RNC endorsement criteria

Bern80

Gold Member
Jan 9, 2004
8,094
722
138
Republicans considering ideological purity test for candidates - Yahoo! News

Good to see the Republican party attempting to create a unified identity. I don't agree with everything on the list, but 8 out of 10.....

1) We support smaller government, smaller national debt, lower deficits and lower taxes by opposing bills like Obama's "stimulus" bill;

(2) We support market-based health care reform and oppose Obama-style government run healthcare;

(3) We support market-based energy reforms by opposing cap and trade legislation;

(4) We support workers' right to secret ballot by opposing card check;

(5) We support legal immigration and assimilation into American society by opposing amnesty for illegal immigrants;

(6) We support victory in Iraq and Afghanistan by supporting military-recommended troop surges;

(7) We support containment of Iran and North Korea, particularly effective action to eliminate their nuclear weapons threat;

(8) We support retention of the Defense of Marriage Act;

(9) We support protecting the lives of vulnerable persons by opposing health care rationing and denial of health care and government funding of abortion; and

(10) We support the right to keep and bear arms by opposing government restrictions on gun ownership;
 
I say it's about darn time. What good is being in a party with a supposed set of beliefs if you won't adhere to them. You have a club then that cares only if you pay your dues to them regularly. THAT we don't need.

Beliefs you aren't willing to support or defend or enforce are worthless.
 
I'm underwhelmed.

Not that the GOP has finally put some positions forward, but that they're kind of ambiguous and the "goals" are pretty unambitious.
True. I view it as a start. First you have to acknowledge the problem. They're 12 stepping their way back to coherance as a party.
 
GOP purity test would have banished Bush, Reagan | Raw Story

The latest trend in the Republican Party is an effort to weed out moderates -- witness New York Republicans' successful effort to oust their own candidate in an upstate House race, in preference for an independent conservative.

But a new GOP "purity test" named for Ronald Reagan moves the line even farther to the right, and a liberal website has found that the test -- if used in the past -- would have screened out President Ronald Reagan and President George W. Bush as viable conservatives.

Trouble is, the measure would likely have screened out President Ronald Reagan, under whose watch the US deficit ballooned. The federal deficit mushroomed from 2.7 percent of gross domestic product in 1980, to 6 percent in 1983.

Reagan also agreed to a $165 billion bailout of Social Security, in contradiction of conservative orthodoxy (though he did drastically reduce the top income tax brackets for Americans).

The Gipper also raised the gasoline tax in 1983.

Irony be thy name.
 
If you want to be a successful national party in a country as large and diverse as the U.S., you have to be prepared to welcome everyone who agrees with you more often than they agree with the other guys,

even if that score is 51 to 49.

The rightwing's 80-20 formula is ludicrous.
 
Last edited:
You know, I admit i do this sometimes, but why on earth do we somehow associate the President with the debt? I mean its the House that dictates the spending. Not the Executive Branch. Shouldnt we rightly place it on the Speaker's head and not the Presidents? (More a side note than anything)

As for the list. Its a good start. I disagree with maybe two points. Points 6 and 7. I dont think that troop surges are necessarily the best strategy in every war effort. I think we need to get the opinions of the generals on the ground and some knowledge of warfare ourselves so we can make educated decisions and not just blindly support something.

I also think containment is a failed policy. We need regime change in North Korea and Iran. I am not saying military intervention on our parts. There are other ways to encourage regime change. I am not sure they've been explored completely. But I dont think we can keep the totalitarian regimes in place and ever have a lasting peace with them. Especially if they have nuclear weapons.
 
I would like to see them convert this into some kind of platform but it is a nice step.
 
As you may have heard here and there, Ronald Reagan couldn't qualify for eight out of ten.

Thats because most of those issues weren't around in 1980s...

Its like comparing Obama to Lincoln or FDR despite the fact that Lincoln wasn't a communist and FDR didn't pass a trillion dollar deficit.
 
If you want to be a successful national party in a country as large and diverse as the U.S., you have to be prepared to welcome everyone who agrees with you more often than they agree with the other guys,

even if that score is 51 to 49.

The rightwing's 80-20 formula is ludicrous.

We don't really need you guys anymore and I predict that the socialist thinking in this country will be squashed in a few years.
 
If you want to be a successful national party in a country as large and diverse as the U.S., you have to be prepared to welcome everyone who agrees with you more often than they agree with the other guys,

even if that score is 51 to 49.

The rightwing's 80-20 formula is ludicrous.

We don't really need you guys anymore and I predict that the socialist thinking in this country will be squashed in a few years.

I wonder if you thought that back in '04, too.
 
Does anyone think that the GOP will NOT win seats in 2010? Does anyone think that Obama will be re-elected in 2012? Why??
 
As you may have heard here and there, Ronald Reagan couldn't qualify for eight out of ten.

Thats because most of those issues weren't around in 1980s...

Its like comparing Obama to Lincoln or FDR despite the fact that Lincoln wasn't a communist and FDR didn't pass a trillion dollar deficit.

Reagan made massive deficits standard practice.
 
If you want to be a successful national party in a country as large and diverse as the U.S., you have to be prepared to welcome everyone who agrees with you more often than they agree with the other guys,

even if that score is 51 to 49.

The rightwing's 80-20 formula is ludicrous.

We don't really need you guys anymore and I predict that the socialist thinking in this country will be squashed in a few years.

You need to look at the scoreboard once in awhile.
 
Republicans considering ideological purity test for candidates - Yahoo! News

Good to see the Republican party attempting to create a unified identity. I don't agree with everything on the list, but 8 out of 10.....

1) We support smaller government, smaller national debt, lower deficits and lower taxes by opposing bills like Obama's "stimulus" bill;

(2) We support market-based health care reform and oppose Obama-style government run healthcare;

(3) We support market-based energy reforms by opposing cap and trade legislation;

(4) We support workers' right to secret ballot by opposing card check;

(5) We support legal immigration and assimilation into American society by opposing amnesty for illegal immigrants;

(6) We support victory in Iraq and Afghanistan by supporting military-recommended troop surges;

(7) We support containment of Iran and North Korea, particularly effective action to eliminate their nuclear weapons threat;

(8) We support retention of the Defense of Marriage Act;

(9) We support protecting the lives of vulnerable persons by opposing health care rationing and denial of health care and government funding of abortion; and

(10) We support the right to keep and bear arms by opposing government restrictions on gun ownership;

Where in here are they creating jobs?
 

Forum List

Back
Top