lfnetwork.com mark read register faq members calendar

Thread: The future of the Republican Party
Thread Tools Display Modes
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Old 11-06-2008, 01:46 AM   #1
Achilles
Dapper Chimp
 
Achilles's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 8,204
Helpful! Veteran Modder Forum Veteran 
The future of the Republican Party

A great deal of the buzz I'm hearing today seems to revolve around the question, "What's next for the Republican Party?".

Based on the overwhelming response we saw during yesterday's election, it would seem that the modern American conservative movement has been sent a message. Will the centrist try to take the wheel and move the party closer to the center in a bid to regain influence? Or will the far-right redouble their efforts and end up moving even further right?

In what might be one of the most important ramifications of an Obama presidency is the fact that he will most likely appoint 1, if not 2, Supreme Court Justices during his 1st term. If he does so within the next two years, he will most certainly have a cooperative Congress doing the confirmations. If the Democrats either keep their current seats or grow their majority (which I suspect they will, but I'm hardly an expert or a fortune teller) in the 2010 mid-term election, then he might even appoint a 3rd justice with an ever more cooperative Congress.

What will happen to the conservative groups pushing their pro-religion/anti-science agenda (I'm using a broad brush here. I feel that all the specific issues I could list off would comfortably fit under this umbrella)? We've seen the conservative movement go underground only to come back stronger later. Is this something we should be thinking about going forward.

A lot of questions here. Hopefully this will generate some good discussion. Thanks reading and thanks in advance for your responses.
Achilles is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 11-06-2008, 09:59 AM   #2
Rogue15
Reconnaissance Specialist
 
Rogue15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Kaas City
Posts: 18,610
Current Game: The Old Republic
Roleplayer 10 year veteran! 
this country is going to hell lol


Battle is a pure form of expression. It is heart and discipline, reduced to movement and motion. In battle, the words are swept away, giving way to actions-- mercy, sacrifice, anger, fear. These are pure moments of expression.
Rogue15 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 11-06-2008, 01:08 PM   #3
Achilles
Dapper Chimp
 
Achilles's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 8,204
Helpful! Veteran Modder Forum Veteran 
Listening to this now.
Achilles is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 11-06-2008, 01:31 PM   #4
tk102
Well past expiration date
 
tk102's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 5,766
Current Game: Dragon Age: Origins
Forum Veteran Helpful! Notable contributor 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles View Post
Will the centrist try to take the wheel and move the party closer to the center in a bid to regain influence? Or will the far-right redouble their efforts and end up moving even further right?
I would expect a farther lean to the right. It worked in 2000/2004 and centrism didn't pan out too well for McCain. Though a lot could change in two years, I doubt that is enough time to see conservatism gain substantial power. If Obama is able to sustain his popularity through his first term enough for re-election in 2012, I would very much expect another rise in conservatism in 2014, just as it did in 1998 (Clinton's 2nd term) and the way liberalism rose in 2006 (Bush's 2nd term). By then there will almost certainly be enough fodder to build a campaign upon (scandals, narrow passage/defeat of controversial legislation, and questionable executive decisions).

I'm not sure what role Palin will play in the future. I really liked Tina Fey.


tk102 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 11-06-2008, 04:39 PM   #5
Achilles
Dapper Chimp
 
Achilles's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 8,204
Helpful! Veteran Modder Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tk102 View Post
I would expect a farther lean to the right. It worked in 2000/2004 and centrism didn't pan out too well for McCain.
Hmm...

I think I would be inclined to argue that Bush won in 2000 because he "out-centristed" McCain. My impression is that Bush did well because he made a case of "compassionate conservatism", not the hard-right conservatism.

McCain didn't run in 04 and some have argued that he didn't do well in this election because he didn't do enough to cater to the center (I'll admit that I'm simply parroting what I've heard on this last point. Feel free to blow it out of the water.).

Quote:
Originally Posted by tk102 View Post
Though a lot could change in two years, I doubt that is enough time to see conservatism gain substantial power.
I think that the previous power-brokers are all gone. The movement would need a new generation of leaders gain momentum. I think you're correct in saying that 2 years isn't enough time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tk102 View Post
If Obama is able to sustain his popularity through his first term enough for re-election in 2012, I would very much expect another rise in conservatism in 2014, just as it did in 1998 (Clinton's 2nd term) and the way liberalism rose in 2006 (Bush's 2nd term). By then there will almost certainly be enough fodder to build a campaign upon (scandals, narrow passage/defeat of controversial legislation, and questionable executive decisions).
2nd terms are always the most fun, aren't they?

Quote:
Originally Posted by tk102 View Post
I'm not sure what role Palin will play in the future. I really liked Tina Fey.
[added by edit]Can Palin resurrect the GOP? Does she want to?[/edit]

If there is any merit to the stories that are coming out now (she didn't know that Africa was a continent, not a country?!), then I think her time in the limelight will be short-lived indeed.

Quasi-unrelated: It will be interesting to see how McCain spends what might be his last two years in the Senate.

Last edited by Achilles; 11-06-2008 at 04:56 PM.
Achilles is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 11-06-2008, 05:06 PM   #6
tk102
Well past expiration date
 
tk102's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 5,766
Current Game: Dragon Age: Origins
Forum Veteran Helpful! Notable contributor 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles View Post
Hmm...

I think I would be inclined to argue that Bush won in 2000 because he "out-centristed" McCain. My impression is that Bush did well because he made a case of "compassionate conservatism", not the hard-right conservatism.
I was thinking of the post-primary time period in 2000, rather than the pre-primary one. At that point Bush selected Cheney and galvanized his ties with PNAC.

But even in the 2000 pre-primary campaign against McCain, the New York Times noted:
Quote:
Mr. Bush, as the first votes of the primary season near, has sought to galvanize his party's conservative base. Originally Mr. Bush tried to run from the center as if already in the general election campaign, using his ''compassionate conservatism'' to distinguish himself from the harder-edged conservatism of Congressional Republicans.

But now, with Mr. McCain drawing support from independents and moderates, Mr. Bush has tried to paint himself as the true conservative of the duo. He has charged that the senator's ideas on campaign finance law would ''hurt Republicans and hurt the conservative cause.'' He has put heavy emphasis on his sweeping tax-cut proposal and constantly tries to tie Mr. McCain to Vice President Al Gore, saying that they are the ''two voices'' in the campaign who say his plan is too large.
--(Jan 16, 2000)

Quote:
I think that the previous power-brokers are all gone. The movement would need a new generation of leaders gain momentum. I think you're correct in saying that 2 years isn't enough time.
*Googles the current whereabouts of Bill Kristol*

Quote:
If there is any merit to the stories that are coming out now (she didn't know that Africa was a continent, not a country?!), then I think her time in the limelight will be short-lived indeed.
That's my gut feel, but look at the trouble that Senator Stevens is in right now. If he steps aside, I would think her star power would be enough to carry herself back to Washington D.C. And I knew I wasn't the only thinking this.


tk102 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 11-06-2008, 05:45 PM   #7
tk102
Well past expiration date
 
tk102's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 5,766
Current Game: Dragon Age: Origins
Forum Veteran Helpful! Notable contributor 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tk102 View Post
If he steps aside, I would think her star power would be enough to carry herself back to Washington D.C. And I knew I wasn't the only thinking this.
Heh heh, after reading the last paragraph in that article over again, I guess she wouldn't need star power at all, just her governorship.


tk102 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 11-06-2008, 05:27 PM   #8
mimartin
TOR ate my KotOR
 
mimartin's Avatar
 
Status: Super Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,052
Current Game: TOR/FO:NV
Imperialist Meatbags Guild Officer The Walking Carpets Guild Officer Alderaan News Holopics contributor 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles View Post
Quote:
Grover Norquist, a leading conservative and president of Americans for Tax Reform, called Palin "one of five or six people who is a plausible candidate for president in 2012," along with familiar names like Mitt Romney, Texas Gov. Rick Perry and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich.
Well Palin is smarter than one of their only plausible candiates for 2012. I've talked to this man on the phone more than once and I would be surprise if he knew where Austin, Texas was. If Perry is one of their five or six plausible candidates the Republican Party is in more trouble than I suspected.



Last edited by mimartin; 11-06-2008 at 05:57 PM.
mimartin is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 11-06-2008, 07:03 PM   #9
Samuel Dravis
 
Samuel Dravis's Avatar
 
Status: Moderator
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 4,973
Quote:
Originally Posted by mimartin View Post
Well Palin is smarter than one of their only plausible candiates for 2012. I've talked to this man on the phone more than once and I would be surprise if he knew where Austin, Texas was. If Perry is one of their five or six plausible candidates the Republican Party is in more trouble than I suspected.
I agree. I can't imagine anyone actually wanting Perry (except, I suppose, a minority of Texans). He carried the last election with less than half of the total votes. The only reason he won was because there were several other contenders that split the opposition. I don't see him being able to swing a candidacy.


"Words are deeds." - Wittgenstein
Samuel Dravis is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 11-06-2008, 05:26 PM   #10
Achilles
Dapper Chimp
 
Achilles's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 8,204
Helpful! Veteran Modder Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tk102 View Post
But even in the 2000 pre-primary campaign against McCain, the New York Times noted: <snip>
Good read. Thanks for the link.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tk102 View Post
*Googles the current whereabouts of Bill Kristol*


I was thinking more along the lines of Tom Delay. Based on what I've been reading lately, I've been made to realize just how far the "team effort" extended. With many big pieces missing, I'm not sure what to expect as far as timeline for resurgence.

Going back to the first post, what does the Discovery Institute do now? They don't have someone in the White House advocating that we "teach the controversy".

How does the anti-abortion movement proceed with the knowledge that a 6-3 or 7-2 conservative Supreme Court isn't likely to happen?

What are the repercussions of the likelihood that U.S. researchers might be on the brink of getting a lot more funding for embryonic stem cell research? Do we need to start eyeing the newspapers for headlines of research facility bombings (ala abortion clinic bombings, etc)?

Is the culture war over? Are we just getting a breather? Or will it continue/intesify/whatever?

Quote:
Originally Posted by tk102 View Post
That's my gut feel, but look at the trouble that Senator Stevens is in right now. If he steps aside, I would think her star power would be enough to carry herself back to Washington D.C. And I knew I wasn't the only thinking this.
Oh my. That's an interesting thought indeed.
Achilles is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 11-10-2008, 05:59 PM   #11
Achilles
Dapper Chimp
 
Achilles's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 8,204
Helpful! Veteran Modder Forum Veteran 
More on this topic here.
Achilles is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 11-10-2008, 06:33 PM   #12
tk102
Well past expiration date
 
tk102's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 5,766
Current Game: Dragon Age: Origins
Forum Veteran Helpful! Notable contributor 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles View Post
More on this topic here.
Thanks Achilles. Some of the key points I heard:

George Will: 25% of Obama's voters were under 30 so could this signal a generational imprinting?
Cynthia Tucker: That would likely be the case if the administration shows itself to be competent.
Fareed Zakaria: Traditional stances of the GOP (deregulation, low taxes, low spending) and are more irrevelant today than in years past.
David Brooks: GOP needs to address today's issues (China, Russia, healthcare, energy).
Mike Pence: McCain still got 46% of the popular vote, so don't count the party out yet.


tk102 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 11-10-2008, 06:56 PM   #13
Achilles
Dapper Chimp
 
Achilles's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 8,204
Helpful! Veteran Modder Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tk102 View Post
Cynthia Tucker: That would likely be the case if the administration shows itself to be competent.
I found her use of adjectives interesting. Did Bush lower the bar so far that competence is all that's required or is the bar for Obama set so high that "competence" from him would seem like "exceed expectation" for someone else?
Quote:
Originally Posted by tk102 View Post
Mike Pence: McCain still got 46% of the popular vote, so don't count the party out yet.
Another comment that I found interesting. Especially in light of the other comments that alluded to the Republican party being the party for people with outdated ideas who refused to get with the times.
Achilles is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 11-10-2008, 07:15 PM   #14
tk102
Well past expiration date
 
tk102's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 5,766
Current Game: Dragon Age: Origins
Forum Veteran Helpful! Notable contributor 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles View Post
I found her use of adjectives interesting. Did Bush lower the bar so far that competence is all that's required or is the bar for Obama set so high that "competence" from him would seem like "exceed expectation" for someone else?
I think more of the latter... by the time rolls around that there's enough hindsight to meaningfully discuss the Obama administration's "competency", it will have its own merits or lack thereof to be judged by. If the youth doesn't get disillusioned, they might very well imprint Democratic.


Quote:
Another comment that I found interesting. Especially in light of the other comments that alluded to the Republican party being the party for people with outdated ideas who refused to get with the times.
I can only think of GOP jabs as a response so I'll just


tk102 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 11-11-2008, 05:05 PM   #15
Achilles
Dapper Chimp
 
Achilles's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 8,204
Helpful! Veteran Modder Forum Veteran 
Another round table discussion from NPR's Talk of the Nation (click Listen Now link at the top of the article).
Achilles is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 01-29-2009, 11:10 PM   #16
SkinWalker
Anthropologist
 
SkinWalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Give critical thought a chance
Posts: 2,709
LFN Staff Member 
There's an article at Rebuild the Party.com that outlines much of their technical strategy and some of there tactical strategy as well.

Technically speaking, they'd like to take more advantage of the internet and novel media in general -something the Obama campaign demonstrated as extremely effective in fundraising and disseminating information.

Tactically, however, they'll need to modify their message. On this site its mentioned:
Quote:
Obama's victory could be a blessing in disguise for conservatives. Why? Because Obama's winning strategy was built on the back of an inherently conservative idea: that we the people, acting together outside of government, can accomplish great things. Or, in the words of the overused slogan, "Yes We Can."
-and an admission that:
Quote:
Because of the Internet, "us" becomes a force more powerful than any in politics. The ability to donate or volunteer instantaneously online gives the millions of "us" more leverage than even the most connected group of insiders.
But their one failing may actually be the continued appeal to their alleged "base" of evangelical and fundamental but largely ignorant Christians who have a large population and a low education. This population is slowly dying off as older generations make way for younger, more tolerant and less fundamental ones and as education gains a larger foothold among Christian populations, diluting the fundamental mentality with a more eclectic one.


A Hot Cup of Joe - My Blog

Not finding an intellectual challenge in the Swamp? Try the Senate Chambers!

Evolution and How We Know It's Right - Post your thoughts!
Debate Strategies & Tactics - Polish your online debate skills and offer your own advice
SkinWalker is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-02-2009, 06:47 PM   #17
GarfieldJL
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,856
Excuse me?

I'm a Republican and I consider those comments to be out of line, the Republican's base has always been Military, Religious Conservatives, etc.

People had better hope the Republicans manage to remain a major party or this country is in real trouble, cause we'd have a One-Party system.


The reasons why Republicans lost this last election can be traced to multiple factors, however to sum up the situation I find the commentary that Republicans are not tolerant of others to be really insulting, that's the stereotype the media tries to paint Republicans as, that's not what Republicans are, just look at who heads the Republican Party.
GarfieldJL is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-02-2009, 07:47 PM   #18
Vikinor
600cc
 
Vikinor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Midgard
Posts: 1,232
Current Game: Cataclysm
Well, as much as many people don't like to believe, stereotypes are often based on some form of truth. Not always, but often, whether it is or is not stretched or blown out of proportion.

And from what you say about the Republican base being military and religious conservatives, may possibly be one of the key factors to why they aren't a majority in office at this time.

Military. Well, I know this isn't a great example and is pretty biased. Iraq.

Religious. Somewhat irrelevant because of the separation of Church and State.

Not trying to sound like a jerk or anything. And I do apologize if this came across that way.




Original member of 2002.
Vikinor is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-02-2009, 07:51 PM   #19
GarfieldJL
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,856
Well, here is the thing, was it the Republicans that lost or the unethical behavior of the Media that caused the Democrats to be elected.

Seriously, if it were the results of just people going to the left, it wouldn't explain why the constitutional amendment in California passed.


As far as Iraq is concerned, did anyone else notice the fact they voted here recently without any major incident of violence.

Furthermore, I don't want to get into the race/gender media coverage in this thread.
GarfieldJL is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-11-2009, 03:16 PM   #20
Kurgan
Headhunter
 
Kurgan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1997
Location: The Dawn of Time
Posts: 18,322
LFN Staff Member 10 year veteran! 
Whenever people start talking about an "anti-religious" movement here, I ask them to reconsider how the black vote got Obama elected, and that constituency is largely religious, and conservative on some social issues (Ie: anti-gay marriage).

So let's try and avoid too much black and white (pardon the pun) portrayals here.

Frankly I think the Republican party has lost its way (yes I was a Ron Paul supporter, and it was amazing to see how different he was from the other candidates running). The big two have just gotten fatter and more centrist, cynical politically sly with each passing year. That's reason enough to remain an independent!


Download JK2 maps for JA Server|BOOT CAMP!|Strategic Academy|
(JA Server: 108.178.55.189:29070)


"The Concussion Rifle is the weapon of a Jedi Knight Player, an elegant weapon, from a more civilized community." - Kyle Katarn
Kurgan is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-11-2009, 10:40 PM   #21
Tommycat
º¿º>^..^<
 
Tommycat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,578
Current Game: Real Life 1.0(BETA)
Forum Veteran 
Ya get 90% of a demographic to vote for someone, and all of the sudden that means the Republicans are falling apart.

McCain never energized the party, let alone the nation. I swear some times it seemed like he was campaigning for Obama.

And Vikinor, I would be VERY careful with your generalizations about stereotypes. Especially with us now having an African American president. There are more than a few stereotypes out there. And quite a few are unfounded.
Tommycat is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-11-2009, 11:46 PM   #22
Vikinor
600cc
 
Vikinor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Midgard
Posts: 1,232
Current Game: Cataclysm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tommycat View Post
And Vikinor, I would be VERY careful with your generalizations about stereotypes. Especially with us now having an African American president. There are more than a few stereotypes out there. And quite a few are unfounded.
Not quite sure I understand what you're getting at(or what you interpreted from my post), but I'll keep that in mind.




Original member of 2002.
Vikinor is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-12-2009, 12:59 AM   #23
Tommycat
º¿º>^..^<
 
Tommycat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,578
Current Game: Real Life 1.0(BETA)
Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vikinor View Post
Not quite sure I understand what you're getting at(or what you interpreted from my post), but I'll keep that in mind.
Justifying the stereotype of Republicans could easily be used to justify the stereotypes of African Americans. I would rather not go into explaining those. Basically, I'm saying watch your stereotypes, and the justifications you use.
Tommycat is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-15-2009, 04:13 PM   #24
Darth Avlectus
Your point?
 
Darth Avlectus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Attack on Titan
Posts: 4,255
Current Game: Soul Calibur 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tommycat View Post
Justifying the stereotype of Republicans could easily be used to justify the stereotypes of African Americans. I would rather not go into explaining those. Basically, I'm saying watch your stereotypes, and the justifications you use.
Or conservatives for that matter, friends.

@general idea
The whole "conservatives are defined by the oldest, dumbest, most racist white guy who loves his guns" stereotype is getting rather old. If it is true, then how do you explain Ted Hayes?

I'd have more but I'd rather not rant on and on right now. Just thought I'd toss out an example (a popular one at that) of a stereotype.


"I cant see S***! --YOU GO TO HELL!" --Tourettes guy
Darth Avlectus is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-15-2009, 08:19 PM   #25
EnderWiggin
Sine Amore Nihil Est Vita
 
EnderWiggin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 3,395
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTA:SWcity View Post
*brevity*

True, but on the other hand, most members of the group are both in favor of the War and Religious, which may not be the public's wish for a leader right now.

While this doesn't include all Republicans, I can see what Viknor was trying to say, even if I don't necessarily agree.

_EW_



Hello, Pot? This is Kettle. You're black. ~ Prime

Yes, I hate you.

J7 - thanks for accepting me as part of the 'family.'
EnderWiggin is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-19-2009, 11:38 PM   #26
Tommycat
º¿º>^..^<
 
Tommycat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,578
Current Game: Real Life 1.0(BETA)
Forum Veteran 
Sorry, but with Skinwalker saying the Republicans(and conservatives in general) were intolerant(even though Bush had more minorities in higher positions than Clinton), ignorant, and uneducated, then Vikinor following that with saying those stereotypes have some basis in truth... That is insulting. It would be like if Garfield called Democrats pot smoking layabout welfare babies. Then I followed it up with claiming there was some truth to it. It's insulting.

At any rate, to the topic: There's very little that makes me think the Republican party is going away. Heck if the Democrat party didn't go away after the crushing defeat in '84 why would the Republican party go away this time. I think more than anything the people wanted something different. If you paid attention to the speeches you would have noticed that "Change" was the buzz word. Eventually that "New President Smell" will wear off, and people will start looking at him and his party more critically. For now it's mostly the conservatives looking at him closely. When it gets on two years, if we aren't doing better, the general public is gonna look real closely at our government. If we're worse off(which is entirely possible), whether right or not, this administration is going to get the blame. That will give the Republican party the ammunition it needs to gain power.

The problem comes in the form of the major news outlets. More of them tend to be far less critical of Democrats than they are Republicans. So taking that into account, it's going to be hard to sway public opinion. Oh well, we'll see how the future plays out
Tommycat is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-21-2009, 12:53 AM   #27
SkinWalker
Anthropologist
 
SkinWalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Give critical thought a chance
Posts: 2,709
LFN Staff Member 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tommycat View Post
Sorry, but with Skinwalker saying the Republicans(and conservatives in general) were intolerant(even though Bush had more minorities in higher positions than Clinton), ignorant, and uneducated, then Vikinor following that with saying those stereotypes have some basis in truth... That is insulting. It would be like if Garfield called Democrats pot smoking layabout welfare babies. Then I followed it up with claiming there was some truth to it. It's insulting.
You're analysis may be formed from preconceived bias and lack of understanding. Perhaps you're a conservative and consider yourself republican (I honestly don't care and actually detest politics in general), but my statements, while not supported at the time with references, were generally accurate.

Yours, however, suffer some fallacious reasoning.

First, you assume that the mere act of a single leader within the republican party or conservative movement to position minorities within government is both necessary and sufficient to absolve the entire party of its overall intolerant appearance. It is not.

Facts show that more resistance to human rights, gay rights, women's rights, and the rights of people of color within government is driven by republican and conservative efforts (Bandhauer & Perales 2004; Kromm & Sturgis 2008; Republicans Against 8 2008; and Ross & Esposito 2005).

Facts also show (Massengill, 2008) that "Even in light of the increased educational opportunities available to Americans born since 1940, being raised conservative Protestant still exerts a negative effect on educational attainment... conservative Protestants born since 1960 are no less likely to finish high school, but display consistently lower odds of bachelor's degree attainment when compared to mainliners."

Should you find a desire to attempt a riposte by deriding Democrats, please feel free to knock yourself out. I have my fair share of criticism for them as well. I'll reserve this criticism should someone deluded by liberal ideology wish to bring it up.

As I said, I detest politics. Mostly because its an institution that is necessary but deplorable in its ideological nonsense which ends up polarizing human societies in order to accomplish progress.

References:

Bandhauer, C. A. and Perales, M. (2004-08-14) "Guest Workers or Invaders? The Conservative Division Over U.S. Immigration Policy: The Reinforcement of National Borders and the Racialization of Latino Migrants" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association, Hilton San Francisco & Renaissance Parc 55 Hotel, San Francisco, CA

Kromm, Chris and Sue Sturgis (2008). Hurricane Katrina and the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement: a Global Human Rights Perspective on a National Disaster. Institute for Southern Studies

Massengill, Rebekah Peeples (2008). Educational attainment and cohort change among conservative protestants, 1972-2004. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 47(4), 545-562.

Republicans Against 8 (2008). http://www.republicansagainst8.com/about/

Ross, Brian and Richard Esposito (Nov. 18, 2005). CIA's Harsh Interrogation Techniques Described. ABC World News


A Hot Cup of Joe - My Blog

Not finding an intellectual challenge in the Swamp? Try the Senate Chambers!

Evolution and How We Know It's Right - Post your thoughts!
Debate Strategies & Tactics - Polish your online debate skills and offer your own advice
SkinWalker is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-21-2009, 02:40 PM   #28
GarfieldJL
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,856
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkinWalker View Post
You're analysis may be formed from preconceived bias and lack of understanding. Perhaps you're a conservative and consider yourself republican (I honestly don't care and actually detest politics in general), but my statements, while not supported at the time with references, were generally accurate.
No, I think Tommycat was completely accurate and in some cases understating the fact.


Quote:
Originally Posted by SkinWalker
First, you assume that the mere act of a single leader within the republican party or conservative movement to position minorities within government is both necessary and sufficient to absolve the entire party of its overall intolerant appearance. It is not.
The current leader of the Republican Party is African American, your comments that Republicans are racist are out of line.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SkinWalker
Facts show that more resistance to human rights, gay rights, women's rights, and the rights of people of color within government is driven by republican and conservative efforts (Bandhauer & Perales 2004; Kromm & Sturgis 2008; Republicans Against 8 2008; and Ross & Esposito 2005).
California is ran predominately by Democrats not Republicans.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SkinWalker
Facts also show (Massengill, 2008) that "Even in light of the increased educational opportunities available to Americans born since 1940, being raised conservative Protestant still exerts a negative effect on educational attainment... conservative Protestants born since 1960 are no less likely to finish high school, but display consistently lower odds of bachelor's degree attainment when compared to mainliners."
And what evidence do you have that this individual knows what he is talking about. Some of the people from 1960s that predominately run Academia curriculem today were the Marxists and terrorists that did their best to kill people. See William Ayers as an example.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SkinWalker
Bandhauer, C. A. and Perales, M. (2004-08-14) "Guest Workers or Invaders? The Conservative Division Over U.S. Immigration Policy: The Reinforcement of National Borders and the Racialization of Latino Migrants" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association, Hilton San Francisco & Renaissance Parc 55 Hotel, San Francisco, CA
If that is an example of your sources your case is in serious trouble, it is no secret that the hard left controls academia and no coincidence that it happens to be Pelosi's district.

Congratulations you just fell for the most typical left wing ploy, when someone disagrees with them, they just call them racists or sexist. We saw it all 2008 election, we even see it just last week.
GarfieldJL is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-21-2009, 07:10 PM   #29
ET Warrior
PhD in horribleness
 
ET Warrior's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Evil League of Evil
Posts: 9,405
LFN Staff Member Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by GarfieldJL View Post
And what evidence do you have that this individual knows what he is talking about.
So, as usual, if it doesn't agree with your preconceived notions of how the world works it's probably an outright fabrication?

Quote:
Originally Posted by GarfieldJL View Post
If that is an example of your sources your case is in serious trouble, it is no secret that the hard left controls academia
lolwut? So any academic source is null and void because those crazy lefties have them in their pockets? Are you for serious here?

Quote:
Originally Posted by GarfieldJL View Post
Congratulations you just fell for the most typical left wing ploy, when someone disagrees with them, they just call them racists or sexist. We saw it all 2008 election, we even see it just last week.
And you have fallen for the most typical GarfieldJL ploy, when someone disagrees with you just accuse them of being part of the radical left and then insinuate that they want to perform romantic acts on our current president.



ET Warrior is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-21-2009, 09:04 PM   #30
True_Avery
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,002
Quote:
Originally Posted by GarfieldJL
California is ran predominately by Democrats not Republicans.
We may vote Democrat in the presidential elections, but we have a Republican in power and on inner state matters we more often vote Republican.

Why?

Because we are a coasted state. Meaning, a good part of the military and navy exist out here. California is not so cut and dry Democrat as the rest of the country likes to believe.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GarfieldJL
And what evidence do you have that this individual knows what he is talking about. Some of the people from 1960s that predominately run Academia curriculem today were the Marxists and terrorists that did their best to kill people. See William Ayers as an example.
So, any academy in the 60s is null and void because they were "terrorists" and/or "marxists"?

Quote:
Originally Posted by GarfieldJL
If that is an example of your sources your case is in serious trouble, it is no secret that the hard left controls academia
Are you serious? Everything is null and void because it is in the "lefts" pocket?

Great job closing your eyes and ears and yelling loudly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GarfieldJL
And you have fallen for the most typical GarfieldJL ploy, when someone disagrees with you just accuse them of being part of the radical left and then insinuate that they want to perform romantic acts on our current president.
Quoted for Truth.
True_Avery is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-21-2009, 09:24 PM   #31
GarfieldJL
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,856
Quote:
Originally Posted by True_Avery View Post
We may vote Democrat in the presidential elections, but we have a Republican in power and on inner state matters we more often vote Republican.

Why?

Because we are a coasted state. Meaning, a good part of the military and navy exist out here. California is not so cut and dry Democrat as the rest of the country likes to believe.
Wasn't your prior Governor a Democrat, also if you look at the voting Demographics you'd find many of the same people that voted for Obama voted to ban Gay Marriage.


Quote:
Originally Posted by True_Avery
So, any academy in the 60s is null and void because they were "terrorists" and/or "marxists"?
They are when they are teaching people their leftist ideaology have you read some of the books they use or even seen them. I have thank you kindly, so I think I know a lot more on the subject than you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by True_Avery
Are you serious? Everything is null and void because it is in the "lefts" pocket?
It is when they start accusing people of being racist, sexists, etc.

Quote:
Originally Posted by True_Avery
Great job closing your eyes and ears and yelling loudly.
Whatever...
GarfieldJL is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-21-2009, 06:47 AM   #32
Tommycat
º¿º>^..^<
 
Tommycat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,578
Current Game: Real Life 1.0(BETA)
Forum Veteran 
Oh, prop 8... I forgot, Is California mostly Republican? Then why on earth would it be voted down... Could it have more to do with the fact that we as a nation in general are intolerant. To pin it on the Republicans is a bit silly. You are also painting the whole of the party by the actions of a few, so why can't we use the actions of a few to paint us in a better light. I mean wasn't Robert Byrd a member of the KKK? Can't get much more intolerant than the KKK.

You also note that there is division within the party over immigration. So, throw that one out.

Oh Come on... your Katrina source is obviously biassed. Find me anything negative they say about the Democrats at Facing South(which both of them are associated with).

And sorry, but people who are intolerant of religious people talking about religious intolerance... Sorry, doesn't fly. All you'd have to do is read more of Dr. Massengill's work to see where she stands with regards to religion.

And as far as I know the Republicans don't have a monopoly on the religious.

It was Republicans that freed slaves
It was Democrats that fillibustered to prevent making lynching a federal crime.
It was a Democrat that put a Klansman into the supreme court.
First Black Secretary of State?
First Black Woman Secretary of State?

Republicans tend to get called racist and intolerant, and it just is not fair.

Oh right Republicans are intolerant of the GLBT community http://online.logcabin.org/

So what about the torture.. the party leader for the last election was McCain. He made it VERY clear he opposed torture.


"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." Thomas Jefferson
Tommycat is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-22-2009, 09:34 PM   #33
Det. Bart Lasiter
obama.png
 
Det. Bart Lasiter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: `(•.°)~
Posts: 7,997
Current Game: all
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
heh your logic is so pathetic the only thing you can do is make baseless accusations against his sources



"No, Mama. You can bet your sweet ass and half a titty whoever put that hit on you already got the cops in their back pocket." ~Black Dynamite
Det. Bart Lasiter is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-23-2009, 03:03 PM   #34
Q
The one who knocks
 
Q's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: ABQ
Posts: 6,643
Current Game: Mowing down neos with my M60
LF Jester Forum Veteran Helpful! 
Well, these past few posts have been quite educational.

I now have a better idea of what actually occurs when matter and antimatter come into close proximity with one another.


"They should rename the team to the Washington Government Sucks. Put Obama on the helmet. Line the entire walls of the stadium with the actual text of the ACA.
Fix their home team score on the board to the debt clock, they can win every game 17,000,000,000,000 to 24. Losing team gets taxed by the IRS 100%, then droned."
-Toker
Q is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-23-2009, 08:37 PM   #35
GarfieldJL
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,856
Quote:
Originally Posted by Qliveur View Post
Well, these past few posts have been quite educational.

I now have a better idea of what actually occurs when matter and antimatter come into close proximity with one another.
Sadly I've actually seen worse.


Anyways, my point is several universities including those that SkinWalker used as sources are facing lawsuits of discrimination against Conservatives. There have been a lot of things here recently that demonstrate just how corrupt the Education system is in the United States.

There is even a documentary out there about a teacher scolding elementry school children because they and their parents supported John McCain. (The documentary was done by people from a country in Europe I'll try to find more information on it, cause I'm going off of memory) Many of Academia have their own agenda to take down Conservatives, many want Income Redistribution.

There was another incident in Colorado that I didn't bother to look for that I can think of off the top of my head.

Additionally the Political Science department at the University I go to got in trouble for violating Federal Election Laws by using university printers to make Barack Obama fliers to post all over campus. So there is a major problem.
GarfieldJL is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-25-2009, 01:11 AM   #36
SkinWalker
Anthropologist
 
SkinWalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Give critical thought a chance
Posts: 2,709
LFN Staff Member 
Conservatism and Intelligence

What follows are brief excerpts from an article in-press and my own commentary, which describes the negative correlation between intelligence and conservative beliefs. I cited the article elsewhere in this thread, but I'll include the citation at the end of this post.

I can't post the entire article here due to Fair Use restrictions, but you should be able to find the journal Intelligence at your local university library or online via your local public library's internet access. You should even be able to order it via your public/uni library through the Inter Library Loan (I'll try to include the DOI to make this easier)

Quote:
Abstract
Conservatism and cognitive ability are negatively correlated. The evidence is based on 1254 community college students and 1600 foreign students seeking entry to United States' universities. At the individual level of analysis, conservatism scores correlate negatively with SAT, Vocabulary, and Analogy test scores. At the national level of analysis, conservatism scores correlate negatively with measures of education (e.g., gross enrollment at primary, secondary, and tertiary levels) and performance on mathematics and reading assessments from the PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment) project. They also correlate with components of the Failed States Index and several other measures of economic and political development of nations. Conservatism scores have higher correlations with economic and political measures than estimated IQ scores.
The abstract gives an overview of the hypotheses of the author, which is that there is a negative correlation between conservatism and cognitive ability. That is to say, the more cognitively capable a person is, the less likely they are to be conservative.

In this abstract, you can also get a sense of the methodology used, which includes a sampling of 2854 people (n=2854), including 1254 community college students and 1600 foreign students. What was evaluated for cognitive ability were SAT scores, etc. (see the abstract).

More on methodology
To rate conservatism, the author drew on successful survey questions from other research that was able to establish levels of conservatism through the use of scaling questions with answers (like strongly and completely disagree to strongly and completely disagree).

Questions rated the degree to which an individual subscribes to conventional religious beliefs, the degree to which an individual subscribes to various justifications of self interest; the degree to which an individual subscribes to patriotism, consitutionalism, humanism, existentialism, neoliberalism, and functionalism; and the degree to which an individual subscribes to subjective experiences (paranormal experiences, personal mysticism, etc.).

Example statements (to which the respondent chose the degree to which they agreed or disagreed) were: "religion should play hte most important role in civil affairs;" "worldly possessions are the greatest good in life;" "I love and am devoted to my country;" and "some objects have magical powers."

The results showed a negative correlation between conservatism and cognitive ability:
Quote:
Overall, both IQ and Conservatism are important in assessingthe country's economic and political status, with Conservatism showing a somewhat better predictive validity. Again, I wish to refrain from making causal inferences. All that can be said from the data at hand is that two psychological variables — cognitive ability (or IQ) and Conservative syndrome — appear to form a nexus with demographic, economic, sociological, health and political/legal variables at the country level of analysis.
The author describes "conservatism" thus:
Quote:
The Conservative syndrome
describes a person who attaches particular importance to the respect of tradition, humility, devoutness and moderation as well as to obedience, self-discipline and politeness, social order, family, and national security and has a sense of belonging to and a pride in a group with which he or she identifies. A Conservative person also subscribes to conventional religious
beliefs and accepts the mystical, including paranormal, experiences. The same person is likely to be less open to intellectual challenges and will be seen as a responsible “good citizen” at work and in the society while expressing rather harsh views toward those outside his or her group. Our data
also show that countries differ along similar albeit somewhat broader dimensions of Conservatism. This paragraph's description of the Conservative syndrome is a narrative listing of psychological processes captured by the scales and items that define Conservatism factor in this and other studies of ours.
In his final concluding remarks, the author notes that he makes no attempt to speak to the causes of the results. He raises several questions: does IQ (cognitive ability) influence individuals' decisions to be conservative, or does conservatism influence one's IQ?

If anyone is interested, I'll also give a similar treatment to one of the other studies, the Nyborg study on intelligence and religiosity perhaps. I thought about adding it to this post, but I'm tired and have a full day tomorrow.


By the way, Nyborg is a researcher at the University of Aarhus in Denmark. Stankov is at the National Institute of Education in Singapore.

References:

Stankov, L., (2009). Conservatism and cognitive ability, Intelligence , doi:10.1016/j.intell.2008.12.007


A Hot Cup of Joe - My Blog

Not finding an intellectual challenge in the Swamp? Try the Senate Chambers!

Evolution and How We Know It's Right - Post your thoughts!
Debate Strategies & Tactics - Polish your online debate skills and offer your own advice
SkinWalker is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-26-2009, 08:46 AM   #37
SkinWalker
Anthropologist
 
SkinWalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Give critical thought a chance
Posts: 2,709
LFN Staff Member 
Stankov and Nyborg appear to be about as neutral as they can get. I still don't see any issue with Massengill's data. I see you disagreement and objection to her "agenda" and "bias," but there's no quantification of this bias and "agenda" and why they might affect her data. If her methods have deficiencies, then you've cause to doubt her research. Otherwise, we simply must accept that all researchers have an agenda (they call these research questions) and biases (they filter these through rigorous methodology and peer review).


A Hot Cup of Joe - My Blog

Not finding an intellectual challenge in the Swamp? Try the Senate Chambers!

Evolution and How We Know It's Right - Post your thoughts!
Debate Strategies & Tactics - Polish your online debate skills and offer your own advice
SkinWalker is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-26-2009, 10:53 AM   #38
GarfieldJL
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,856
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkinWalker View Post
Stankov and Nyborg appear to be about as neutral as they can get. I still don't see any issue with Massengill's data. I see you disagreement and objection to her "agenda" and "bias," but there's no quantification of this bias and "agenda" and why they might affect her data. If her methods have deficiencies, then you've cause to doubt her research. Otherwise, we simply must accept that all researchers have an agenda (they call these research questions) and biases (they filter these through rigorous methodology and peer review).
The intelligence thing I brought up was subject to peer review as well. Never take any study involving race or religion at face value.


Btw, an Ivy league education doesn't mean one is intelligent, it just means they studied in a particular field. There are other colleges out there.

I just found something else that makes you wonder what these Professors were taught:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...020603332.html

Supposedly because they didn't vote for Obama they are slavery loving racists? Excuse me, this is a College Professor shouldn't he have learned that there are other reasons one wouldn't have voted for Obama.
GarfieldJL is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-26-2009, 01:16 PM   #39
Det. Bart Lasiter
obama.png
 
Det. Bart Lasiter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: `(•.°)~
Posts: 7,997
Current Game: all
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by GarfieldJL View Post
The intelligence thing I brought up was subject to peer review as well. Never take any study involving race or religion at face value.
That isn't an argument. Like SkinWalker said, if you can demonstrate the bias of the researchers and back it up with evidence and/or show a flaw in their methods, that would be an argument, simply saying "they're biased because they're part of academia" without even giving evidence of such is not a valid argument.



"No, Mama. You can bet your sweet ass and half a titty whoever put that hit on you already got the cops in their back pocket." ~Black Dynamite
Det. Bart Lasiter is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-26-2009, 04:15 PM   #40
GarfieldJL
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,856
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmac7142 View Post
That isn't an argument. Like SkinWalker said, if you can demonstrate the bias of the researchers and back it up with evidence and/or show a flaw in their methods, that would be an argument, simply saying "they're biased because they're part of academia" without even giving evidence of such is not a valid argument.
And I suppose this incident that Newsbusters picked up on isn't more than a little out of line too?

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/scott-w...tt-head-insult


Seriously, a researcher comparing Bill O'Reilly to a Nazi in one of the articles I brought up about IU, and that doesn't indicate a conflict of interest? What do they need to do for you to acknowledge that they aren't objective? Them running around without any clothes on with "I hate Conservatives" spray painted on their backsides, seriously.
GarfieldJL is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Go Back   LucasForums > Network > JediKnight Series > Community > Senate Chambers > The future of the Republican Party

Tags
discovery institute, escr, focus on the family, gop, roe v. wade

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:11 AM.

LFNetwork, LLC ©2002-2011 - All rights reserved.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.