Liberty
Libertarian Minded
Fiscally moderate? Either you trust criminals with your money, or you don't. I personally don't trust the whores in congress.
Democrats = failed ideas, still running against bush
- Thread starter Cancel 2018. 3
- Start date
Fiscally moderate? Either you trust criminals with your money, or you don't. I personally don't trust the whores in congress.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
funny, but wasn't it the liberals on this board that continued to tell everyone how the number of self identified Republicans kept diminishing under Bush?
http://pewresearch.org/pubs/773/fewer-voters-identify-as-republicans
So if fewer and fewer identified as Reps, it would stand to reason that the ones left would be more inclined to still like and support Bush.
Obama did win in large part because of the independent swing to Dems. But he also lost due to a disenfranchised conservative base.
Side note: the Independents who were hoping for change under Obama are now flocking just as fast away from him and the insanity of the Dem led Congress who has now presided over massive deficit spending under both Bush and Obama.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
yes, we are aware of both.
Is there an actual point in there somewhere that is responsive to anything I wrote in this thread? If so, I can't seem to find it.
Which doesn't change what I have stated one iota. When the TEA Protests first began there were stories about the "disturbing libertarian" trend in the TEA Party. While the protests have changed face and there are more Republicans than before it doesn't change historically what I have stated. Fiscal conservatives began to distrust the R Party, they either stayed home, voted third party or even switched to vote in favor of Ds... But the reality of the consequences of the election will swing the pendulum in the other direction this time.
And yes, you are the one that is confused.
1. I pointed out that even in your poll there were some of those stalwart "Republican Conservatives" unhappy with Bush. Even then there were signs of what I was talking about.
2. I pointed out that "conservative" and "Republican" are sometimes not the same thing, especially when considering fiscal conservatism.
3. I pointed out that many conservatives who were not Rs changed the way they voted because they mistrusted the R party, then you "reminded" us that the Independents changed... Well, um... Duh. That's what I SAID.
I could go on, but there really is no point. The idea that Bush is some Conservative hero is flatly rejected by both history and anybody with a brain. Reality and the evidence, even that provided by you, supports my reasoning.
I know it doesn't change what you are saying, it just reveals that what you are saying is simply not true.
It reveals that you will say anything rather than just look at the supporting evidence you provided and I have underlined several times.
Here, stories like this one were constant...
http://www.justplainpolitics.com/showthread.php?t=24896&highlight=libertarian+party
People were "disturbed" by the "libertarian" trend in the TEA party, in this case the story was about Evangelicals who were "disturbed"... We discussed all of this before, and when the Congress changes just as I predicted more evidence will support my reasoning.
The reality is, what I said happened did. What you linked to in "support" of your opposition even supports it. How many stories did we see about "How are the Rs going to win back the trust of their own party?"... Seriously, it boggles the mind how much people can lose sight of the forest because all those trees are in the way.
The base adored Bush until he was a lame duck; period. He was a rock star among conservatives.
Again, even the previously posted poll showed that even among the base there was an element who didn't "adore" Bush. Then you continue to pretend that Rs are "all of" the conservatives. That there aren't any such people among Independents... You have to ignore reality to take your position, mine is created from the cloth of reality and the full understanding (personal) of that very disgust which turned over the Congress to supermajorities.
Pointing to an article about evangelical Christians not liking the Tea Party and considering it "libertarian" doesn't move me much, Damo. Please.
The reality is that only 6% of Tea Party people are independents. The vast majority are conservative Republicans, the same conservative Republicans that hate Obama (8% approval) but loved George W. Bush (72% approval).
The base is the base. I can't believe you're taking pride in an "element." There is an "element" of every President's base - especially the current one - who are dissatisfied at best.
The larger point is that he had the base basically his whole tenure, and he WAS a conservative hero. You like to alternate between your own feelings & conservatives at large, but in the context of this discussion, the latter are all that matters. The latter are represented by Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter, Glen Beck, et al, as distasteful as you may find that, and they also represent themselves well at election time. And the plain fact is, the conservative base did not sit the last couple of elections out; they voted.
They just didn't have the votes of independents to push their votes over the top. But it doesn't change the fact that Bush was a conservative hero.
I pointed to an example of the very thing I stated, groups were worried about the "libertarianism" of the TEA Party Protests. They are more comfortable now, because Rs were basically successful in hijacking the protests. (Shown as well by the second poll you posted). I'm good with that, basically because the Rs had to pay attention to these people, they were the disaffected who normally would vote R but were hacked off.
Slowly now, for the deliberately obtuse.
1. Not every conservative is republican,
2. the fiscal conservatives, even among that most stalwart group (the one you posted the poll about while ignoring those in that group who said they were not in approval) were not always in support of Bush.
3. It doesn't take too many to change an election, but the total collapse is caused by people turning that otherwise would normally vote for them, these were largely found in the Independent voting block. They were disaffected conservatives.
Bush is no conservative "hero" except in your own mind.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
But what he is saying IS true, going by the polling data and statistics. All you are offering to contradict that, is your unfounded opinion. So let's see... Polling data and statistics... OR... Nigey's Unfounded Opinion? Sorry, I think you lose!
The only point I disagree with Damo on, is the sentiment that Conservatives have somehow abandoned social conservative principles, because they aren't being widely vocal against gay marriage. I think there are just more important issues to conservatives in general, and that is why you aren't hearing these criticisms at this time. We're talking about a socially liberal issue that 70% of the country is against, and you would have to think that number is much higher among conservatives. I just don't think it's as important as rescuing our nation from the grips of Socialism. I think it's a 'priority' issue.
They don't need to abandon them, all they need is to show that they prioritize fiscal conservative ideation first. Almost any of those fiscally conservative people would be willing to support socially conservative candidates if they could be trusted not to turn their backs on fiscal conservative ideas as soon as a "compassionate conservative" is elected.
Actually, I'm the only one posting polling data and statistics. Damo's citing articles about evangelicals not liking the Tea Party.
I cited your polling data and showed how it supports what I said. Thanks for linking to it. Then I posted an example of what I talked about in the beginning of the TEA Party Protest movement. So far you have posted data that supports my opinion, ignored what I said, confused "conservatives" with "republican", ignored how even your own data showed that among even the most stalwart supporters were people who were unhappy with Bush's fiscally irresponsible policies....
Yeah, you are an apologist who believes that "running against Bush" will bring you another win. It won't.
Slowly now, for the deliberately obtuse.
1. Not every conservative is republican,
2. the fiscal conservatives, even among that most stalwart group (the one you posted the poll about while ignoring those in that group who said they were not in approval) were not always in support of Bush.
3. It doesn't take too many to change an election, but the total collapse is caused by people turning that otherwise would normally vote for them, these were largely found in the Independent voting block. They were disaffected conservatives.
Bush is no conservative "hero" except in your own mind.
Your denial of his being a conservative hero is laughable. I spent the better part of 8 years wondering how a whole group of voters could blindly worship that guy.
Your revisionist history knows no bounds.
Your insistence that he is a "hero" is based on wishes rather than reality. Bush was the bane of the R party, many of those stalwarts understand it now. What I have stated the past 9 years is the reality. Bush wasn't even a conservative, let alone one that could be called a "hero"...
Your entire argument is based on saying "worship" and "hero", the data supports what I have stated. We have twin apologists. I think you'll find any attempt by the Ds to establish another campaign against Bush to be ineffective.
The polling data didn't support anything that you said. I'm not really interested in arguing about this with you. I know how you operate. You'll just keep saying the same things over and over and over again without any factual basis.
I can always tell when you've reached that point. That's when you break out either "inane," "hack" or "apologist." It's sad, really.