User Tag List

First 123 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 28

  1. #11
    Supreme Allied Commander Take Five's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Enneagram
    1w9
    Posts
    925

    Default

    The Republican party will not die any time soon, certainly not by the next election. There is no way that will happen and that's all there is to it. In 2008, people liked Obama more than they like Democrats as a whole. Even more than that, they were tired of Bush. Even so, Obama I think only won like 53 % of the popular vote. Just give him time to foul up something and the Repubs will jump at the chance.
    Johari Nohari

    "If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared. "--Niccolo Machiavelli

  2. #12
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Posts
    3,187

    Default

    Stop being stupid. Parties don't die, they merely transform into something of a different name and the same core principles continue on. What SHOULD die is the political machinery that exists in both parties.

  3. #13
    Senior Member lowtech redneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,705

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by onemoretime View Post
    Social conservatism is a regional rump, particularly based in rural America, particularly in the Southeast and Plains states. 80% of the country's population lives in urban/suburban areas.
    Social-conservatism is always a relative thing, and the urban/suburban divide is at least as great as the suburban/rural divide (of the three, suburbanites are the single-largest demographic, and that's where the political battleground is as far as social issues are concerned). Also, socially-conservative and rural families tend to have more children, and the geography/competitive advantages of the United States combined with a preference for suburban living among families with children make it likely that the urban/rural proportion of the population will not drastically change for the foreseeable future.

    Competitions between two minimum-winning coalitions are dynamic, and future predictions based on prejudicial assumptions/interpretations are unlikely to be very accurate.

  4. #14
    Striving for balance Little Linguist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    xNFP
    Posts
    6,885

    Default

    This will not have been the first time that MAJOR political beliefs have changed within parties. If the Republican Party is not securing enough votes with its current strategy, it will surely change strategies, as some people have already mentioned.

    It's too reductionistic to say that there 'are not enough racist people to vote for the Republican party.' Remember, the ideologies of the political parties used to be diametrically opposed to what they are today (meaning former Republicans used to be like modern-day Democrats and vice versa). So I think it is totally possible for parties to change their philosophies as necessary.

    That being the case, I wouldn't worry about it too much. Both parties are centrists and ultimately two peas in a pod, with some fundamental differences on a few issues, nothing more. No party will die out any time soon.

    Essentially, it would leave a political vacuum, which no party could replace. And in my opinion, we do not have such a chaotic mess in the political system and there is no catalyst (e.g. like a civil war) to create a new party strong enough to truly have an impact.
    If you are interested in language, words, linguistics, or foreign languages, check out my blog and read, post, and/or share.

  5. #15
    Dreaming the life onemoretime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    3h50
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lowtech redneck View Post
    Social-conservatism is always a relative thing, and the urban/suburban divide is at least as great as the suburban/rural divide (of the three, suburbanites are the single-largest demographic, and that's where the political battleground is as far as social issues are concerned). Also, socially-conservative and rural families tend to have more children, and the geography/competitive advantages of the United States combined with a preference for suburban living among families with children make it likely that the urban/rural proportion of the population will not drastically change for the foreseeable future.
    1. Suburbanites tend to be much more socially progressive than true rural citizens. Suburbanites get used to things, rural citizens do not.

    2. Immigration completely outweighs the rural population advantage. Remember, the white American population is below replacement level (1.98 if I remember correctly) among all socioeconomic classes. The Republicans, through this Sotomayor business, have completely fumbled with Latin American immigrants, who aren't necessarily inclined toward bloc politics.

    Quote Originally Posted by Little Linguist View Post
    This will not have been the first time that MAJOR political beliefs have changed within parties. If the Republican Party is not securing enough votes with its current strategy, it will surely change strategies, as some people have already mentioned.

    It's too reductionistic to say that there 'are not enough racist people to vote for the Republican party.' Remember, the ideologies of the political parties used to be diametrically opposed to what they are today (meaning former Republicans used to be like modern-day Democrats and vice versa). So I think it is totally possible for parties to change their philosophies as necessary.

    That being the case, I wouldn't worry about it too much. Both parties are centrists and ultimately two peas in a pod, with some fundamental differences on a few issues, nothing more. No party will die out any time soon.

    Essentially, it would leave a political vacuum, which no party could replace. And in my opinion, we do not have such a chaotic mess in the political system and there is no catalyst (e.g. like a civil war) to create a new party strong enough to truly have an impact.
    Like I said, structural issues - the same things which killed both the Federalist (Northeastern rump party) and Whig (Midwestern rump party) parties. Democrats survived (barely) the Civil War by combining the Solid South with the Northern cities' political machines, and even then were consistently blown away on a national level until FDR.

    All it took to end the Era of Good Feelings was a particularly polarizing figure in Andrew Jackson (the Whigs were called as such because they opposed "King Andrew"). This all has happened before, and can happen again.

  6. #16
    Senior Member lowtech redneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,705

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by onemoretime View Post
    1. Suburbanites tend to be much more socially progressive than true rural citizens. Suburbanites get used to things, rural citizens do not.

    2. Immigration completely outweighs the rural population advantage. Remember, the white American population is below replacement level (1.98 if I remember correctly) among all socioeconomic classes. The Republicans, through this Sotomayor business, have completely fumbled with Latin American immigrants, who aren't necessarily inclined toward bloc politics.
    1.) Suburbanites also tend to be much less socially progressive than urban citizens.

    2.) I doubt opposition to the Sotomayor nomination will have long-term repercussions, and you are right about hispanic citizens not necessarily voting as a bloc. Furthermore, hispanic citizens tend toward social conservatism; they are therefore most likely to inter-marry with socially conservative whites, eventually nullifying any temporary gains achieved by Democrats as a result of the debate on illegal immigration.

    Edit: The Republican party also has an effective binding mechanism through which the disparate elements of the coalition are held together, in the form of the (contemporary) doctrine of federalism. The Democrats lack anything similar to this, making it far more difficult for them to balance the disparate interests of their own coalition. This problem is made worse in direct proportion to the extent to which policy-making becomes centralized, which is why dominant elements within the Democratic party are such huge fans of judicial activism and bureaucratic inertia.
    Last edited by lowtech redneck; 07-30-2009 at 08:10 PM. Reason: self-evident

  7. #17
    veteran attention whore Jeffster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESFP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    6,727

    Default

    I'd like to announce my candidacy as new leader of the reformed Whig party!
    Jeffster Illustrates the Artisan Temperament <---- click here

    "I like the sigs with quotes in them from other forum members." -- Oberon

    The SP Spazz Youtube Channel

  8. #18
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeffster View Post
    I'd like to announce my candidacy as new leader of the reformed Whig party!
    I would have made an excellent Bourbon Democrat 100-120 years ago.
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  9. #19
    Striving for balance Little Linguist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    xNFP
    Posts
    6,885

    Default

    You know what would be ironic? If America got a king...

    (okay, that was random...)

    No, that won't happen, but I wonder what the alternative would be? Not a green party, because you need something for middle-class suburban America that leans conservatively. Pfft....I really don't know. Hopefully something more sensible in any case.

    I'm voting for JEFFY!
    If you are interested in language, words, linguistics, or foreign languages, check out my blog and read, post, and/or share.

  10. #20
    Member ilovetrannies's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Socionics
    ISFP
    Posts
    83

    Default

    The Republican Party has become a disgrace and a mockery of true social responsibility. Their hypocrisy and delusions of grandeur (Fox News) infuriates me. I am sick of them and frankly, their out right stupidity. I hope the Republicans can change for the better, but with scumbags like Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck spewing hate on a daily basis, we might be shit outta luck. The Green Party all the Way. FTW!

Similar Threads

  1. The future of the Republican party
    By Lateralus in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 797
    Last Post: 09-22-2015, 01:06 PM
  2. Former Republican staffer's extremely scathing critique of the Republican party.
    By Magic Poriferan in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 11-23-2011, 07:29 PM
  3. Unity within the upper echelons of the Republican Party begins to crack.
    By DiscoBiscuit in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 10-26-2009, 12:18 PM
  4. Web 2.0 - the death of culture?
    By Langrenus in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 05-04-2007, 08:40 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO