Why the Current Liberal Dominated Political System is About to Crash

[Derideo_Te]

Exit polls showed who voted, with about a 30% share to each the liberals and conservatives, with moderates getting40% approximately.

But the polls of regular Americans shows that the breakdown is this: 45% conservative, 35% moderate, and only 20% liberal.

The GOP loses when they fail to energize their base and less than half of conservatives even bother to vote as they wait and hope for another Reagan.

Care to share those polls?

Its been a while since I have looked, but a quick couple of Googles yields the following:

conservatives 40%
Moderates 35%
liberals 21%
Conservatives Remain the Largest Ideological Group in U.S.

exit polls:
Moderates 45%
Conservatives 35%
Liberals 22%
It?s a Mod, Mod, Mod, Mod World: Most Voters are Moderates in Presidential Elections

Conservatives win if they energize their base, while liberals win if conservatives fail.

Thank you for those links. The data in the 2nd link is a mirror of the first up to 2008. The question I have with the Gallup link is whether that data has been adjusted following the exposure of the right wing bias that Gallup has now admitted?

Your allegation that "Conservatives win if they energize their base, while liberals win if conservatives fail" does not fit within the established results of elections. The GOP has traditionally done better in off year cycles when there is always a lower turnout. It tends to suffer when there is a higher voter turnout.

That would argue that moderates tend to be biased towards the left which is not the case. By definition moderates are swing voters and will choose based on what they perceive as being best for themselves and the nation irrespective of party ideology.

In the last 3 election cycles the conservative base has been extremely motivated and energized and yet it has lost 2 out of 3 of those elections.

The changing voter demographics and the internet are going to play an even bigger role in the next 2 elections and while I agree that the conservative base will be just as energized as they were in the prior 3 elections they might have a harder time achieving the gains that they want. The reason for this is because those Gallup polls are not a true reflection of the changing demographics in my opinion. If you recall the GOP relied heavily on those polls while the Dems were using a more accurate polling model in 2012.

 

[PMZ]

Energize their base?
What happened to the 10s of millions of Republicans who CRIED, "Anybody but Obama"?
Not enough energy?
They sure as well Gerrymandered their way into a House victory (and yes, the Democrats would have done EXACTLY the same thing), but they COULDN'T get Romney into the White House?

Face it, no matter how bad O is, and despite his speeches he's certainly not accomplishing anything I want, you ain't getting an elitist white haired male into the WH anytime soon.

What do you want that's not on his agenda?

Fair Trade (Comparative Advantage).
Eliminate Business Visas and send current visas home.
MNCs have to pay back deductions for moving off-shore.
Evacuate illegals.
Restore Glass-Steagall Act.

All good points. All probably politically impossible until the House is freed from the strangle hold of the Republican majority, coming up soon.

One of the biggest national political problems of the day is how to get business back to focusing on growth rather than current earnings. People will interpret, rightly or wrongly, what you want as anti business. When you're still unemployed, anti business is not popular. The politics would have to walk a tight rope between anti business and anti financial firms which is difficult.

 

[Friends]

Its been a while since I have looked, but a quick couple of Googles yields the following:

conservatives 40%
Moderates 35%
liberals 21%
Conservatives Remain the Largest Ideological Group in U.S.

Gallup December 11, 2013

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Americans continue to see the Democratic and Republican parties unfavorably, as a year marred by high-profile policy failures for both parties comes to a close. The Republican Party's favorability has improved slightly to 32% from an all-time low of 28% in October during the government shutdown, while 61% now view the GOP unfavorably. The Democratic Party -- on the defensive recently for the flawed rollout of the healthcare website -- maintains a favorable rating of 42%. But a majority of Americans, 53%, now see the party unfavorably, up from 49% in October.
Democratic Party Maintains Favorability Edge Over GOP

Gallup December 11, 2013

PRINCETON, NJ -- For the first time, a slim majority of Americans say they have an unfavorable opinion of the Tea Party movement. About one-third view the movement favorably, a new low.
Tea Party Favorability Falls to Lowest Yet

socialism has more fans than opponents among the 18-29 crowd. Forty-nine percent of people in that age bracket say they have a positive view of socialism; only 43 percent say they have a negative view.

And while those numbers aren't very far apart, it's noteworthy that they were reversed just 20 months ago, when Pew conducted a similar poll. In that survey, published May 2010, 43 percent of people age 18-29 said they had a positive view of socialism, and 49 percent said their opinion was negative.
Young People More Likely To Favor Socialism Than Capitalism: Pew

"Conservatism" means different things to different people. Many conservatives vote Democratic. They are conservative on social issues. Nevertheless, they want to preserve the basic reforms of the New Deal along with Medicare, and they know that many Republicans don't. A larger number of moderates vote Democrat.

The growing popularity of socialism among the young is significant. No one with national name recognition has advocated socialism for at least a generation. The growing unpopularity of the Tea Party indicates that the GOP will step over the cliff if it moves to the right.

The OP sounds like he is on the right side of the growing income divide. Good for him. Nevertheless, most Americans earn pay checks that buy less than they did when Bill Clinton left office, if they have jobs at all.

For a number of years public opinion polls have indicated strong support for raising taxes on the rich, and very little support for cutting Social Security and Medicare.

https://www.google.com/#q=poll+++taxes+++rich+++"Social+Security"+++Medicare

When Republicans talk about "less government" many whites remember bad experiences they had with the government. Perhaps they had trouble renewing a driver's license. Perhaps the IRS took a long hard look at their tax returns. Perhaps they lost a job opportunity because of affirmative action - or think they did. And so on.

Nevertheless, most Americans want the government to help them get through life. As our corporate leaders continue to concentrate on reducing the number of their employees rather than increasing the number of their customers, this is likely to continue.

 

[PMZ]

Its been a while since I have looked, but a quick couple of Googles yields the following:

conservatives 40%
Moderates 35%
liberals 21%
Conservatives Remain the Largest Ideological Group in U.S.

Gallup December 11, 2013

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Americans continue to see the Democratic and Republican parties unfavorably, as a year marred by high-profile policy failures for both parties comes to a close. The Republican Party's favorability has improved slightly to 32% from an all-time low of 28% in October during the government shutdown, while 61% now view the GOP unfavorably. The Democratic Party -- on the defensive recently for the flawed rollout of the healthcare website -- maintains a favorable rating of 42%. But a majority of Americans, 53%, now see the party unfavorably, up from 49% in October.
Democratic Party Maintains Favorability Edge Over GOP

Gallup December 11, 2013

PRINCETON, NJ -- For the first time, a slim majority of Americans say they have an unfavorable opinion of the Tea Party movement. About one-third view the movement favorably, a new low.
Tea Party Favorability Falls to Lowest Yet

socialism has more fans than opponents among the 18-29 crowd. Forty-nine percent of people in that age bracket say they have a positive view of socialism; only 43 percent say they have a negative view.

And while those numbers aren't very far apart, it's noteworthy that they were reversed just 20 months ago, when Pew conducted a similar poll. In that survey, published May 2010, 43 percent of people age 18-29 said they had a positive view of socialism, and 49 percent said their opinion was negative.
Young People More Likely To Favor Socialism Than Capitalism: Pew

"Conservatism" means different things to different people. Many conservatives vote Democratic. They are conservative on social issues. Nevertheless, they want to preserve the basic reforms of the New Deal along with Medicare, and they know that many Republicans don't. A larger number of moderates vote Democrat.

The growing popularity of socialism among the young is significant. No one with national name recognition has advocated socialism for at least a generation. The growing unpopularity of the Tea Party indicates that the GOP will step over the cliff if it moves to the right.

The OP sounds like he is on the right side of the growing income divide. Good for him. Nevertheless, most Americans earn pay checks that buy less than they did when Bill Clinton left office, if they have jobs at all.

For a number of years public opinion polls have indicated strong support for raising taxes on the rich, and very little support for cutting Social Security and Medicare.

https://www.google.com/#q=poll+++taxes+++rich+++"Social+Security"+++Medicare

When Republicans talk about "less government" many whites remember bad experiences they had with the government. Perhaps they had trouble renewing a driver's license. Perhaps the IRS took a long hard look at their tax returns. Perhaps they lost a job because of affirmative action - or think they did. And so on.

Nevertheless, most Americans want the government to help them get through life. As our corporate leaders continue to concentrate on reducing the number of their employees rather than increasing the number of their customers, this is likely to continue.

"As our corporate leaders continue to concentrate on reducing the number of their employees rather than increasing the number of their customers"

Wonderfully put.

 

[Pogo]

Sounds reasonable to me, Jim. The GOP continues its leftward slide in its mad race to become the Dem Part Lite.

When we have two indistinguishable parties, we will have one party rule, and there will no pretense of listening to the people.

Damn, how can I rep the second half only?

Dave, fix the first half of that post and you'll have it on the money. Because the idea that both parties are moving to the left is almost as absurd as the OP here. We've been drifting right for three decades. That's obvious.

Or maybe that was a cleverly cloaked sarcasm...?

Stop listening to what Obama says. Pay attention to what he does.

New Obama Adviser Brings Corporate Ties

5 Obama Appointees with Wall Street Ties | Care2 Causes

THERE ya go. Now you got it.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Modern American Liberalism exists only because far too many tolerate the fact that the federal government forces people to provide goods and services to others - that is, the government engages in invkoluntary servitude.

As soon as that scale tips, Modern Americal Liberalism falls in defeat,.

Modern American Liberals, at least those able or willing to understand this, are amazed that they've lasted this long.

 

[M14 Shooter]

What I get a kick out of is conservative flexibility. A while ago their indictment of Obama was lack of business experience. Now it's that his administration is too connected to business.

I think that the real source of their theatrics is that he's not a Republican.

The real source of our criticism is that Obama is utterly incompetent.

He certainly is if you only consider Republican propaganda.

Or, more honestly, all the promises he made and has kept.
When did we close Gitmo?

An unceasing stream of it since Republicans woke up to the fact that their reputation is now saddled with the worst President in American history...

You're confused.... Obama is Democrat.

 

[PMZ]

Modern American Liberalism exists only because far too many tolerate the fact that the federal government forces people to provide goods and services to others - that is, the government engages in invkoluntary servitude.

As soon as that scale tips, Modern Americal Liberalism falls in defeat,.

Modern American Liberals, at least those able or willing to understand this, are amazed that they've lasted this long.

Here's what far too many Americans tolerate. 20% of the population have 85% of the wealth and they will not settle for less than all of it.

Many of the people who created that wealth are unemployed and their salaries are now going to lavishly rewarded executives.

Our wealth distribution is extreme compared to all other developed countries.

That has been proven to be the cause of many of our social ills, and the source of most of the revolutions in history.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Modern American Liberalism exists only because far too many tolerate the fact that the federal government forces people to provide goods and services to others - that is, the government engages in invkoluntary servitude.

As soon as that scale tips, Modern Americal Liberalism falls in defeat,.

Modern American Liberals, at least those able or willing to understand this, are amazed that they've lasted this long.

Here's what far too many Americans tolerate. 20% of the population have 85% of the wealth and they will not settle for less than all of it.

Red herring. You know you cannot refute what I said, so you try to change the subject.

 

[Katzndogz]

The rich should labor for the benefit of the poor who intend to make pursuit of pleasure their life's work.

 

[PMZ]

Modern American Liberalism exists only because far too many tolerate the fact that the federal government forces people to provide goods and services to others - that is, the government engages in invkoluntary servitude.

As soon as that scale tips, Modern Americal Liberalism falls in defeat,.

Modern American Liberals, at least those able or willing to understand this, are amazed that they've lasted this long.

Here's what far too many Americans tolerate. 20% of the population have 85% of the wealth and they will not settle for less than all of it.

Red herring. You know you cannot refute what I said, so you try to change the subject.

You can't refute what I said. And what I said is the biggest contributor to American dysfunction that there is.

 

[PMZ]

The rich should labor for the benefit of the poor who intend to make pursuit of pleasure their life's work.

First, the rich don't labor. Why should they?

Second there is absolutely nobody more expert at the pursuit of pleasure than the rich. Don't you ever watch real news?

 

[JimBowie1958]

The rich should labor for the benefit of the poor who intend to make pursuit of pleasure their life's work.

First, the rich don't labor. Why should they?

Second there is absolutely nobody more expert at the pursuit of pleasure than the rich. Don't you ever watch real news?

You obviously do not have any experience working for wealthy people.

There are two kinds, those who inherit their wealth and those who made it themselves.

Those who make their own wealth know how to work and likely do 60-80 hours a week. The problem with them is that they often times have little sympathy for people that work NORMAL hours and have NORMAL lives. Most of them I have met are likely to wind up without family or friends in direct correlation to how close or beyond 80 hour work weeks they have.

Those who inherit their wealth tend to be a bit guilty in their own minds (though certainly not all of them) and they go to great lengths to justify their wealth in the minds of others and their own minds.

But of this second group, there are a few of them I have met that are simply pimples on the face of US society, craven, cretinous and contemptable. But they are a very few.

We are mostly fortunate to have the wealthy folks we have as most are self-made and good solid church going people. Only some of them are a problem and most of those are in the top management at international corporations or Wall Street banks. These I think are the kinds of people the guillotines and firing squads were made for.

 

[editec]

It astounds me how many of you folks think Obama is a socialist.

He is WALL STREET'S bestest bestest bud.

If you don't already instinctively understand that?

Then truly you have no hope of ever understanding how our world works.

 

[PMZ]

The rich should labor for the benefit of the poor who intend to make pursuit of pleasure their life's work.

First, the rich don't labor. Why should they?

Second there is absolutely nobody more expert at the pursuit of pleasure than the rich. Don't you ever watch real news?

You obviously do not have any experience working for wealthy people.

There are two kinds, those who inherit their wealth and those who made it themselves.

Those who make their own wealth know how to work and likely do 60-80 hours a week. The problem with them is that they often times have little sympathy for people that work NORMAL hours and have NORMAL lives. Most of them I have met are likely to wind up without family or friends in direct correlation to how close or beyond 80 hour work weeks they have.

Those who inherit their wealth tend to be a bit guilty in their own minds (though certainly not all of them) and they go to great lengths to justify their wealth in the minds of others and their own minds.

But of this second group, there are a few of them I have met that are simply pimples on the face of US society, craven, cretinous and contemptable. But they are a very few.

We are mostly fortunate to have the wealthy folks we have as most are self-made and good solid church going people. Only some of them are a problem and most of those are in the top management at international corporations or Wall Street banks. These I think are the kinds of people the guillotines and firing squads were made for.

I've said here often that two of my many heroes are Bill Gates and Warren Buffet. They contributed, they made many people wealthy, they allowed many more to live comfortably. Now they are doing maximum global good with what they have been given by being the right person in the right place at the right time.

But look at many of the wealthy. Entertainers. Being celebrity by being celebrities.

The most ruthless in business.

Politicians selling influence.

Criminals of all types.

Those whose only contribution is who they were born to or who that they married.

A motley crew for sure.

Yet they have, together, virtually all of the wealth in the country.

And for the people who create all of the wealth, formerly for themselves, but lately for the aristocracy, workers, there is nothing left.

That's not what got us to prosperity. That denies prosperity for everybody. It's the end of the golden goose.

 

[JimBowie1958]

It astounds me how many of you folks think Obama is a socialist.

He is WALL STREET'S bestest bestest bud.

If you don't already instinctively understand that?

Then truly you have no hope of ever understanding how our world works.

There is absolutely ZERO conflict in what you stated.

International corporations and central Banks LOVE socialism, dude.

 

[JimBowie1958]

First, the rich don't labor. Why should they?

Second there is absolutely nobody more expert at the pursuit of pleasure than the rich. Don't you ever watch real news?

You obviously do not have any experience working for wealthy people.

There are two kinds, those who inherit their wealth and those who made it themselves.

Those who make their own wealth know how to work and likely do 60-80 hours a week. The problem with them is that they often times have little sympathy for people that work NORMAL hours and have NORMAL lives. Most of them I have met are likely to wind up without family or friends in direct correlation to how close or beyond 80 hour work weeks they have.

Those who inherit their wealth tend to be a bit guilty in their own minds (though certainly not all of them) and they go to great lengths to justify their wealth in the minds of others and their own minds.

But of this second group, there are a few of them I have met that are simply pimples on the face of US society, craven, cretinous and contemptable. But they are a very few.

We are mostly fortunate to have the wealthy folks we have as most are self-made and good solid church going people. Only some of them are a problem and most of those are in the top management at international corporations or Wall Street banks. These I think are the kinds of people the guillotines and firing squads were made for.

I've said here often that two of my many heroes are Bill Gates and Warren Buffet. They contributed, they made many people wealthy, they allowed many more to live comfortably. Now they are doing maximum global good with what they have been given by being the right person in the right place at the right time.

But look at many of the wealthy. Entertainers. Being celebrity by being celebrities.

The most ruthless in business.

Politicians selling influence.

Criminals of all types.

Those whose only contribution is who they were born to or who that they married.

A motley crew for sure.

Yet they have, together, virtually all of the wealth in the country.

And for the people who create all of the wealth, formerly for themselves, but lately for the aristocracy, workers, there is nothing left.

That's not what got us to prosperity. That denies prosperity for everybody. It's the end of the golden goose.

Lol, the vast majority of millionares, if that is what we define as wealthy, are small business owners and not at all the kind of people you list.

 

[PMZ]

It astounds me how many of you folks think Obama is a socialist.

He is WALL STREET'S bestest bestest bud.

If you don't already instinctively understand that?

Then truly you have no hope of ever understanding how our world works.

There is absolutely ZERO conflict in what you stated.

International corporations and central Banks LOVE socialism, dude.

Under pure socialism, "International corporations and central Banks" wouldn't exist.

That’s why virtually all countries today employ a mixture of socialism and private enterprise.

 

[PMZ]

You obviously do not have any experience working for wealthy people.

There are two kinds, those who inherit their wealth and those who made it themselves.

Those who make their own wealth know how to work and likely do 60-80 hours a week. The problem with them is that they often times have little sympathy for people that work NORMAL hours and have NORMAL lives. Most of them I have met are likely to wind up without family or friends in direct correlation to how close or beyond 80 hour work weeks they have.

Those who inherit their wealth tend to be a bit guilty in their own minds (though certainly not all of them) and they go to great lengths to justify their wealth in the minds of others and their own minds.

But of this second group, there are a few of them I have met that are simply pimples on the face of US society, craven, cretinous and contemptable. But they are a very few.

We are mostly fortunate to have the wealthy folks we have as most are self-made and good solid church going people. Only some of them are a problem and most of those are in the top management at international corporations or Wall Street banks. These I think are the kinds of people the guillotines and firing squads were made for.

I've said here often that two of my many heroes are Bill Gates and Warren Buffet. They contributed, they made many people wealthy, they allowed many more to live comfortably. Now they are doing maximum global good with what they have been given by being the right person in the right place at the right time.

But look at many of the wealthy. Entertainers. Being celebrity by being celebrities.

The most ruthless in business.

Politicians selling influence.

Criminals of all types.

Those whose only contribution is who they were born to or who that they married.

A motley crew for sure.

Yet they have, together, virtually all of the wealth in the country.

And for the people who create all of the wealth, formerly for themselves, but lately for the aristocracy, workers, there is nothing left.

That's not what got us to prosperity. That denies prosperity for everybody. It's the end of the golden goose.

Lol, the vast majority of millionares, if that is what we define as wealthy, are small business owners and not at all the kind of people you list.

Evidence?

There are many small business owners that are the epitome of ruthless and quite a few even criminal.

 

[JimBowie1958]

It astounds me how many of you folks think Obama is a socialist.

He is WALL STREET'S bestest bestest bud.

If you don't already instinctively understand that?

Then truly you have no hope of ever understanding how our world works.

There is absolutely ZERO conflict in what you stated.

International corporations and central Banks LOVE socialism, dude.

Under pure socialism, "International corporations and central Banks" wouldn't exist.

That’s why virtually all countries today employ a mixture of socialism and private enterprise.

True, I think Fabian socialism is about as harsh an economic Marxism as one would find today, and not all socialism traces back to Marx. It existed prior to 'Das Kapital' in the form of communal societies and other economic critics like Proudhon, whom history is going to judge far more kindly than Marx, is my bet anyway.