Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
August 22, 2014, 03:18:55 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Christian Fundamentalists and Neo Cons  (Read 1248 times)
tu_holmes
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 15817


With a keen eye for details, one truth prevails.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #25 on: January 07, 2013, 07:47:19 PM »

Nothing, problem is the GOP will never nominate a guy like that.

See Ron Paul.
Exactly.
Report to moderator   Logged
Roger Bacon
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 20962


Roger Bacon tries to be witty and fails


View Profile
« Reply #26 on: January 07, 2013, 07:56:57 PM »

So you don't think there's anyway they'll compromise on running peoples lives and policing the world to gain thousands of voters? Huh
Report to moderator   Logged

Shockwave
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 19402


Decepticons! Scramble!


View Profile
« Reply #27 on: January 07, 2013, 08:10:43 PM »

So you don't think there's anyway they'll compromise on running peoples lives and policing the world to gain thousands of voters? Huh
Nope.
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 8199


Doesnt lie about lifting.


View Profile
« Reply #28 on: January 07, 2013, 08:22:09 PM »

Nothing, problem is the GOP will never nominate a guy like that.

See Ron Paul.

you disagree w 95% of what RP stands for 
Report to moderator   Logged
Roger Bacon
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 20962


Roger Bacon tries to be witty and fails


View Profile
« Reply #29 on: January 07, 2013, 08:54:10 PM »

If it comes down to another Rick Santorum, or Romney I'll vote democratic out of spite.
Report to moderator   Logged

syntaxmachine
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 2519


Team Free A-Halo, Servant of Lord Jehova God


View Profile
« Reply #30 on: January 08, 2013, 05:14:37 AM »

Here's some data indicating that going forward, social conservatism is going to damage Republican prospects ever further, given the increasingly wide divergence between its views and what most Americans think. I'm too lazy to post the data by age, but it reinforces my conclusion ever further by indicating that all of the below issues are generational: that is, the younger generation holds very liberal views, the older generation conservative views. This means that as the old generation "exits the stage," so to speak, the general population's conservative leanings with regard to social issues are going to tick downward in a big way.

I got the data from PollingReports.com and created the shitty graphs at some free kids website, lol.



Washington Post/Kaiser Family Foundation Poll. July 25-Aug. 5, 2012. N=3,130 adults nationwide. Margin of error 2.
Organized religious groups of all kinds should stay out of politics. OR, It is important for organized religious groups to stand up for their beliefs in politics." Options rotated
Stay Out: 55%; Stand Up: 42%







Report to moderator   Logged
tu_holmes
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 15817


With a keen eye for details, one truth prevails.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #31 on: January 08, 2013, 08:41:16 AM »

Here's some data indicating that going forward, social conservatism is going to damage Republican prospects ever further, given the increasingly wide divergence between its views and what most Americans think. I'm too lazy to post the data by age, but it reinforces my conclusion ever further by indicating that all of the below issues are generational: that is, the younger generation holds very liberal views, the older generation conservative views. This means that as the old generation "exits the stage," so to speak, the general population's conservative leanings with regard to social issues are going to tick downward in a big way.

I got the data from PollingReports.com and created the shitty graphs at some free kids website, lol.


It's as I always say... Young people don't hate the gays and they don't think abortion is "evil".

None of the fundamentalists believe me... Then 2012 happens and they blame it on the "moderate".

Roll Eyes

Report to moderator   Logged
Purge_WTF
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 5497


Constitution Party forever.


View Profile
« Reply #32 on: January 08, 2013, 08:54:03 AM »

 Unfortunately, Holmes is right. The people who were dropping acid on Haight Ashbury in the 60's are now in the White House, and abominable things like gay marriage and unrestricted abortion become more acceptable as time goes on.
Report to moderator   Logged

Psalm 23.
Straw Man
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 25078


one dwells in nirvana


View Profile
« Reply #33 on: January 08, 2013, 11:06:01 AM »

Unfortunately, Holmes is right. The people who were dropping acid on Haight Ashbury in the 60's are now in the White House, and abominable things like gay marriage and unrestricted abortion become more acceptable as time goes on.

fyi - we don't have unrestricted abortion in this country

obviously gay marriage is an abomination.  Can you tell us how it has wreaked it's destructive power on your life?
Report to moderator   Logged
Roger Bacon
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 20962


Roger Bacon tries to be witty and fails


View Profile
« Reply #34 on: January 08, 2013, 12:21:33 PM »



So the Republicans would be smart to look towards Economic Conservatives that are Socially Liberal or Center?

Huh
Report to moderator   Logged

Roger Bacon
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 20962


Roger Bacon tries to be witty and fails


View Profile
« Reply #35 on: January 08, 2013, 12:24:33 PM »

As far as an issue like abortion or gay marriage go, from a Christian/Biblical point of view.  Is it considered sinful for a "Christian" politician to acknowledge that he doesn't personally support it, but that he isn't going to make that choice for others?
Report to moderator   Logged

tbombz
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 19164


Psalms 150


View Profile
« Reply #36 on: January 08, 2013, 01:34:45 PM »

As far as an issue like abortion or gay marriage go, from a Christian/Biblical point of view.  Is it considered sinful for a "Christian" politician to acknowledge that he doesn't personally support it, but that he isn't going to make that choice for others?
based on the "new testament" alone, my interpretation of the viewpoint would be complete anarchy.
Report to moderator   Logged
MCWAY
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 15904


Getbig!


View Profile
« Reply #37 on: January 08, 2013, 02:09:54 PM »

As far as an issue like abortion or gay marriage go, from a Christian/Biblical point of view.  Is it considered sinful for a "Christian" politician to acknowledge that he doesn't personally support it, but that he isn't going to make that choice for others?

I think the argument would be "YES", in some circles, if the tactic is passively allowing laws that endorse such without fighting them and standing up for life and traditional marriage.
Report to moderator   Logged
syntaxmachine
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 2519


Team Free A-Halo, Servant of Lord Jehova God


View Profile
« Reply #38 on: January 08, 2013, 02:10:35 PM »

So the Republicans would be smart to look towards Economic Conservatives that are Socially Liberal or Center?

Huh

Unless there is some sort of religious revival or "awakening" (certainly not unheard of) among the youth, the current trends suggest Republicans will need to nominate socially moderate/liberal candidates in order to be competitive; presumably such candidates will come from either the 'establishment' moderate or libertarian camps. (To the extent that social issues matter to voters, that is. It's conceivable that for certain elections they will vote solely on the basis of economic policy, in which case social conservatism would not be a negative. But it's hard to imagine social issues being totally irrelevant, and thus Republicans are still safer jettisoning social conservatism from their platform).
Report to moderator   Logged
MCWAY
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 15904


Getbig!


View Profile
« Reply #39 on: January 08, 2013, 02:14:11 PM »

Unless there is some sort of religious revival or "awakening" (certainly not unheard of) among the youth, the current trends suggest Republicans will need to nominate socially moderate/liberal candidates in order to be competitive; presumably such candidates will come from either the 'establishment' moderate or libertarian camps.

One could argue that Romney came from that camp. But, how many Dems are you going to peel off?

Again, to cite Rush, do you think the Dems are going to give up their gay-rights/amnesty voters to the Republicans?

NOPE!!

Remember that a lot of moderate Republicans took a beating this past election. Some will say it's because they were painted as "far right", even if they weren't.

Report to moderator   Logged
tu_holmes
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 15817


With a keen eye for details, one truth prevails.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #40 on: January 08, 2013, 02:16:46 PM »

One could argue that Romney came from that camp. But, how many Dems are you going to peel off?

Again, to cite Rush, do you think the Dems are going to give up their gay-rights/amnesty voters to the Republicans?

NOPE!!

Remember that a lot of moderate Republicans took a beating this past election. Some will say it's because they were painted as "far right", even if they weren't.



They are painted as far right because that's the direction that they had to move.
Report to moderator   Logged
syntaxmachine
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 2519


Team Free A-Halo, Servant of Lord Jehova God


View Profile
« Reply #41 on: January 08, 2013, 03:20:54 PM »

One could argue that Romney came from that camp. But, how many Dems are you going to peel off?

1. Yes, I think it's fair to say Romney was a candidate derived from the moderate 'establishment' camp. That he didn't win doesn't mean that a social conservative would have done better; in fact, the data I cite (and lots more that I didn't) indicates that a social conservative ala Santorum would have done significantly worse.

2. How many Dems would start voting Republican if the latter abandoned social conservatism entirely? I don't know; maybe a small contingent, maybe large -- it's an empirical matter either way. I could imagine some Blue Dog Democrats switching over if they support fiscal conservatism but were turned off by Republican social conservatism.

But it isn't an especially important question, since only 31% of Americans are Democrats anyway. At 37%, independents are the largest block of voters (Republicans clock in at a measly 29%). So the question ought to be, "how many independents would such a change in the Republican party attract?" And I think that a fair amount would switch. I am an example of one, so I know they exist: I'd be willing to give genuine fiscal conservatism a try, but won't vote for repealing Roe v Wade nor suppressing gay rights, especially not on the basis of millenia old goat herder opinion steeped in the false certainty of "divine" inspiration.

Again, to cite Rush, do you think the Dems are going to give up their gay-rights/amnesty voters to the Republicans?

NOPE!!

3. As I've already indicated, what Dems do isn't particularly important: what matters is how many of the somewhat ill-informed independents in the middle -- the largest voting block -- such a move would attract. And I think it would be sizable, even if social issues aren't what people generally emphasize most when deciding who to vote for.

Republicans will probably lose votes if they jettison social conservatism; evangelicals and their political conspecifics may well not accept a move toward social liberalism. Republicans will also lose votes if they bake any or all elements of social conservatism into their platform. The point of the data seems to be that they will lose more voters holding onto such conservatism than they will keeping it (since the stock of people who believe in social conservatism is getting smaller and smaller). It isn't an enviable position to be in, but the former is apparently the least worst choice.

2. Rush's mistake in formulating his views is assuming the rest of the country thinks like the political class ( the media, politicians, activists). The fact is, his audience is an extremely small segment of both the population and eligible voters, and so goes it with all the freaks on cable news as well. As I already said, most voters are rather ignorant men and women with no party affiliation and relatively moderate views.
Report to moderator   Logged
whork
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 5353


Getbig!


View Profile
« Reply #42 on: January 08, 2013, 05:35:15 PM »

you disagree w 95% of what RP stands for 

So does the neocons thats the problem.
Report to moderator   Logged
Roger Bacon
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 20962


Roger Bacon tries to be witty and fails


View Profile
« Reply #43 on: January 08, 2013, 06:23:32 PM »

Unless there is some sort of religious revival or "awakening" (certainly not unheard of) among the youth, the current trends suggest Republicans will need to nominate socially moderate/liberal candidates in order to be competitive; presumably such candidates will come from either the 'establishment' moderate or libertarian camps. (To the extent that social issues matter to voters, that is. It's conceivable that for certain elections they will vote solely on the basis of economic policy, in which case social conservatism would not be a negative. But it's hard to imagine social issues being totally irrelevant, and thus Republicans are still safer jettisoning social conservatism from their platform).

Good to know, I hope you're right
Report to moderator   Logged

garebear
Time Out
Getbig V
*
Gender: Male
Posts: 6517


Never question my instincts.


View Profile
« Reply #44 on: January 10, 2013, 04:02:47 AM »

Jon Huntsman blew Mitt and Rick S. away.  He was ignored...
What didn't you like about Huntsman?

Report to moderator   Logged

G
Fury
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 21035


All aboard the USS Leverage


View Profile
« Reply #45 on: January 10, 2013, 05:48:15 AM »

If it comes down to another Rick Santorum, or Romney I'll vote democratic out of spite.

This is the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Sack up and vote Gary Johnson like a man.

Then again, you like RINO Huntsman so you're really just a Dem anyway. Part of the system and part of the problem.
Report to moderator   Logged
Hugo Chavez
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 31873


View Profile
« Reply #46 on: January 10, 2013, 05:55:03 AM »

This is the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Sack up and vote Gary Johnson like a man.

Then again, you like RINO Huntsman so you're really just a Dem anyway. Part of the system and part of the problem.
pip has a valid point with what he just said without it translating to him being a Rino supporter.  

3333 and other hardcore righties made the same kind of "either, or" arguments in this last election.  I can't blame PiP for saying fuck that when it comes to the ultra religious and neocon types they're putting forward.  

Republicans need to dump neocons and religious nuts and just go back to common sense conservatism and you'll see hordes bail from the moderate left to back that bandwagon.  Might sound crazy but it's true. I'd bet money on that candidate if he/she existed.
Report to moderator   Logged
Fury
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 21035


All aboard the USS Leverage


View Profile
« Reply #47 on: January 10, 2013, 06:18:22 AM »

pip has a valid point with what he just said without it translating to him being a Rino supporter.  

3333 and other hardcore righties made the same kind of "either, or" arguments in this last election.  I can't blame PiP for saying fuck that when it comes to the ultra religious and neocon types they're putting forward.  

Republicans need to dump neocons and religious nuts and just go back to common sense conservatism and you'll see hordes bail from the moderate left to back that bandwagon.  Might sound crazy but it's true.

Understandable, but people like that are perpetuating this situation. Because of people like that, guys like Ron Paul and Gary Johnson are forced to label themselves as Republicans. It ensures two party rule.

Voting Dem out of spite is still voting for the economic destruction of this country. He's just as responsible for that as the scumbags in office.
Report to moderator   Logged
Hugo Chavez
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 31873


View Profile
« Reply #48 on: January 10, 2013, 06:30:30 AM »

Understandable, but people like that are perpetuating this situation. Because of people like that, guys like Ron Paul and Gary Johnson are forced to label themselves as Republicans. It ensures two party rule.

Voting Dem out of spite is still voting for the economic destruction of this country. He's just as responsible for that as the scumbags in office.
Pip is a pretty big Ron Paul supporter.  He hasn't perpetuated anything by bringing this up.  This is shit that should be brought up.  Republicans are killing themselves with the religious and hardcore neocon bullshit when they could just go right back to simple conservatism and score a horde of moderates from the left while the pissed off freaks on the right wouldn't have a choice but to also vote for him. (not a mormon because mormons will vote for christians but many christians still won't vote for a mormon... sorry but true...)

It's time for republicans to ignore the nuts on the right and force the party toward a simple common sense conservative candidate--end of story.  That's the way.

Nothing wrong with that and Americans will back that kind of person if you can still find one.

a candidate similar to Goldwater would get elected in a heartbead today.  Just make sure that candidate is removed from the totally corrupted so called "tea party"  That name is poison now and should be. 

Just go back to traditional conservatism and watch the hordes flock BIGTIME... I'd bet on it...
Report to moderator   Logged
Fury
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 21035


All aboard the USS Leverage


View Profile
« Reply #49 on: January 10, 2013, 06:33:31 AM »

Pip is a pretty big Ron Paul supporter.  He hasn't perpetuated anything by bringing this up.  This is shit that should be brought up.  Republicans are killing themselves with the religious and hardcore neocon bullshit when they could just go right back to simple conservatism and score a horde of moderates from the left while the pissed off freaks on the right wouldn't have a choice but to also vote for him.

It's time for republicans to ignore the nuts on the right and force the party toward a simple common sense conservative candidate--end of story.  That the way.

Nothing wrong with that and Americans will back that kind of person if you can still find one.

240 also claimed to be a big Ron Paul supporter. Then he couldn't bothered voting for him.

People would make more of a point voting for Johnson than Dem out of spite.
Report to moderator   Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Theme created by Egad Community. Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!