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

[mudwhistle]

Everyone feels they aren't hard core anything. They feel they're moderates.

Especially when they aren't hardcore anything and no one can present any examples where they are! I keep asking for some examples.... still not a thing!

Conservatism is a philosophy and not an ideology. That means, conservatives are mostly not ideologues. They vary widely in their personal views on singular issues, they don't follow a template like liberal ideologues.

Hardcore to a liberal is anyone not willing to buy their silly horseshit....

 

[Mac1958]

Everyone feels they aren't hard core anything. They feel they're moderates.

YES.

.

 

[Harry Dresden]

.

Hardcore right wingers say there's no such thing as the hardcore right, hardcore left wingers say there's no such thing as the hardcore left.

Commitment to a hardcore partisan ideology literally distorts perception, so it's quite possible that these people are being perfectly honest.

From their perspective.

.

I say that there is such a thing as the hardcore left. Does that mean that you now believe that I am not a hardcore left winger? Cool!

sure there is.....hardcore lefties and righties have the same philosophy when it concerns others in the country not like them....."if you dont like what we like,fuck you"......and they will not question those who they say are in charge and know whats best for everyone......we see that everyday here on both sides....

 

[Boss]

.

Hardcore right wingers say there's no such thing as the hardcore right, hardcore left wingers say there's no such thing as the hardcore left.

Commitment to a hardcore partisan ideology literally distorts perception, so it's quite possible that these people are being perfectly honest.

From their perspective.

.

AGAIN... (and I plan to keep point this out, over and over and over) It takes about two brain cells to bow up and call someone a name! What you are continuing to FAIL doing is showing something to indicate this "hardcore partisan ideology" that makes the "far right" so "extreme and fanatical" or whatever.

How about presenting some examples of "far right hardcore partisan ideology" for us? Balancing a budget? Controlling illegal immigration? Adhering to the Constitution? What exactly do you have to support your claim?

*CRICKETS*

Not sure what the "CRICKETS" thing is, I'm always more than happy to provide an opinion when asked. And when I say that someone is a "hardcore partisan ideologue", I'm not trying to engage in name-calling. I'm quite serious about each word in that phrase, and you'll never see me calling someone here a nasty name.

So, to answer your question: I am confident that you understand that political opinion lies along a spectrum, from Left to Right. So an example of this would be the use of the term RINO, which generally means a Republican who does not agree with all of the GOP platform. I'm sure you have heard that term, so no doubt I don't need to go into more detail there.

So what do I mean by "hardcore right wing partisan ideologue"? Well, there are two parts to that: Ideological and behavioral.

Ideological: Easy call here. Off the top of my head: No abortions, no gay marriage, neocon war & foreign policy, total free market healthcare, decrease federal government spending at all costs, constant push for fewer gun laws, constant push for lower personal and corporate income taxes and other taxation, constant push to abolish any number of federal government departments (from education to IRS). Surely you recognize that there are some conservatives who may not push quite as hard or might even disagree with one or two of those positions, thereby moving them toward the Left on the aforementioned "spectrum".

Behavioral: Partisan ideologues on both ends regularly engage in the same dishonest behaviors: Spin, deflection, distortion, denial, hyperbole, straw man arguments and outright lies in a transparent effort to maximize all arguments, data and information on their "side" and to minimize, avoid, ignore all contrary arguments, data and information. Ideology over everything else, from honesty to country. Further, I have become convinced that adherence to a hardcore partisan ideology literally distorts perception, making people truly believe and say things that they would not if they were in a more rational state of mind.

There. I hope that clarifies.

.

It only clarifies that you can't tell the difference between an ideology and a philosophy. Now you listed some issues which conservative philosophy deals with, but where is the "extremism" in anything you mentioned? For example, which Conservative is advocating that we ban all abortions? What the hell is "neocon war?" ...You mean like bombing Syria?

I know plenty of Conservatives who support a state's right to legislate gay marriage... are they not conservative because of that?

 

[NYcarbineer]

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!

Okay,

so name the more conservative candidates who could have beaten Obama in either 2008 or 2012.

Be specific and make the case for anyone you name.

LOL.. WTF? You're asking me to tell you who could have won an election they didn't win? AND, you want me to make the case for why they could have won what they didn't win?

I think I clearly stated that what Conservatives have been missing is a voice. Since you seem retarded and don't comprehend, that means in 2008 and 2012, the Conservatives didn't have a strong voice. The GOP, subsequently, did not nominate a Conservative. Coulda, shoulda, woulda... makes no difference now.

Conservatives did have a voice in every election I cited. The more conservative 'voices' weren't nominated.

You claim they could have done better, or even won.

Well?

Name who could have won...

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

What is ridiculous is that so many buy into the 'either left or right' argument and then immediately refer to the one they disagree with in terms of extreme (-wing, far-, etc.). This is exactly what the two party dictatorship manipulates so well. It is a malady that we would do well to be cured of.

What is ridiculous is that some whackos buy into the 'two-party dictatorship conspiracy' argument and then immediately refer to the ones who are sane and do not see a dictatorship as ________________(fill in the blank)

 

[Boss]

Another post... still no examples of what is meant by "FAR RIGHT!"

Folks... they can't answer you on this! It's all rhetoric!

Here is an example of all it takes to be far Right, it's that simple!

Feb 20, 2015
RUSH: All you need to know is Obama wants it; you should oppose it. It's that simple.

Okay... So to you, "far right" means anyone who is in opposition to Obama on any issue!

Glad you clarified your rhetoric, now we understand!

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

There's no such thing as a 'Far-Right'.
.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Barack Obama won the Moderate vote by 20 points over McCain in 2008.

You want the GOP to move further to the right, and cede MORE of the Moderate vote to the next Democratic candidate?

You're insane.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Another post... still no examples of what is meant by "FAR RIGHT!"

Folks... they can't answer you on this! It's all rhetoric!

Here is an example of all it takes to be far Right, it's that simple!

Feb 20, 2015
RUSH: All you need to know is Obama wants it; you should oppose it. It's that simple.

Okay... So to you, "far right" means anyone who is in opposition to Obama on any issue!

Glad you clarified your rhetoric, now we understand!

Ok, Rush is NOT far right

 

[Mac1958]

.

Hardcore right wingers say there's no such thing as the hardcore right, hardcore left wingers say there's no such thing as the hardcore left.

Commitment to a hardcore partisan ideology literally distorts perception, so it's quite possible that these people are being perfectly honest.

From their perspective.

.

AGAIN... (and I plan to keep point this out, over and over and over) It takes about two brain cells to bow up and call someone a name! What you are continuing to FAIL doing is showing something to indicate this "hardcore partisan ideology" that makes the "far right" so "extreme and fanatical" or whatever.

How about presenting some examples of "far right hardcore partisan ideology" for us? Balancing a budget? Controlling illegal immigration? Adhering to the Constitution? What exactly do you have to support your claim?

*CRICKETS*

Not sure what the "CRICKETS" thing is, I'm always more than happy to provide an opinion when asked. And when I say that someone is a "hardcore partisan ideologue", I'm not trying to engage in name-calling. I'm quite serious about each word in that phrase, and you'll never see me calling someone here a nasty name.

So, to answer your question: I am confident that you understand that political opinion lies along a spectrum, from Left to Right. So an example of this would be the use of the term RINO, which generally means a Republican who does not agree with all of the GOP platform. I'm sure you have heard that term, so no doubt I don't need to go into more detail there.

So what do I mean by "hardcore right wing partisan ideologue"? Well, there are two parts to that: Ideological and behavioral.

Ideological: Easy call here. Off the top of my head: No abortions, no gay marriage, neocon war & foreign policy, total free market healthcare, decrease federal government spending at all costs, constant push for fewer gun laws, constant push for lower personal and corporate income taxes and other taxation, constant push to abolish any number of federal government departments (from education to IRS). Surely you recognize that there are some conservatives who may not push quite as hard or might even disagree with one or two of those positions, thereby moving them toward the Left on the aforementioned "spectrum".

Behavioral: Partisan ideologues on both ends regularly engage in the same dishonest behaviors: Spin, deflection, distortion, denial, hyperbole, straw man arguments and outright lies in a transparent effort to maximize all arguments, data and information on their "side" and to minimize, avoid, ignore all contrary arguments, data and information. Ideology over everything else, from honesty to country. Further, I have become convinced that adherence to a hardcore partisan ideology literally distorts perception, making people truly believe and say things that they would not if they were in a more rational state of mind.

There. I hope that clarifies.

.

It only clarifies that you can't tell the difference between an ideology and a philosophy. Now you listed some issues which conservative philosophy deals with, but where is the "extremism" in anything you mentioned? For example, which Conservative is advocating that we ban all abortions? What the hell is "neocon war?" ...You mean like bombing Syria?

I know plenty of Conservatives who support a state's right to legislate gay marriage... are they not conservative because of that?

Philosophy vs. ideology is irrelevant in this case. If you want to parse words, that's fine.

And surely you know what I mean by "neocons".

And perhaps you can show me where I used the word "extremism". You put it in quotes; I didn't say that.

You're illustrating what Mudwhistle infers above: Even hardcore partisan ideologues think they're moderates.

.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Another post... still no examples of what is meant by "FAR RIGHT!"

Folks... they can't answer you on this! It's all rhetoric!

Here is an example of all it takes to be far Right, it's that simple!

Feb 20, 2015
RUSH: All you need to know is Obama wants it; you should oppose it. It's that simple.

Okay... So to you, "far right" means anyone who is in opposition to Obama on any issue!

Glad you clarified your rhetoric, now we understand!

The 'far right', along with much of the mainstream right, are the people who think Jeb Bush is too moderate.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Another post... still no examples of what is meant by "FAR RIGHT!"

Folks... they can't answer you on this! It's all rhetoric!

Here is an example of all it takes to be far Right, it's that simple!

Feb 20, 2015
RUSH: All you need to know is Obama wants it; you should oppose it. It's that simple.

Okay... So to you, "far right" means anyone who is in opposition to Obama on any issue!

Glad you clarified your rhetoric, now we understand!

Ok, Rush is NOT far right

lol, Rush has been for decades one of the loudest voices claiming the GOP needs to move further to the right to win presidential elections.

He is a major faction in radicalizing conservatives.

 

[Boss]

Conservatives did have a voice in every election I cited. The more conservative 'voices' weren't nominated.

You claim they could have done better, or even won.

Well?

Name who could have won...

No... they didn't have a voice. I didn't claim they could have done better or even won. You're asking me to give you examples of someone who didn't exist and I can't do that.

If Conservatives had someone like Ronald Reagan who could have articulated Conservative philosophy, they would have won in a landslide over Obama or any other liberal lefty. The fact is, they had no such person on the national stage. They had a few who tried but failed because they weren't articulate enough. I can't change reality, it is what it is. Your demands that I present some alternate reality that never happened is kind of stupid.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Another post... still no examples of what is meant by "FAR RIGHT!"

Folks... they can't answer you on this! It's all rhetoric!

Here is an example of all it takes to be far Right, it's that simple!

Feb 20, 2015
RUSH: All you need to know is Obama wants it; you should oppose it. It's that simple.

Okay... So to you, "far right" means anyone who is in opposition to Obama on any issue!

Glad you clarified your rhetoric, now we understand!

Ok, Rush is NOT far right

lol, Rush has been for decades one of the loudest voices claiming the GOP needs to move further to the right to win presidential elections.

He is a major faction in radicalizing conservatives.

When you use their own words to prove a point, wingnuts of the far right just ignore reality

 

[NYcarbineer]

Conservatives did have a voice in every election I cited. The more conservative 'voices' weren't nominated.

You claim they could have done better, or even won.

Well?

Name who could have won...

No... they didn't have a voice. I didn't claim they could have done better or even won. You're asking me to give you examples of someone who didn't exist and I can't do that.

If Conservatives had someone like Ronald Reagan who could have articulated Conservative philosophy, they would have won in a landslide over Obama or any other liberal lefty. The fact is, they had no such person on the national stage. They had a few who tried but failed because they weren't articulate enough. I can't change reality, it is what it is. Your demands that I present some alternate reality that never happened is kind of stupid.

So someone else wrote this in your OP?

"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."

YOU brought up the past elections.

 

[thanatos144]

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...

Would be?

Well it IS Rubio, Cruz, Tea Party wingers, and others who make the GOP look like a lunatic asylum

Well, again, you fuckwits keep on mouthing this but you aren't giving any examples. Is that the best you all can do? Mouth some smart ass shit that you can't back up? It doesn't take very many brain cells to sit here and accuse someone of being a lunatic. I've not seen such a strategy work since about 3rd grade, but good luck!

Basically all the GOP needs is another Jimmy Carter (who actually was more fiscally conservative than Ronald Reagan ever dreamed of being) and you'll win big regardless of who you roll out. The last President to fit that mold was W who turned peace and prosperity into a series of unwinnable endless wars and a $700B bailout.
It takes about 12 years to get the White House back after such a disaster....good luck in 2020.

This is how retarded the democrats are.....

 

[bendog]

Far right to me means it's less important to get the budget under control than it is to be able to fire the gays for being gay, and not have any permanent legal status for illegal aliens who've been working for years, and to ban every abortion and even those down with over the counter pills.

 

[thanatos144]

What has been missing for Conservatives is a voice.

What has been missing for Conservatives is an intelligent voice.

There are hundreds of retards on the air speaking for Conservatives. That's the problem.

What do you care since you will vote democrat anyway? Oh I keep forgetting you try and portray yourself as a republican on this board.....

 

[Boss]

.

Hardcore right wingers say there's no such thing as the hardcore right, hardcore left wingers say there's no such thing as the hardcore left.

Commitment to a hardcore partisan ideology literally distorts perception, so it's quite possible that these people are being perfectly honest.

From their perspective.

.

AGAIN... (and I plan to keep point this out, over and over and over) It takes about two brain cells to bow up and call someone a name! What you are continuing to FAIL doing is showing something to indicate this "hardcore partisan ideology" that makes the "far right" so "extreme and fanatical" or whatever.

How about presenting some examples of "far right hardcore partisan ideology" for us? Balancing a budget? Controlling illegal immigration? Adhering to the Constitution? What exactly do you have to support your claim?

*CRICKETS*

Not sure what the "CRICKETS" thing is, I'm always more than happy to provide an opinion when asked. And when I say that someone is a "hardcore partisan ideologue", I'm not trying to engage in name-calling. I'm quite serious about each word in that phrase, and you'll never see me calling someone here a nasty name.

So, to answer your question: I am confident that you understand that political opinion lies along a spectrum, from Left to Right. So an example of this would be the use of the term RINO, which generally means a Republican who does not agree with all of the GOP platform. I'm sure you have heard that term, so no doubt I don't need to go into more detail there.

So what do I mean by "hardcore right wing partisan ideologue"? Well, there are two parts to that: Ideological and behavioral.

Ideological: Easy call here. Off the top of my head: No abortions, no gay marriage, neocon war & foreign policy, total free market healthcare, decrease federal government spending at all costs, constant push for fewer gun laws, constant push for lower personal and corporate income taxes and other taxation, constant push to abolish any number of federal government departments (from education to IRS). Surely you recognize that there are some conservatives who may not push quite as hard or might even disagree with one or two of those positions, thereby moving them toward the Left on the aforementioned "spectrum".

Behavioral: Partisan ideologues on both ends regularly engage in the same dishonest behaviors: Spin, deflection, distortion, denial, hyperbole, straw man arguments and outright lies in a transparent effort to maximize all arguments, data and information on their "side" and to minimize, avoid, ignore all contrary arguments, data and information. Ideology over everything else, from honesty to country. Further, I have become convinced that adherence to a hardcore partisan ideology literally distorts perception, making people truly believe and say things that they would not if they were in a more rational state of mind.

There. I hope that clarifies.

.

It only clarifies that you can't tell the difference between an ideology and a philosophy. Now you listed some issues which conservative philosophy deals with, but where is the "extremism" in anything you mentioned? For example, which Conservative is advocating that we ban all abortions? What the hell is "neocon war?" ...You mean like bombing Syria?

I know plenty of Conservatives who support a state's right to legislate gay marriage... are they not conservative because of that?

Philosophy vs. ideology is irrelevant in this case. If you want to parse words, that's fine.

And surely you know what I mean by "neocons".

And perhaps you can show me where I used the word "extremism". You put it in quotes; I didn't say that.

You're illustrating what Mudwhistle infers above: Even hardcore partisan ideologues think they're moderates.

.

All I did was ask you for some examples to back up the rhetoric and you've failed to produce them. And no... Ideology and philosophy are two completely different things and the difference is not irrelevant. That is a fact and it's not "parsing" anything to point it out.

Any time you place the word "FAR" in front of something, it explicitly implies "extreme!" What the fuck else can "extreme" mean?

I am not a partisan ideologue and so far, there has been NO EXAMPLES GIVEN of what this even means in terms of my positions and views. It's all a part of the Rhetoric Campaign... the systematic dismantling of Conservative philosophy in an attempt to morph it into some backward-thinking ideology that can be ridiculed and opposed.

You're failing because you can't cite examples to support your rhetoric! I've asked patiently, over and over... doesn't seem to matter... you guys just keep heaping the rhetoric on hot and heavy without backing it up.

What does "FAR RIGHT" mean? Am I "far right" because I believe our Constitution guarantees us the right to bear arms? That makes me an "extremist radical far right wacko?" Is it my view on Constitutionally limited federal government? Less taxes and more freedom? Please, do tell... what makes me a "far right" conservative?