives and/or Republicans gain significant strength in Federal government. We have a far left president leading his executive branch. Congress just lost another Republican (though a moderate Republican or RINO as some may call him). We just lost a Republican selected Supreme Court Justice. Obama will probably select a more left-leaning person for judge.

The conservatives have moved away from the Republicans (disappointed in the Republican’s alleged move to the left). The conservatives are abandoning the Republicans or the Republicans are abandoning the conservatives or the separation was mutual (take your pick). Anyway, it practically results in a split ticket – helping the Democrats that much more.

Will conservative talking heads be able to convince Republican politicians to be more conservative and earn their vote or will there be a new right-wing party? Will conservatives be able to convince the general voting public to demand that elected officials be more conservative? Will the conservatives compromise, hold their noses, and vote for moderate Republicans (as in voting for the better of two evils). Even though McCain was not a far right-wing conservative, I think that most conservatives would agree that they would have rather had him as president than Obama as president. No matter what strategy or strategies the conservatives use, I think that it will be a very long time before we have a Ronald Reagan – like administration in Washington.

Perhaps the only chance for conservatives is if Obama really really screws up America in the eyes of the public. As liberal as he may be, I’ don’t see that happening any time soon.

It's an interesting phenonemon. Normally, you have compromises between coalition party elements that are made to get the party elected.

The core Republicans nowdays are dominated by religious right and tax cut zealots, and neither group is willing to compromise with anyone, including moderate Republicans or Democrats.

Unless the economy remains in a rut, I predict that the hard core element will be a far right candidate on for '12, someone like Palin where the ideology is masked by a pretty smile. Then they'll get crushed in the general election (a la Barry Goldwater in '64) and out of that fiasco a more moderate Republican party will emerge.

All rank speculation.

The religious right does not dominate the GOP. That's fearmongering rhetoric from the left. Nor do tax cut zealots. Whoever THEY are.

Conservatives should not have to compromise their principles for either the GOP nor the Democrats.

This same split happened to the Democrats during the 70s. It culminated with Reagan crushing Carter because of all the former Democrats Carter pulled the rug out from under taking the party left voted for Reagan.

Those former democrats -- neocons -- are what control the GOP now. There isn't a damned thing conservative about it. Bush enlarged the government. He spent like a Democrat. Obama must have been offended the way he's spending to show who REALLY is the boss of rampant, wasteful spending.

And whoever or whatever this religious right shit is, can one of you lefties provide some pics, names or something? I've heard of this mysterious presence for years but only from the left. Not to be confused with those on the right who are religious; which, is not the same thing. If this country is 80+% Christian, they aren't all on the right and I spent my entire childhood attending church in a family of and with families of staunch Democrats.

 

[editec]

The GOP will soldier on, have no fear of that.

TWO parties are absolutely essantial to continue the illusion of choice.

 

[garyd]

Conservatism isn't dead thought the GOP might be depending on who wins the war for the parties soul.

The country clubbers lead by the family Bush - all of them not just the last - or the conservatives. If the former then it is likely the conservatives will simply abandon ship as many did in the last election.

 

[DamnYankee]

The religious right does not dominate the GOP. That's fearmongering rhetoric from the left. Nor do tax cut zealots. Whoever THEY are.

Conservatives should not have to compromise their principles for either the GOP nor the Democrats.

This same split happened to the Democrats during the 70s. It culminated with Reagan crushing Carter because of all the former Democrats Carter pulled the rug out from under taking the party left voted for Reagan.

Those former democrats -- neocons -- are what control the GOP now. There isn't a damned thing conservative about it. Bush enlarged the government. He spent like a Democrat. Obama must have been offended the way he's spending to show who REALLY is the boss of rampant, wasteful spending.

And whoever or whatever this religious right shit is, can one of you lefties provide some pics, names or something? I've heard of this mysterious presence for years but only from the left. Not to be confused with those on the right who are religious; which, is not the same thing. If this country is 80+% Christian, they aren't all on the right and I spent my entire childhood attending church in a family of and with families of staunch Democrats.

That was well said, thank you.