Cons that are tired of losing and being the minority

With one side preaching non-violence and PC "War's not the answer" rhetoric? Be the shortest war of all time. I'm sorry, but most hipsters are not this pro-active.

 

Swamp logic.

 

Since I'm not a Democrat, your attempt to twit me this way is pointless.

 

This is because you're a narrow minded, intolerant political hack.


You can't imagine any political viewpoint having any value if it is different than your own.


You statement says allot about you, and nothing about the GOP.


The GOP will not profit from attempting to become Liberalism-Lite, it will only put a stamp of validation on those parts of Liberalism, such as racial preferences, which are clearly unconstituional and unjust.


Which is why so many lefties keep trying to fool the currently disheartened GOP rank and file into demanding such changes. This would be a huge mistake for the GOP.


They do not need to try to out-bid the Liberals with even greater racial preferences to gain a larger portion of the "minority" vote, they need to hold to the principles of color blindness and liberty to pursue entrepeneurial fortune without regard to race or gender.


The Liberal Pander machine is heading down a path to rapid fiscal collapse and self-destruction. In the next decade, it will become clear to ALL that the Liberal method is national fiscal suicide.


If the TEA Party and GOP do anything over the next four years, it should be to simply quietly bow out and let Liberalism hang itself.


They should stick to their principles in their comments, critiques, and campaigns, and after the harsh lessons on WHY a Pander-Socialist-Racist Nation does NOT work are learned by the masses, they will be well positioned to begin to rebuild the country.


-

 

All are in similar lines, some a bit more progressive others more conservative, the lines of working are the same.

I don't making up excuses for not trying to learn more, I am just saying what I've been observing my whole life, and I don't see real differences. Obviously depending of the pressure of the society the conservative can take a position or other, if a society is more advanced and progressive than others the conservative won't be able to take their logical stance and sacrifice some points of it, for example the British with the marriage.

But in general lines all conservative are based in the same values.

Again, Libertarianism is the only American ideology that can be said that respect the classical liberalism(and even they have some bad interpretations of that ideas, but are the closest one). Conservatism as the name says is keep the tradition, whatever that tradition is outdated and reactionary. That is the reality, for that reason conservatism is a reactionary ideology, with for example the xenophobic, homophobic, anti-social justice, and more ideas.

Even today the liberals of USA are closer to that thing called classical liberalism than the conservative. You should read the classical liberals and you will see that the distance from conservative to them is enormous.

 

Because you're superficial, yes I know.

Fun Fact: the Political counterpart for American Conservatives in Australia, is their liberals. You are debunked sir.

Uh, no. There are no Liberals calling for Limited Government... well, except in Australia. BP

Someone evidently needs to learn the history of what is called America's "Old Right".

 

From what I can tell, a true breaking point has yet to occur in regards to the right-wing's political and social ideology. Sure, the abysmal performance of Republicans in the last election has triggered a bit of introspection, but we still see and hear that the right-wing considers the rest of America to be broken and themselves to be the sole island of sanity in a sea of change.

Further, it seems that the consensus is not to change the putrid ideology that they have been trying to ram down our throats for the past few decades but to "tone down the rhetoric" and keep the truly fringe sound bites that helped shape the election behind closed doors and amongst like-minded individuals.

Let's face it, the Republican Party isn't going to change -it CAN'T change - until enough of its core of white, Christian, conservative and older voting base has died off to let fresher ideas waft in through the cracks that have appeared.

Even then, it'll probably be more like the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan's resurgence ad the "New Clan". Slap some lipstick on the pig but the pig will still wallow in the mud as soon as you turn your back.

 

The Republican Parties performance in the last election was very good. They were 4-6 points ahead in HONEST voter polls going into the general election. They gained significantly among low-middle class white voters, particularly males.


The republicans would have won the election for either of two things, or both:

1] Prevented the massive swing state democratic voter fraud. i.e. reject the vote tallies from districts with over 100% turnout and zero Republican votes, and they are clearly fraudulent.

2] Gains just a bit more of the White Women's vote and / or the White vote in general.


Looking at the electoral vote means little, it shows as a landslide, because the Democratic Party Fraud Vote was carefully planned to push every swing state just over the edge into the Democrats hand. The Democrats are clearly masters of Fraud Voting, but they do not have the will of the American People.


-

 

There will be dissent and struggle without end.

 

That will take at least thirty years to happen. The United States doesn't have thirty years left before its finances collapse.

I'm thinking more like the Mau Mau or the Viet Cong.

 

You're in favor of a one party state like in China.

 

Considering the differences between your system and the China are really minor. A one party system obviously is bad, but a system where you only have two options and both are of the same great party is equally bad, just that is disguessed.

 

The GOP lost because they did not create a counter against and/or create a competitive Fraud Vote machine to make up for the advantage that the Chicago Machine gone National that was built by the Obama supporters. It really is that simple.

 

The GOP ran a good campaign. You'll hear liberals run up and down all day celebrating their Great Leader so much that their blind to how close the election really was, but the GOP ran a good campaign. They were up against one hell of a hill. The incumbent had the advantage of no funds being dispersed fighting for the nomination (hundreds of millions of Republicans dollars went towards attacking each other), the POTUS had more outside group ads (despite the over-coverage of Republican PACs), the DNC had more funds than GOP, Obama's campaign raised more than Romney's.

Obama had a heavy advantage going into it, but what sealed the deal was his campaign's ability to MAKE the debate about personality, not issues. Obama would have lost if the campaign debated the issues, but instead they successfully painted Romney as Scrooge and Obama as a Messiah (again), and the GOP candidate played nice (again).

 

Gee, I hope they run their next one just like the last one. Bet you think Sara ran a good one too. I loved it.

 

They certainly need to learn to use the tools that served the Dems so well. War on freedom - forced union. War on your money - big enormous govt wasting you money on any (*)(*)(*)(*) thing, wanting to put you back in the gulags. So many tools under utilized, much room for improvement.

 

Stupid assumption; you're as wrong as you can be.

 

LOL and Amen!!

 

The natural impulses of all leftists like yourself are ultimately authoritarian. All collectivism is ultimately authoritarian.

 

"Too far"? Republicans were far more on the right in 2010, where they dominated.

It's not that they were "too far", it's "not enough". 30 Million conservatives in 2008 and 2012, didn't go to the polls, because they didn't like what they saw, a candidate compromised by statist rhetoric.

Nearly all the candidates who were elected on Conservative, Tea party platform, and who stuck to that platform, were re-elected in 2012. Mitt Romney's problem is that he was too hesitant to embrace it himself.


Still, with President Obama raising tax rates on nigh-everybody, and regulations getting out-of-hand, and the Federalist argument being made thanks to those who wants Drug Decriminalization, he opportunity will present itself even stronger.

Obama lost 6 million people in 2012, the Democrats will not be able to brush off the economic dilapidation in 2016 on the Republicans, their failure will be too evident by then for any to ignore.