As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

The New GOP Thread: Taking Anti-Intellectualism to a Whole New Level

1181921232460

Posts

  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Well, for one thing, plenty of people were arrested at Bush events. For things like wearing t-shirts.

    Anyway a couple of general points:

    1) The forum overwhelmingly went for Obama, that much is true. However, those of us who did range in ideology from typically conservative who are fucking pissed at the modern Republican Party (Jeffe and Salvation as prominent examples); to Mountain West Dems who are more moderate, definitely pro-gun, and a few other positions (mcdermott comes to mind); centrist Democrats (Speaker); however you'd characterize moniker (smart?); pure liberals (myself, many others); raging liberals (Hedgie, obviously); raging populists (Rust); actual socialists (kakos!); and a bunch of places in between. There's a wide diversity of thought, and if the modern Republican Party was more even Bush the Greater there'd be a decent number of Republicans around.

    2) Arkansas is traditionally very, very Democratic (which is why you don't know many Republicans), but also has voted Republican at the national level for some time. They were also one of the states that was unusually anti-Obama both in the primary and the general election. Which was basically all of Appalachia with probably some residual admiration of the Clintons thrown in. The South and Midwest being mocked is a bit over done here sometimes, I'll admit.

    3) The demographics here are going to make us unusually annoyed with the positions the Republicans take which are straight from Jerry Falwell. It's an overwhelmingly young, well educated populace. So we're going to be unkind to those who oppose civil rights for gays, as an example.

    4) We fucking hate Ayn Rand. And a depressing amount of the current Republican Party's ideas come from her. And even more so the conservatives who end up being in that demographic subset. A goodly number of the posters on this forum have longed for some kind of fiscally conservative, socially liberal party, or even just a return to Eisenhower style Republicans. Hell, I think we had a Jeffe/Salvation rebuild the Republican Party thread sometime in the past year, which had many people wishing to subscribe to their newsletter.

    enlightenedbum on
    Herbert Hoover got 40% of the vote in 1932. Friendly reminder.
    Warren 2020
  • HenroidHenroid Mexican kicked from Immigration Thread Centrism is Racism :3Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    aaronsedge wrote: »
    The elitism and know it all attitudes that liberal democrats almost always portray has always put me off and if anything push me more towards the right. Even my hardcore conservative mom when talking about Liberals says stuff like "bless them and pray for them" when they are talking politics. You guys just rip people apart and I cannot understand why. I'm always for open mindedness and I'm always for respecting other peoples beliefs and I always thought that was part of the liberal democratic oath or something. I've seen plenty of batshit insane Liberals. I'm sure this link has been seen, but whatever.

    Well y'know, something to remember is that when it comes down to it this is an internet forum. People will express themselves a lot more strongly than they do in real life (or maybe not, but I do speak for myself and anyone who happens to be alike). I'm willing to bet though that if you sat people here down at a table with those they despise, they'd actually be able to conduct themselves quite well and not be insulting. Or, at minimum, as insulting.

    The thing is, politics is easy to get passionate about and it's really easy for people to start going, "Oh those Republicans or Democrats," or "Oh those southern states!" I do the latter, which is my failing, but I think people do this sort of generalization because it's the easiest way to sum up a general attitude toward something, because getting the accurate argument takes a lot of time. And unless it's the appropriate thread for it, that time won't be taken because there's other things to address.

    I get a lot of heat from people living in Texas when I point out the major flaws I saw when living in east Texas. I know my observations don't apply to every spot in Texas, and I know their defense doesn't apply to every spot in Texas.

    Henroid on
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Bullio wrote: »
    aaronsedge wrote: »
    aaronsedge wrote: »
    I know most of the people at this forum are hardcore lefty

    You're really going to have to explain how you reached this conclusion, because by all available evidence, it's not.

    My bad, "hefty quantity?"

    No, not that either.

    You're problem seems to be one of lacking perspective. You're thinking that since we're not right, we're left. There's a reason why it's called a 'political spectrum' and not a 'political dichotomy.' There are very, very few 'hard-core' lefties active around here, a fact you would have realized if you'd taken the time to look around, instead of deciding that since we're not 'right' we're all 'hardcore left' and then making a big strawman of, 'and you guys are like this!'

    Part of the problem is that the goal posts have been moved unbelievably far to the right within the last few months. I consider myself a centrist that leans left, but by today's standards I guess I'd be a full blown liberal. What may have been considered moderate, or even right leaning, a year ago is considered leftist these days.
    aaronsedge wrote: »
    I've seen plenty of batshit insane Liberals. I'm sure this link has been seen, but whatever.

    http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/?p=621

    I'm not really sure I get your point by posting this. If it's only to point out that there are crazy people on both sides of the political spectrum, then that's nothing new. They're often referred to as "the fringe." The difference between people like the ones in those pictures and the ones we're seeing now is that, during the Bush years, those people were kept on the fringe. They were called out as such and kept where they belonged. The ones we're seeing now, those decrying Obama as a socialist/Nazi/Muslim/fascist/racist/whatever, those toting guns to protests, the birthers, etc have not been called out as such and promptly ignored. Instead, the fringe has pretty much been mainstreamed with welcome arms into everyday political discourse and is being pandered to by this thread's subject of ridicule. For me personally it's frustrating as hell to see political debate dissolve into what it's become. The right fights dirty as hell by appealing to FUD with stories that range from distortions of the truth to flat out lies, and people are eating it up and demanding more. This cheapens and dumbs down debate and discourse and prevents shit from getting done. So if I personally come off as "elitist" or as an asshole or whatever, it's because I have no patience for it, and I'm sick of seeing and having to put up with this incredibly moronic bullshit.

    The issue is more that there are sitting Members of Congress who share the same fringe views. I mean, the John Birch Society and LaRouche level craziness isn't anything new. Them having a seat at the table kind of is.

    story.jpg

    moniker on
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    moniker wrote:
    The issue is more that there are sitting Members of Congress who share the same fringe views. I mean, the John Birch Society and LaRouche level craziness isn't anything new. Them having a seat at the table kind of is.

    As I said, the Overton window is moved way to the right.

    enlightenedbum on
    Herbert Hoover got 40% of the vote in 1932. Friendly reminder.
    Warren 2020
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    moniker wrote:
    The issue is more that there are sitting Members of Congress who share the same fringe views. I mean, the John Birch Society and LaRouche level craziness isn't anything new. Them having a seat at the table kind of is.

    As I said, the Overton window is moved way to the right.

    Eh, most of it is an expansion of technology lowering barriers to entry and the democratization of political processes (due in part to technological advancement, the first televised political convention was decidedly not an hours long infomercial) empowering the crazies further than they were before. I mean, that one catholic priest who was anti-New Deal probably makes Rush look cute and cuddly...but politicians still largely controlled how things played out and how they delivered their message. When you only have 5 channels, the President occupying 3 of them makes it kind of hard to ignore. When you have 1,000 channels and the entire internets available...well, now POTUS is competing with 18 different kinds of football and porn. Let alone congress critters. Power has been defused. That isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it means that Birchers or Tea Partiers have a more impressive megaphone in comparison to before.

    moniker on
  • aaronsedgeaaronsedge __BANNED USERS
    edited October 2009
    Guys, I completely see what you all mean and thank you for the post. I didn't mean to come off as an ass and didn't mean to label the entire forum, the reason I lurk here is because I find it near the top of the ladder when it comes to intelligent posters, plus I lol a lot. I also didn't mean to patronize, I've had 17 year old girls tell me "ohh that's sooo good for you" at parties when they find out I don't drink and I hate that shit.

    I'm still in that post still growing up, still fucking up, still looking for all the answers stage.
    that was kind of lame...

    I just needed a better understanding of peoples views.

    aaronsedge on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    Munch wrote: »
    Only if there are some tig ol' bitties on the cover know'm sayin'?
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    moniker wrote: »
    moniker wrote:
    The issue is more that there are sitting Members of Congress who share the same fringe views. I mean, the John Birch Society and LaRouche level craziness isn't anything new. Them having a seat at the table kind of is.

    As I said, the Overton window is moved way to the right.

    Eh, most of it is an expansion of technology lowering barriers to entry and the democratization of political processes (due in part to technological advancement, the first televised political convention was decidedly not an hours long infomercial) empowering the crazies further than they were before. I mean, that one catholic priest who was anti-New Deal probably makes Rush look cute and cuddly...but politicians still largely controlled how things played out and how they delivered their message. When you only have 5 channels, the President occupying 3 of them makes it kind of hard to ignore. When you have 1,000 channels and the entire internets available...well, now POTUS is competing with 18 different kinds of football and porn. Let alone congress critters. Power has been defused. That isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it means that Birchers or Tea Partiers have a more impressive megaphone in comparison to before.

    I'm just saying over the past decade. I mean, in 1999 was it an acceptable position to support torture? Now it's the position of one of the major parties and between a third and half the public.

    enlightenedbum on
    Herbert Hoover got 40% of the vote in 1932. Friendly reminder.
    Warren 2020
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    aaronsedge wrote: »
    Guys, I completely see what you all mean and thank you for the post. I didn't mean to come off as an ass and didn't mean to label the entire forum, the reason I lurk here is because I find it near the top of the ladder when it comes to intelligent posters, plus I lol a lot. I also didn't mean to patronize, I've had 17 year old girls tell me "ohh that's sooo good for you" at parties when they find out I don't drink and I hate that shit.

    I'm still in that post still growing up, still fucking up, still looking for all the answers stage.
    that was kind of lame...

    I just needed a better understanding of peoples views.

    You're from the South. You guys invented 'bless your heart.'

    moniker on
  • zerg rushzerg rush Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    aaronsedge wrote: »
    I have a few republican beliefs, but not completely. I'm for gay marriage, teaching evolution in school, but against abortion(on the fence really) and for privatized health care and less government etc. [...]I've always thought republicans to be the underdog.

    Going through the points-
    • Gay Marriage: Liberal position

    • Teaching evolution in schools: Liberal position

    • Abortion: You either think life begins at conception or life begins near birth. It's not that liberals love killing children or some shit, it's just that we don't consider blastocysts to be babies. Everything makes sense from there. And as a liberal who is pro-choice, I can understand how someone can easily be anti-choice if they start with a different position on when an embryo becomes a baby.

    • Less government: Everybody wants less government. But neither republicans or democrats will give it to us. It's really not a partisan issue.

    • Privatized Health Care: We all want better healthcare. The only issue is that you think the best healthcare comes from the private sector and I think the best healthcare comes with government intervention. The thing is, the rest of the world already has cheaper and better healthcare than us. It's a solved problem. Finding the solution to healthcare is as easy as taking a country that already has better and cheaper healthcare and copying them. Seems simple right?
      And it turns out, all of the good places have more 'socialist' healthcare than we do.
      Also, it's not that simple since every country has to deal with issues unique to them, and America has a ton of unique problems. But that's the general flow of it.


    PS. Drinking helps get you laid. I know, I know. It makes no sense how making a fool of yourself would do that, but trust me it works.

    zerg rush on
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    zerg rush wrote: »
    aaronsedge wrote: »
    I have a few republican beliefs, but not completely. I'm for gay marriage, teaching evolution in school, but against abortion(on the fence really) and for privatized health care and less government etc. [...]I've always thought republicans to be the underdog.

    Going through the points-
    • Gay Marriage: Liberal position
    • Teaching evolution in schools: Liberal position
    • Abortion: You either think life begins at conception or life begins near birth. It's not that liberals love killing children or some shit, it's just that we don't consider blastocysts to be babies. Everything makes sense from there. And as a liberal who is pro-choice, I can understand how someone can easily be anti-choice if they start with a different position on when an embryo becomes a baby.
    • Less government: Everybody wants less government. But neither republicans or democrats will give it to us. It's really not a partisan issue.
    • Privatized Health Care: We all want better healthcare. The only issue is that you think the best healthcare comes from the private sector and I think the best healthcare comes with government intervention. The thing is, the rest of the world already has cheaper and better healthcare than us. It's a solved problem. Finding the solution to healthcare is as easy as taking a country that already has better and cheaper healthcare and copying them. Seems simple right?
      And it turns out, all of the good places have more 'socialist' healthcare than we do.
      Also, it's not that simple since every country has to deal with issues unique to them, and America has a ton of unique problems. But that's the general flow of it.

    PS. Drinking helps get you laid. I know, it makes no sense how making a fool of yourself would do that, but trust me it works.

    There's a lot of intricate nuance, reasoning, and variety behind people's views let alone how they get to those views. Enough to fuel the hundreds of horrific threads on abortion that have existed here and then some. Plus this isn't the place to cover it, because then it will become one of those horrors.

    moniker on
  • zerg rushzerg rush Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    moniker wrote: »
    There's a lot of intricate nuance, reasoning, and variety behind people's views let alone how they get to those views. Enough to fuel the hundreds of horrific threads on abortion that have existed here and then some. Plus this isn't the place to cover it, because then it will become one of those horrors.

    I was trying to give the cliff notes simple answer instead of talking down to him. Sorry.

    Though I do think my argument is a reasonable (if condensed) approximation of the average belief. It at least gives room so that he can understand how the two sides can look at the same issue and come to different conclusions despite both sides being logical.

    zerg rush on
  • ScalfinScalfin __BANNED USERS regular
    edited October 2009
    moniker wrote: »
    zerg rush wrote: »
    aaronsedge wrote: »
    I have a few republican beliefs, but not completely. I'm for gay marriage, teaching evolution in school, but against abortion(on the fence really) and for privatized health care and less government etc. [...]I've always thought republicans to be the underdog.

    Going through the points-
    • Gay Marriage: Liberal position
    • Teaching evolution in schools: Liberal position
    • Abortion: You either think life begins at conception or life begins near birth. It's not that liberals love killing children or some shit, it's just that we don't consider blastocysts to be babies. Everything makes sense from there. And as a liberal who is pro-choice, I can understand how someone can easily be anti-choice if they start with a different position on when an embryo becomes a baby.
    • Less government: Everybody wants less government. But neither republicans or democrats will give it to us. It's really not a partisan issue.
    • Privatized Health Care: We all want better healthcare. The only issue is that you think the best healthcare comes from the private sector and I think the best healthcare comes with government intervention. The thing is, the rest of the world already has cheaper and better healthcare than us. It's a solved problem. Finding the solution to healthcare is as easy as taking a country that already has better and cheaper healthcare and copying them. Seems simple right?
      And it turns out, all of the good places have more 'socialist' healthcare than we do.
      Also, it's not that simple since every country has to deal with issues unique to them, and America has a ton of unique problems. But that's the general flow of it.

    PS. Drinking helps get you laid. I know, it makes no sense how making a fool of yourself would do that, but trust me it works.

    There's a lot of intricate nuance, reasoning, and variety behind people's views let alone how they get to those views. Enough to fuel the hundreds of horrific threads on abortion that have existed here and then some. Plus this isn't the place to cover it, because then it will become one of those horrors.

    Yeah, better go to the drinking thread. They'll hook you up. I recommend hard cider. I personally can't abide anything carbonated, but it's not bad if allowed to go flat (like with wine).

    Scalfin on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    The rest of you, I fucking hate you for the fact that I now have a blue dot on this god awful thread.
  • aaronsedgeaaronsedge __BANNED USERS
    edited October 2009
    zerg rush wrote: »
    moniker wrote: »
    There's a lot of intricate nuance, reasoning, and variety behind people's views let alone how they get to those views. Enough to fuel the hundreds of horrific threads on abortion that have existed here and then some. Plus this isn't the place to cover it, because then it will become one of those horrors.

    I was trying to give the cliff notes simple answer instead of talking down to him. Sorry.

    Though I do think my argument is a reasonable (if condensed) approximation of the average belief. It at least gives room so that he can understand how the two sides can look at the same issue and come to different conclusions despite both sides being logical.


    Thanks. I mostly know where most parties stand and mostly where I stand. To be honest I probably wouldn't fit well with either party. My friends have called me a Liberal Republican. My parents call it gay.

    When I was 14 I got into this straight edge craze and over the years forgot about all of it and just never felt the need to drink.

    aaronsedge on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    Munch wrote: »
    Only if there are some tig ol' bitties on the cover know'm sayin'?
  • Gnome-InterruptusGnome-Interruptus Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    I'm curious, was part of Bush's "No Child Left Behind" the "Reading by 9" rule, where teachers could no longer pass their students if they were still functionally illiterate in grade 9?

    I was just reading an interesting article done by the National Adult Literacy Survey about how close to 50% of adult americans only have basic class 1 or class 2 literacy skills. Which would sort of explain the extremely low election turnouts.

    I'm wondering if it might benefit the Republicans to try to take a pro-education stance, but then again, I could see alot of Dems jumping on board with that, and that might make everyone look good. And the congressional republicans wouldnt like that.

    Gnome-Interruptus on
    steam_sig.png
    MWO: Adamski
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    I'm curious, was part of Bush's "No Child Left Behind" the "Reading by 9" rule, where teachers could no longer pass their students if they were still functionally illiterate in grade 9?

    I was just reading an interesting article done by the National Adult Literacy Survey about how close to 50% of adult americans only have basic class 1 or class 2 literacy skills. Which would sort of explain the extremely low election turnouts.

    I'm wondering if it might benefit the Republicans to try to take a pro-education stance, but then again, I could see alot of Dems jumping on board with that, and that might make everyone look good. And the congressional republicans wouldnt like that.

    They're pro-education as long as it's based on charter schools.

    enlightenedbum on
    Herbert Hoover got 40% of the vote in 1932. Friendly reminder.
    Warren 2020
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    I'm wondering if it might benefit the Republicans to try to take a pro-education stance, but then again, I could see alot of Dems jumping on board with that, and that might make everyone look good. And the congressional republicans wouldnt like that.

    Actually, it wouldn't benefit them. The GOP benefits from reduced voter turnout, not increased. Hence why they happily engage in voter suppression and caging.

    AngelHedgie on
    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • GoslingGosling Looking Up Soccer In Mongolia Right Now, Probably Watertown, WIRegistered User regular
    edited October 2009
    aaronsedge wrote: »
    Thanks. I mostly know where most parties stand and mostly where I stand. To be honest I probably wouldn't fit well with either party. My friends have called me a Liberal Republican. My parents call it gay.

    When I was 14 I got into this straight edge craze and over the years forgot about all of it and just never felt the need to drink.

    Hey, aaronsedge, welcome aboard. Identify as Green myself, but vote Dem due to the actual Greens being well-meaning dips who don't have a clue what in blazes they're doing. If not straight-up crazy people. I live in a deep-red town. I'm still getting '57 states' and 'hey are you gonna pay my taxes' lines thrown my way. I can attest, when you're further left than the rest of the community, it can be tough.

    As far as here, you'll probably want to expect a little bit of a grilling for a couple days until we get used to you. Just letting you know what you may be in for. It's de facto standard procedure whenever a Republican shows up. We try to keep the Republicans around so it doesn't get to be an echo chamber, but we tend to accidentally chase a fair number off. Hang in there.

    Gosling on
    I have a new soccer blog The Minnow Tank. Reading it psychically kicks Sepp Blatter in the bean bag.
  • aaronsedgeaaronsedge __BANNED USERS
    edited October 2009
    Gosling wrote: »
    aaronsedge wrote: »
    Thanks. I mostly know where most parties stand and mostly where I stand. To be honest I probably wouldn't fit well with either party. My friends have called me a Liberal Republican. My parents call it gay.

    When I was 14 I got into this straight edge craze and over the years forgot about all of it and just never felt the need to drink.

    Hey, aaronsedge, welcome aboard. Identify as Green myself, but vote Dem due to the actual Greens being well-meaning dips who don't have a clue what in blazes they're doing. If not straight-up crazy people. I live in a deep-red town. I'm still getting '57 states' and 'hey are you gonna pay my taxes' lines thrown my way. I can attest, when you're further left than the rest of the community, it can be tough.

    As far as here, you'll probably want to expect a little bit of a grilling for a couple days until we get used to you. Just letting you know what you may be in for. It's de facto standard procedure whenever a Republican shows up. We try to keep the Republicans around so it doesn't get to be an echo chamber, but we tend to accidentally chase a fair number off. Hang in there.


    Well, I'm not really new, I do have like 600 post. I just don't like posting out of fear of making an asinine statement that I will regret down the line, which I'm sure I have made many...on my websites, but hope I have balanced out my asinine post with reasonably ok post. How's Libertarian going right now, if Clint Eastwood is doing it, maybe I want to.

    aaronsedge on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    Munch wrote: »
    Only if there are some tig ol' bitties on the cover know'm sayin'?
  • theSquidtheSquid Sydney, AustraliaRegistered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Would just like to add to what Gosling said about this forum and Republicans. Over the last ten to twenty pages we have people come in who are Republican or Libertarian and either blatantly troll or be overly hostile - see unitedshoes86 and civil_disobedience 's posts in this thread as an example of how not to act.

    It's good that you came in here with an open-minded attitude rather than a "FUCKING LIBERAL CIRCLE-JERK" stance though, and you'll get treated with a lot more respect as a result of that.

    theSquid on
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    aaronsedge wrote: »
    Gosling wrote: »
    aaronsedge wrote: »
    Thanks. I mostly know where most parties stand and mostly where I stand. To be honest I probably wouldn't fit well with either party. My friends have called me a Liberal Republican. My parents call it gay.

    When I was 14 I got into this straight edge craze and over the years forgot about all of it and just never felt the need to drink.

    Hey, aaronsedge, welcome aboard. Identify as Green myself, but vote Dem due to the actual Greens being well-meaning dips who don't have a clue what in blazes they're doing. If not straight-up crazy people. I live in a deep-red town. I'm still getting '57 states' and 'hey are you gonna pay my taxes' lines thrown my way. I can attest, when you're further left than the rest of the community, it can be tough.

    As far as here, you'll probably want to expect a little bit of a grilling for a couple days until we get used to you. Just letting you know what you may be in for. It's de facto standard procedure whenever a Republican shows up. We try to keep the Republicans around so it doesn't get to be an echo chamber, but we tend to accidentally chase a fair number off. Hang in there.


    Well, I'm not really new, I do have like 600 post. I just don't like posting out of fear of making an asinine statement that I will regret down the line, which I'm sure I have made many...on my websites, but hope I have balanced out my asinine post with reasonably ok post. How's Libertarian going right now, if Clint Eastwood is doing it, maybe I want to.

    This depends if it's Randian (BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD), or healthy skepticism of government power. There are a few civil libertarians around here who remain angry about Obama's continuance of Bush executive power functions (hi!). Yours, if you identify as Republican, probably extends a bit further into economic areas than most of ours does though. Just don't spout Rand bullshit and you'll be OK, though we'll try to convince you of the usefulness of government.

    enlightenedbum on
    Herbert Hoover got 40% of the vote in 1932. Friendly reminder.
    Warren 2020
  • Eat it You Nasty Pig.Eat it You Nasty Pig. tell homeland security 'we are the bomb'Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    frankly I think not drinking is kind of a dealbreaker

    Eat it You Nasty Pig. on
    NREqxl5.jpg
    hold your head high soldier, it ain't over yet
    that's why we call it the struggle, you're supposed to sweat
  • LibrarianThorneLibrarianThorne Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    @ aarosedge

    I am a no-bullshit liberal democrat, but it's apparent that my views are still to the left of most of this board. If I could ascribe any views to the majority members of this board, it would be socially liberal (governmental regulation of markets promotes competition/freedom of choice/etc.) and fiscally pragmatic. The board is by and large not fiscally conservative in the sense of low taxes and low government, but is not in favor of massive spending programs without good reasoning (to prevent a depression, etc.).

    As to the nature of arguments, I enjoy ripping apart conservatives because I see no value in their argument. Arguing with a low taxes chap to me is like arguing with someone who says the sky is orange. It is something that is objectively speaking compltely bullshit and not worthy of an even debate. If a guy says to me that the sky is orange, he is simply wrong and must (usually) be corrected.

    To me, the American conservative movement is fighting a losing battle and because of it likely hurting the country. The debate shouldn't be about whether or not we have public health care, the debate should be between a single payer system or a regulated system like the Swiss, for example. The argument shouldn't be whether or not the idea of a government is good or bad, the argument should be where government needs to be to help the most. They are having debates over whether or not solutions to problems are solutions at all, rather than whether or not they are the best solutions. That's what is needed, a competition of ideas, not of stonewalling in a vain hope that voters will see a lack of action as a failure and reward obtuseness with election night success. That's not a policy that helps right now, nor will it ever be.

    LibrarianThorne on
  • Gnome-InterruptusGnome-Interruptus Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    I'm wondering if it might benefit the Republicans to try to take a pro-education stance, but then again, I could see alot of Dems jumping on board with that, and that might make everyone look good. And the congressional republicans wouldnt like that.

    Actually, it wouldn't benefit them. The GOP benefits from reduced voter turnout, not increased. Hence why they happily engage in voter suppression and caging.

    I know reduced turnout helps incumbents, but is there statistics that show the lower the turnout the better the Republican performs? Or is it simply a matter that the easiest voters to suppress are the minorities / less educated who generally vote democratic?

    Gnome-Interruptus on
    steam_sig.png
    MWO: Adamski
  • zerg rushzerg rush Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    If I could ascribe any views to the majority members of this board, it would be socially liberal (governmental regulation of markets promotes competition/freedom of choice/etc.) and fiscally pragmatic. The board is by and large not fiscally conservative in the sense of low taxes and low government, but is not in favor of massive spending programs without good reasoning (to prevent a depression, etc.).

    Technologically biased. One of the biases you missed is that we are incredibly technologically biased. It's the one uniform across the entire forum. We may argue about philosophy, health care, government spending, police oversight, etc., but when it comes to technological issues we are an unyielding wall. Everyone ridicules "the videogames are corrupting our children," nearly everyone supports net neutrality, most people support IP reform, a lot of people recognize that mainstream media is dying, and nobody takes "a series of tubes" seriously.

    It has only come into play a couple times. Notably during the Obama campaign where he trashed Hillary and McCain on the organizational front with technology. But McCain is bringing it up again now with net neutrality. In the case of this thread's OP, the members of this site will invariably be on the side of more science. It's the one political constant here.

    zerg rush on
  • SanderJKSanderJK Crocodylus Pontifex Sinterklasicus Madrid, 3000 ADRegistered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Abortion is easily the trickiest subject of them all for me, I consider it mostly a no win situation. Without wanting to steer the discussion into it to much, I'd want to point out the rights of the mother are paramount for me, which is a common point in the debacle.

    Personally, I'm not at all for smaller government. I believe there are many tasks that a government is uniquely qualified for, things you either cannot do in the private sector, or things you cannot trust the private sector with. I also believe in a state that actively takes care of it's sick, poor, and unfortunates (by helping them out of these situations, getting them education and jobs). I do not trust charity to fix these problems, nor believe that all of the people can be as selfreliant as some think everyone should be. All these things combined take a hefty percentage of GDP, and I don't see much of a problem with it. I think the claims of bureaucracy in the government are often exaggerated because it's almost impossible to defend against and something people like to hear.

    SanderJK on
    Steam: SanderJK Origin: SanderJK
  • HenroidHenroid Mexican kicked from Immigration Thread Centrism is Racism :3Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Joe Wilson is quite the little magical moron isn't he? He insinuated we could've taken care of Afghanistan with the internet. Because the internet means freedom. Or something.

    I dunno, the Daily Show had a clip about him making that connection when talking about Net Neutrality.

    Henroid on
  • Eat it You Nasty Pig.Eat it You Nasty Pig. tell homeland security 'we are the bomb'Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    My favorite conservative trope is the low government/low spending thing.

    Not only does almost nobody actually want that (based on the last 60 years of election results), the entire idea is based on one or both of these ridiculous assertions: 1) that the private sector does it better or 2) government is comparatively wasteful. Neither one is ever, ever meaningfully substantiated, but they're repeated as gospel over and over again.

    Eat it You Nasty Pig. on
    NREqxl5.jpg
    hold your head high soldier, it ain't over yet
    that's why we call it the struggle, you're supposed to sweat
  • Eat it You Nasty Pig.Eat it You Nasty Pig. tell homeland security 'we are the bomb'Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Henroid wrote: »
    Joe Wilson is quite the little magical moron isn't he? He insinuated we could've taken care of Afghanistan with the internet. Because the internet means freedom. Or something.

    I dunno, the Daily Show had a clip about him making that connection when talking about Net Neutrality.

    He's not the quickest crayon in the shed, no.

    Eat it You Nasty Pig. on
    NREqxl5.jpg
    hold your head high soldier, it ain't over yet
    that's why we call it the struggle, you're supposed to sweat
  • HounHoun Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    As to the nature of arguments, I enjoy ripping apart conservatives because I see no value in their argument. Arguing with a low taxes chap to me is like arguing with someone who says the sky is orange. It is something that is objectively speaking compltely bullshit and not worthy of an even debate. If a guy says to me that the sky is orange, he is simply wrong and must (usually) be corrected.

    Oh man. I was having a political discussion with a nice Republican gal once, and she was trying to convince me that her political ideologies were right because she believed in them completely, going so far as to literally state that the sky would in fact be orange if she believed it enough.

    I laughed for hours after deleting her from all my contact lists.

    Houn on
  • Hexmage-PAHexmage-PA Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Houn wrote: »
    As to the nature of arguments, I enjoy ripping apart conservatives because I see no value in their argument. Arguing with a low taxes chap to me is like arguing with someone who says the sky is orange. It is something that is objectively speaking compltely bullshit and not worthy of an even debate. If a guy says to me that the sky is orange, he is simply wrong and must (usually) be corrected.

    Oh man. I was having a political discussion with a nice Republican gal once, and she was trying to convince me that her political ideologies were right because she believed in them completely, going so far as to literally state that the sky would in fact be orange if she believed it enough.

    I laughed for hours after deleting her from all my contact lists.

    To be fair, the sky is kind of orange-y at dusk.

    Hexmage-PA on
  • HounHoun Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Hexmage-PA wrote: »
    Houn wrote: »
    As to the nature of arguments, I enjoy ripping apart conservatives because I see no value in their argument. Arguing with a low taxes chap to me is like arguing with someone who says the sky is orange. It is something that is objectively speaking compltely bullshit and not worthy of an even debate. If a guy says to me that the sky is orange, he is simply wrong and must (usually) be corrected.

    Oh man. I was having a political discussion with a nice Republican gal once, and she was trying to convince me that her political ideologies were right because she believed in them completely, going so far as to literally state that the sky would in fact be orange if she believed it enough.

    I laughed for hours after deleting her from all my contact lists.

    To be fair, the sky is kind of orange-y at dusk.

    You gotta believe!

    Houn on
  • GoslingGosling Looking Up Soccer In Mongolia Right Now, Probably Watertown, WIRegistered User regular
    edited October 2009
    So the GOP is trending towards self-funding candidates. This is a strategy that has never, ever failed.

    Gosling on
    I have a new soccer blog The Minnow Tank. Reading it psychically kicks Sepp Blatter in the bean bag.
  • Saint MadnessSaint Madness Registered User
    edited October 2009
    http://www.usofearth.com/2011-obamas-coup-fails.php

    I don't think has been posted yet.

    It's basically an online game made by some militia nuts about a coup against Obama, they have a pretty impressive backround story to it, even a future news section.

    Heres a few choice headlines:
    Michelle Obama Captured By Militia, America Celebrates

    Joe Wilson and the New Congress Militia Meet Up With Breitbart Brigade

    Saint Madness on
  • MKRMKR Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Militia people are going to flip when they try to revolt and find out that the USAF has smart bombs and bunker busters. Whoops.

    MKR on
  • iTunesIsEviliTunesIsEvil Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    This "lets go to war with the US government because we lost an election" fetish is getting awfully creepy.

    iTunesIsEvil on
  • KanamitKanamit Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    MKR wrote: »
    Militia people are going to flip when they try to revolt and find out that the USAF has smart bombs and bunker busters. Whoops.
    You don't understand. The military knows the threat that Barack Hussein Obama poses to the country and the Constitution better than anyone, and will be among the greatest supporters of Joe Wilson's second American revolution.
    No, seriously. That's what these people think.

    Kanamit on
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Kanamit wrote: »
    MKR wrote: »
    Militia people are going to flip when they try to revolt and find out that the USAF has smart bombs and bunker busters. Whoops.
    You don't understand. The military knows the threat that Barack Hussein Obama poses to the country and the Constitution better than anyone, and will be among the greatest supporters of Joe Wilson's second American revolution.
    No, seriously. That's what these people think.

    Yeah. They actually think that the military will "sit this one out" and just stick to defending the US form external threats. That's actually a plot point in that game that was linked earlier.

    AngelHedgie on
    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • jhunter46jhunter46 Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    It really bums me out that the GOP is probably broken beyond repair.

    Without passing any judgment on Obama the next three some odd years of his administration could be a cluster of a Presidency and he would get reelected simply because the Republicans can't put forth a candidate that could a, swing moderate votes and b, do any better than the current administration.

    I can only really hope that eventually the party might go through some kind of political rebirth or a group of like minded conservatives can splinter off and try and pull a Bull Moose. Without some kind of drastic shift however I don't see anyway conservative values (small c) will ever have a place in national politics again.

    jhunter46 on
  • KanamitKanamit Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    jhunter46 wrote: »
    I can only really hope that eventually the party might go through some kind of political rebirth or a group of like minded conservatives can splinter off and try and pull a Bull Moose. Without some kind of drastic shift however I don't see anyway conservative values (small c) will ever have a place in national politics again.
    We can only hope.

    Kanamit on
  • MKRMKR Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Kanamit wrote: »
    MKR wrote: »
    Militia people are going to flip when they try to revolt and find out that the USAF has smart bombs and bunker busters. Whoops.
    You don't understand. The military knows the threat that Barack Hussein Obama poses to the country and the Constitution better than anyone, and will be among the greatest supporters of Joe Wilson's second American revolution.
    No, seriously. That's what these people think.

    The idea that the USAF would stand by and watch while militants kill innocent Americans in their revolt seems awfully unpatriotic to me.

    :P

    MKR on
This discussion has been closed.