HARD RIGHT TURN: How The GOP Destroyed Its Moderates

[Toro]

I would agree that the Republican Party has made it more difficult for moderates. Moderates are often targeted by right wing special interest groups in the primaries. There is even a name for moderates - RINO. I don't recall such derision for moderates in the Democrat Party.

I think this is a problem for the Republican Party. The more they cede the center, the more likely they are to end up as a rump, opposition party, like they are in California.

The only thing that RINOs cede are their (claimed) principles, when they campaign like libertarians then govern like the leftist progressives they claim to oppose....Only to then turn around and make the chickenshit cop-out claim that "we went to change Washington and Washington changed us".

Besides that, there are far more potential voters amongst the ranks of those who either have never voted or dropped out altogether, than there are amongst the squishy, unprincipled, knock-them-over-with-a-feather "moderates".

Thanks for proving my point. I appreciate that.

 

[kaz]

I would agree that the Republican Party has made it more difficult for moderates. Moderates are often targeted by right wing special interest groups in the primaries. There is even a name for moderates - RINO. I don't recall such derision for moderates in the Democrat Party.

I think this is a problem for the Republican Party. The more they cede the center, the more likely they are to end up as a rump, opposition party, like they are in California.

There are two main reasons people are generally called RINOs. The socons call people who support our owning our own bodies RINOs, in which case I agree with you. But more often they are called RINOs for taxing and spending like Democrats, in which case I agree with them.

As for Democrats, name a moderate. Joe Lieberman disagreed with the Democrats on one issue, Iraq, and was driven from the party for it. And then when Obama became President, he implemented that policy. Every Democrat in the House of Representatives voted for nationalizing healthcare proving that a "blue dog" is a Democrat who simply wants to be known as conservative while it means nothing to them. How do they attack people who don't exist?

 

[Toro]

I would agree that the Republican Party has made it more difficult for moderates. Moderates are often targeted by right wing special interest groups in the primaries. There is even a name for moderates - RINO. I don't recall such derision for moderates in the Democrat Party.

I think this is a problem for the Republican Party. The more they cede the center, the more likely they are to end up as a rump, opposition party, like they are in California.

There are two main reasons people are generally called RINOs. The socons call people who support our owning our own bodies RINOs, in which case I agree with you. But more often they are called RINOs for taxing and spending like Democrats, in which case I agree with them.

As for Democrats, name a moderate. Joe Lieberman disagreed with the Democrats on one issue, Iraq, and was driven from the party for it. And then when Obama became President, he implemented that policy. Every Democrat in the House of Representatives voted for nationalizing healthcare proving that a "blue dog" is a Democrat who simply wants to be known as conservative while it means nothing to them. How do they attack people who don't exist?

Of course there are extremists in both parties. But I view the Democrats as more accepting of moderates. I don't see a concerted drive to expunge them from the base as I do amongst the extremist Republicans.

 

[Oddball]

Of course there are extremists in both parties. But I view the Democrats as more accepting of moderates. I don't see a concerted drive to expunge them from the base as I do amongst the extremist Republicans.

Izzatafact?

Seems you missed the 2006 Democrat primary, for the Senate seat in Connecticut.

 

[Dot Com]

LIAR..as usual, LIBERAL liars who can't EVER stand on the truth..

Conservatives Remain the Largest Ideological Group in U.S.

Conservatives Remain the Largest Ideological Group in U.S.
Overall, the nation has grown more polarized over the past decade
by Lydia Saad
PRINCETON, NJ -- Political ideology in the U.S. held steady in 2011, with 40% of Americans continuing to describe their views as conservative, 35% as moderate, and 21% as liberal. This marks the third straight year that conservatives have outnumbered moderates, after more than a decade in which moderates mainly tied or outnumbered conservDon'tatives.


SHOW THE ENTIRE POLL NEXT TIME LIB. Conservatives are republicans on Election Day.

FROM GALLUP

no shit but they don't ID as Repubs. Just because someone says they're conservative does NOT automatically mean they join the Repub party. Why does it NOT surprise me that my post went over your head?

The only person impressed with your STUPIDITY is you. Nothing you say goes over anyone's head. The country breaks down in Gallup in to :

Conservative, Indpendent or Moderate, Liberal

That's it.. Party affiliation is just that which MEANS zero in the sum total of how this country leans and perceives thing. Only disingenuous people like yourself push a marginal line to create the facade that somehow less than 30% of the country is conservative which is a LIE.

AGAIN!!! Who said anything about 'conservative' you twunt? I said most people will not ID w/ the Repub party & for good reason. They've let the Teavangelists & Randians be their face to the public at large. Don't bring a knife to a shooting match. You cons got anyone better than LadyDumbSlinger I can debate with

 

[Oddball]

I would agree that the Republican Party has made it more difficult for moderates. Moderates are often targeted by right wing special interest groups in the primaries. There is even a name for moderates - RINO. I don't recall such derision for moderates in the Democrat Party.

I think this is a problem for the Republican Party. The more they cede the center, the more likely they are to end up as a rump, opposition party, like they are in California.

The only thing that RINOs cede are their (claimed) principles, when they campaign like libertarians then govern like the leftist progressives they claim to oppose....Only to then turn around and make the chickenshit cop-out claim that "we went to change Washington and Washington changed us".

Besides that, there are far more potential voters amongst the ranks of those who either have never voted or dropped out altogether, than there are amongst the squishy, unprincipled, knock-them-over-with-a-feather "moderates".

Thanks for proving my point. I appreciate that.

What's to be gained by acting like the people you claim to oppose?...I mean other than political power for its own sake?

After you do that, does it not then in turn become arguable that there is in fact no true opposition party?

 

[LadyGunSlinger]

no shit but they don't ID as Repubs. Just because someone says they're conservative does NOT automatically mean they join the Repub party. Why does it NOT surprise me that my post went over your head?

The only person impressed with your STUPIDITY is you. Nothing you say goes over anyone's head. The country breaks down in Gallup in to :

Conservative, Indpendent or Moderate, Liberal

That's it.. Party affiliation is just that which MEANS zero in the sum total of how this country leans and perceives thing. Only disingenuous people like yourself push a marginal line to create the facade that somehow less than 30% of the country is conservative which is a LIE.

AGAIN!!! Who said anything about 'conservative' you twunt? I said most people will not ID w/ the Repub party & for good reason. They've let the Teavangelists & Randians be their face to the public at large. Don't bring a knife to a shooting match. You cons got anyone better than LadyDumbSlinger I can debate with

As always, liberals revert to form in name calling, especially using derrogatory terms toward women which I find soo odd, and yet nearly all do it on this forum and claim to champion women's rights, blah blah blah.. Like Obama, libruls think they need merely say it and it's somehow a truth. The above proves anything but..

 

[Harry Dresden]

I would agree that the Republican Party has made it more difficult for moderates. Moderates are often targeted by right wing special interest groups in the primaries. There is even a name for moderates - RINO. I don't recall such derision for moderates in the Democrat Party.

I think this is a problem for the Republican Party. The more they cede the center, the more likely they are to end up as a rump, opposition party, like they are in California.

I would agree that the Republican Party has made it more difficult for moderates.

i would say they have made it more difficult for the more Liberal Republicans......those are the Rinos....
I don't recall such derision for moderates in the Democrat Party.

the more Conservative Democrats.....the "Blue Dogs"........

 

[Freewill]

I would agree that the Republican Party has made it more difficult for moderates. Moderates are often targeted by right wing special interest groups in the primaries. There is even a name for moderates - RINO. I don't recall such derision for moderates in the Democrat Party.

I think this is a problem for the Republican Party. The more they cede the center, the more likely they are to end up as a rump, opposition party, like they are in California.

Isn't the nomination of both McCain and Romney enough proof of what you say is just pure liberal story line? Neither of them, along with GWB is anywhere near a Reagan type conservative.

 

[Oddball]

I would agree that the Republican Party has made it more difficult for moderates. Moderates are often targeted by right wing special interest groups in the primaries. There is even a name for moderates - RINO. I don't recall such derision for moderates in the Democrat Party.

I think this is a problem for the Republican Party. The more they cede the center, the more likely they are to end up as a rump, opposition party, like they are in California.

Isn't the nomination of both McCain and Romney enough proof of what you say is just pure liberal story line? Neither of them, along with GWB is anywhere near a Reagan type conservative.

Hell, Reagan wasn't anywhere near a Reagan type "conservative" (whatever the hell that's supposed to mean anymore).

 

[squeeze berry]

This is prolly why only @ 28% +/- ID themselves as being Repubs It aint your father's Repub party, it's been hijacked by the Fundies & Randians
Party Affiliation

the link you provided indicates the % is closer than the 28% you mentiion when you include "leaners"

your perception is skewed at best. I have yet to discuss politics with other GOPers that mentioned Rand or the bible.

at the grass roots level the GOP has certainly not been hijacked by fundes and randies.

 

[Dot Com]

The only person impressed with your STUPIDITY is you. Nothing you say goes over anyone's head. The country breaks down in Gallup in to :

Conservative, Indpendent or Moderate, Liberal

That's it.. Party affiliation is just that which MEANS zero in the sum total of how this country leans and perceives thing. Only disingenuous people like yourself push a marginal line to create the facade that somehow less than 30% of the country is conservative which is a LIE.

AGAIN!!! Who said anything about 'conservative' you twunt? I said most people will not ID w/ the Repub party & for good reason. They've let the Teavangelists & Randians be their face to the public at large. Don't bring a knife to a shooting match. You cons got anyone better than LadyDumbSlinger I can debate with

As always, liberals revert to form in name calling, especially using derrogatory terms toward women which I find soo odd, and yet nearly all do it on this forum and claim to champion women's rights, blah blah blah.. Like Obama, libruls think they need merely say it and it's somehow a truth. The above proves anything but..

is that how you admit you were wrong? I want to hear the words outta that yammering piehole of yours.

 

[Dot Com]

This is prolly why only @ 28% +/- ID themselves as being Repubs It aint your father's Repub party, it's been hijacked by the Fundies & Randians
Party Affiliation

the link you provided indicates the % is closer than the 28% you mentiion when you include "leaners"

your perception is skewed at best. I have yet to discuss politics with other GOPers that mentioned Rand or the bible.

at the grass roots level the GOP has certainly not been hijacked by fundes and randies.

You're funny

 

[kaz]

I would agree that the Republican Party has made it more difficult for moderates. Moderates are often targeted by right wing special interest groups in the primaries. There is even a name for moderates - RINO. I don't recall such derision for moderates in the Democrat Party.

I think this is a problem for the Republican Party. The more they cede the center, the more likely they are to end up as a rump, opposition party, like they are in California.

There are two main reasons people are generally called RINOs. The socons call people who support our owning our own bodies RINOs, in which case I agree with you. But more often they are called RINOs for taxing and spending like Democrats, in which case I agree with them.

As for Democrats, name a moderate. Joe Lieberman disagreed with the Democrats on one issue, Iraq, and was driven from the party for it. And then when Obama became President, he implemented that policy. Every Democrat in the House of Representatives voted for nationalizing healthcare proving that a "blue dog" is a Democrat who simply wants to be known as conservative while it means nothing to them. How do they attack people who don't exist?

Of course there are extremists in both parties. But I view the Democrats as more accepting of moderates. I don't see a concerted drive to expunge them from the base as I do amongst the extremist Republicans.

Hmm...what about reading my post this time before responding to it? Democrats tolerate zero dissent, and they get none. I asked for an example of a Democratic "moderate" so I could have some clue what you are talking about. You simply repeated your statement and addressed nothing.

 

[squeeze berry]

This is prolly why only @ 28% +/- ID themselves as being Repubs It aint your father's Repub party, it's been hijacked by the Fundies & Randians
Party Affiliation

the link you provided indicates the % is closer than the 28% you mentiion when you include "leaners"

your perception is skewed at best. I have yet to discuss politics with other GOPers that mentioned Rand or the bible.

at the grass roots level the GOP has certainly not been hijacked by fundes and randies.

You're funny

got proof?

 

[Amazed]

yet, you are completely blind to the fact that the far left runs the dem party.

gibberish and cliche - there is no real "far left" in the us.

moron alert!!!!!!

 

[Dot Com]

the link you provided indicates the % is closer than the 28% you mentiion when you include "leaners"

your perception is skewed at best. I have yet to discuss politics with other GOPers that mentioned Rand or the bible.

at the grass roots level the GOP has certainly not been hijacked by fundes and randies.

You're funny

got proof?

r u serious? What I can't figure out is if the 1% are happy or sad that their party is being represented by hard rw social cons. Where were you during the rw HC town halls/shout fest in 2010

 

[Oddball]

Ahhh...Nothing says "I got nothing" better than invoking the stale old 1% meme.

 

[Toro]

Of course there are extremists in both parties. But I view the Democrats as more accepting of moderates. I don't see a concerted drive to expunge them from the base as I do amongst the extremist Republicans.

Izzatafact?

Seems you missed the 2006 Democrat primary, for the Senate seat in Connecticut.

Thanks for that one example.

 

[Toro]

There are two main reasons people are generally called RINOs. The socons call people who support our owning our own bodies RINOs, in which case I agree with you. But more often they are called RINOs for taxing and spending like Democrats, in which case I agree with them.

As for Democrats, name a moderate. Joe Lieberman disagreed with the Democrats on one issue, Iraq, and was driven from the party for it. And then when Obama became President, he implemented that policy. Every Democrat in the House of Representatives voted for nationalizing healthcare proving that a "blue dog" is a Democrat who simply wants to be known as conservative while it means nothing to them. How do they attack people who don't exist?

Of course there are extremists in both parties. But I view the Democrats as more accepting of moderates. I don't see a concerted drive to expunge them from the base as I do amongst the extremist Republicans.

Hmm...what about reading my post this time before responding to it? Democrats tolerate zero dissent, and they get none. I asked for an example of a Democratic "moderate" so I could have some clue what you are talking about. You simply repeated your statement and addressed nothing.

Blue Dog Democrats are moderates. The idea that they tolerate zero dissent is nonsense.

Given all the money Obama and the Democrats are raising from Wall Street - you know, the 1% - it's pretty amusing that you paint them as extremists. If you think the Democrats are extremists while they raise tens of millions from hedge fund and private equity managers, it means that you are an extremist.