[G36's Rule]

Originally Posted by lunarspeak

the real sad thing is that we have huge group that has very republican values...the hispanic vote.

i know alot of latinos,mostly mexican and they want less goverment and are against abortion etc etc, the whole play book of the rep party but they only vote dem because the red party seems intent on makeing life hard on them.

as for the mj subject,ive never smoked it but it seems kinda stupid to try to ban something that a person can grow in thier closet..

How does the Republican Party make life hard for Hispanic Americans?

[G36's Rule]

Originally Posted by Harper

Ok, no problem. The U.S. has the highest incarceration rate in the world. The crime category with the highest percentage... you guessed it -drugs. More people are in prison for drug related offenses at the state and federal level than for violent crime. Canada's rate is about 1/7 of ours. Has it led to social disorder and decay? I don't know, it certainly hasn't lead to lower math and science scores.

You really have nothing. Not a surprise.

[ArtificialGrape]

Originally Posted by ysr_racer

Keep espousing stone-age views, and you'll go the way of the Neanderthals. Oh that's right, the world is only 4000 years old

Stop exaggerating, it turned 6016 a few weeks ago.

[Vic777]

Originally Posted by ysr_racer

When I'm talking to my fellow Republicans, none of them ever mentions abortion, birth control, gay marriage, or marijuana.

I don't vote based on abortion, birth control, gay marriage, or marijuana. My main concerns are Big Government and the Second Amendment. I believe we should also be the World's #1 Superpower and build a moon base. Obviously another new concern is the rampant lying by lieberals and the MSM, this keeps their followers in slavery.

[robertoh]

I knew Romney would have a rough time beating Obama,when Obama "decreed",that welfare recipients wouldn't have to look for work to keep getting their checks.
The Republicans will just have to find a way to out freebe the Dems.

[Kentak]

Originally Posted by Diesel McBadass

I want someone fiscally conservative who keeps the governement out of peoples lives. I dont want someone who cries about how our moral fabric is tearing apart because gays can marry. Someone who stands up for constitutional values and leaves the church out of law.

You are correct, sir!

What the GOP needs are more Barry Goldwaters. Strong fiscal conservative. Strong on Constitutional principles. Strong on defense. And, understood the wisdom of separation of church and state.

[JFrame]

Originally Posted by Kentak

You are correct, sir!

What the GOP needs are more Barry Goldwaters. Strong fiscal conservative. Strong on Constitutional principles. Strong on defense. And, understood the wisdom of separation of church and state.

Not that I disagree with you -- but remember what happened to Barry Goldwater...


.

[ysr_racer]

I'm confused. Are you guys saying the Christian Conservatives wouldn't vote for a Republican candidate who was Pro Choice, pro birth control, didn't care about gay marriage or marijuana?

Who would they vote for, a Democrat?

Keep in mind, not voting is the same thing as voting for a Democrat.

[Kentak]

Originally Posted by Henry's Dad

When the "pro-life" party loses 50% of the Catholic vote to a guy who is decidedly non pro-life, then you have to ask if these issues still really get people worked up.

I know Catholics are demographically different from evangelicals, but the Catholic Church's position on abortion is pretty clear. Yet 50% of them voted for the pro-choice candidate.

And, it needs to be pointed out that Catholic women avail themselves of abortion services pretty much commensurate with their proportion of the total population. That's not politically unimportant.

[Kentak]

Originally Posted by JFrame

Not that I disagree with you -- but remember what happened to Barry Goldwater...


.

Understood. But, he didn't lose because of these religious issues--they weren't issues on the table then. He lost because we were in the middle of a tense cold war with the Soviets and the opposition successfully painted him as someone who might bring on a nuclear confrontation.

[JFrame]

Originally Posted by Kentak

Understood. But, he didn't lose because of these religious issues--they weren't issues on the table then. He lost because we were in the middle of a tense cold war with the Soviets and the opposition successfully painted him as someone who might bring on a nuclear confrontation.

Yes, I fear that I can admit I remember those days well...


.

[Flying-Dutchman]

Originally Posted by HollowHead

Point. Set. Match. HH

HH- You have posted you are originally from the greater NYC area but now you live very far away from such a Liberal Mecca. So you are a Liberal who does not like living around Liberals?

[barbedwiresmile]

Originally Posted by Vic777

My main concerns are Big Government and the Second Amendment. I believe we should also be the World's #1 Superpower and build a moon base.

Is this serious or cleverly sarcastic and mocking the inherent contradictions of modern day 'conservatives'?

[Harper]

Originally Posted by G36's Rule

You really have nothing. Not a surprise.

First let's be honest, there is nothing I could say to tarnish your view of the GOP. I don't expect you to form actual arguments.

The question was how are they a threat to liberty. The U.S. has more people locked up than any other country, those are people without liberty. Why? Are the American people the most evil? Maybe the U.S. is just better at keeping the bad guys off the streets? Then what explains our high violent crime rate and below average education scores? If the influence of religious groups wasn't so strong we'd have less of these prohibitionist laws that are ineffective, strip people of liberty and only serve as a jobs program.

[Kentak]

Originally Posted by barbedwiresmile

Is this serious or cleverly sarcastic and mocking the inherent contradictions of modern day 'conservatives'?

My thoughts as well.

Obviously, we need a national defense strong enough to defeat any threat to our security and *legitimate* interests for the foreseeable future. But, sounds like he wants to be the Empire from Star Wars building "death stars." Foolishness.

Empires have died because they couldn't sustain the costs needed to maintain them. To maintain our physical security, we first need to rebuild our national economic and fiscal health.

[IvanVic]

Originally Posted by Cali-Glock

Mr. Democrat, thank you for spreading the patent lie that Republicans "hate" women/gay/minorities.

Republicans as a whole don't, but a % of the fringe base does.

Originally Posted by Cali-Glock

I can't even dream up what gets twisted around as hatred for women and minorities?

Well, I suppose the posts that say women shouldn't have voting rights would qualify, among the other dozen or so misogynistic posts made in the last few days.


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire

[Kentak]

Originally Posted by Caver 60

s long as we advocate abortion, homosexuality, illegal drugs, fornication, denial of God, etc., this land will continue to suffer.

You don't get it and you never will.

Prochoice is not equal to advocating abortion. It's not telling people they have to have abortions. It means not having government interfere with people following their own beliefs on the issue.

A more sane approach to drug abuse that does not throw people into expensive prisons is not equal to advocating drug use.

Fornication? What century are you from? Government has no business in people's sex lives as long as it's between consenting adults.

Denial of God? What anyone believes or doesn't believe about god is government's business how? Live your life according to your own principles, religious or otherwise, and let your neighbors do the same.

[G23Gen4.40]

America is doomed. Watch and see, the further our morals degrade so goes the nation.

[G36's Rule]

Originally Posted by Harper

First let's be honest, there is nothing I could say to tarnish your view of the GOP. I don't expect you to form actual arguments.

The question was how are they a threat to liberty. The U.S. has more people locked up than any other country, those are people without liberty. Why? Are the American people the most evil? Maybe the U.S. is just better at keeping the bad guys off the streets? Then what explains our high violent crime rate and below average education scores? If the influence of religious groups wasn't so strong we'd have less of these prohibitionist laws that are ineffective, strip people of liberty and only serve as a jobs program.

You keep bringing up drug laws as an answer to your statement about religious voters being a threat to liberty.

Total non-sequitur.

If you had said Blue Laws, you might have been on to something. But Blue Laws are old and come from when the South was entirely Democrat.

[Harper]

Originally Posted by G36's Rule

You keep bringing up drug laws as an answer to your statement about religious voters being a threat to liberty.

Yes, evangelical voters traditionally support drug prohibition. Dictating what people can or can't put in their own body is a violation of individual liberty, then locking them up for it is even worse. You can keep calling that nothing if you like, I'm done.

[JohnH]

Originally Posted by Sporaticus

I see it a different way. They contine to run moderate liberals and lose. The moderate liberals they lost with include Bush 41, Bob Dole, John McCain, and Mitt Romney. GWB only won because of Klinton fatigue, a lousy opponent, good lawyers, and fear of terrorists.

The republicans won't win until they run a conservative who can bring out the base.

+1

The primary process needs to be changed so the RNC can't establish a momentum narrative that favors moderates (no accident that the primaries start in states that are moderate). The RNC apparatus also effectively divides the electorate by running stalking horse candidates to marginalized threats to their favored candidate.

Republicans need to keep the social agenda out of the national platform and leave those issues to the state. Again, I think the RNC leaves these issues in the national platform to divide the electorate.

Most importantly, the Republicans need to stop smearing and stiff arming the libertarian wing of the party. They were the only wing of the party that had any energy and enthusiasm, not to mention the youngest demographic and most fiscally conservative.

Of course, they will do none of this and will be relegated to the scrap heap of history.

[Gunnut 45/454]

Gee the Dumocrats have no problem rolling the Muslim religion into there party! Or did you not see the vote on removing God from the party platform at the DNC Convention. Spearheaded by whom the Muslim party faithful! The atheists have been trying to remove God from the whole country now you want to remove him from the GOP? Why don't you just go and be apart of the Dumocrat party and get it over with. It's obvious you were the ones that voted for Obamamoa or sat on your hands and didn't vote! Either way you supported what we have now so live with your decision. I fore one will not COMPROMISE my core convictions and support things I detest!

[SCmasterblaster]

Originally Posted by Sporaticus

I see it a different way. They contine to run moderate liberals and lose. The moderate liberals they lost with include Bush 41, Bob Dole, John McCain, and Mitt Romney. GWB only won because of Klinton fatigue, a lousy opponent, good lawyers, and fear of terrorists.

The republicans won't win until they run a conservative who can bring out the base.

Right on. We need another Reagan - how about Clint Eastwood?

[Cali-Glock]

Originally Posted by ysr_racer

I'm confused. Are you guys saying the Christian Conservatives wouldn't vote for a Republican candidate who was Pro Choice, pro birth control, didn't care about gay marriage or marijuana?

Who would they vote for, a Democrat?

Keep in mind, not voting is the same thing as voting for a Democrat.

Third party.

[G19G20]

Where the fk did all of you posters come from? Why weren't you all posting up this stuff during the primaries when it mattered? I sure wish these insights were posted when the party was deciding who the standard bearer would be, instead of monday morning quarterbacking and posting up what some of us have been saying all along was a losing recipe, only to be repeatedly left arguing the point against the GTPI peanut gallery.

The evangelicals will either not vote or will vote for whoever the GOP nominee is. They're not going to vote for the Democrat. As long as a person of faith (BUT NOT A FAITH CANDIDATE) is the nominee, he/she will get most evangelical votes.