Republicans do some soul-searching after Romney loss


Machjo
+2 / -1
#1
Republicans do some soul-searching after Romney loss - World - CBC News

This might be a good thing. Should republicans go back to the old Burkian roots of liberal conservatism rather than the neo-conservatism of recent years, they might be able to give the Democrats a run for their money.
 
captain morgan
Bloc Québécois
+3
#2
I think that the Republicans would do well to do some tax-haven searching... Something more tangible
 
Machjo
#3
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morganView Post

I think that the Republicans would do well to do some tax-haven searching... Something more tangible

So they should just step out of politics altogether? I disagree. The US needs a liberal conservative alternative, which it does not have right now.
 
captain morgan
Bloc Québécois
+1
#4
Quote: Originally Posted by MachjoView Post

So they should just step out of politics altogether? I disagree. The US needs a liberal conservative alternative, which it does not have right now.

Big assumption here Machjo - IF Obama follows through with his increased taxes on any person or entity (that's important as many/most small business' will now qualify), you will see a reaction from these groups.

You can assess the nature of the reaction for yourself, but we can both agree that it probably won't result in expansion and higher wages
 
karrie
No Party Affiliation
+1
#5
Quote: Originally Posted by MachjoView Post

Republicans do some soul-searching after Romney loss - World - CBC News

This might be a good thing. Should republicans go back to the old Burkian roots of liberal conservatism rather than the neo-conservatism of recent years, they might be able to give the Democrats a run for their money.

Would you respect the politician who doesn't believe anything, but just changes his platform according to whatever will get him elected?
 
Kreskin
+5
#6  Top Rated Post
They could start with using good old American values, like working together rather than making obstruction their primary mission.
 
Machjo
#7
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morganView Post

Big assumption here Machjo - IF Obama follows through with his increased taxes on any person or entity (that's important as many/most small business' will now qualify), you will see a reaction from these groups.

What assumption? I don't quite get what you're getting at here.

Quote:

You can assess the nature of the reaction for yourself, but we can both agree that it probably won't result in expansion and higher wages

Probably not. With the US debt as it is, lower wages might be a necessity, and might even be beneficial for the US economy.

Quote: Originally Posted by karrieView Post

Would you respect the politician who doesn't believe anything, but just changes his platform according to whatever will get him elected?

That's why I referred to going back to the Burkian roots of liberal conservatism rather than the neo-conservative stuff they have now. At least Burke's liberal conservatism lied on a solid philosophical foundation. It's obvious that most republicans have never read Burke's works, or at least ignore them. He especially detested colonialism, which was probably influenced by his being Irish in British Ireland.
 
captain morgan
Bloc Québécois
#8
Quote: Originally Posted by MachjoView Post

What assumption? I don't quite get what you're getting at here.

Probably not. With the US debt as it is, lower wages might be a necessity, and might even be beneficial for the US economy.

I don't really know how I can communicate my thoughts any clearer (in a brief manner). Clearly. I haven't succeeded thus far.

Ultimately, increasing the tax burden during a time when the economy is shrinking will (probably) result in speeding-up a collapse. As revenues decline in the private sector, the gvt tax revenues collected will shrink as well. It will get to the point where you may not be able to service the debt, let alone pay for social services.

This is what basically happened to Greece. I'm not saying that this is the fate for the USA, but doing anything that might reduce the private sector's capacity to expand in a stable environment is really walking a very thin line.
 
IdRatherBeSkiing
+4
#9
Quote: Originally Posted by karrieView Post

Would you respect the politician who doesn't believe anything, but just changes his platform according to whatever will get him elected?


How is this different than any politician in Canada or the states? And respect and politician are not words I would ever use in the same sentence (except the sentence explaining why I would not use those two words that is).
 
Just the Facts
Free Thinker
+2
#10
Quote: Originally Posted by karrieView Post

Would you respect the politician who doesn't believe anything, but just changes his platform according to whatever will get him elected?

It worked for Barry.

Quote: Originally Posted by KreskinView Post

They could start with using good old American values, like working together rather than making obstruction their primary mission.

You mean work for love of country, rather than revenge? Wish Romney would have thought of that.
 
SLM
No Party Affiliation
+3
#11
Quote: Originally Posted by karrieView Post

Would you respect the politician who doesn't believe anything, but just changes his platform according to whatever will get him elected?

I can't speak for anyone else but I don't know that I've ever had any "respect" for a politican. I honestly see them as predominently opportunists and our selection between them is alway "best of a bad lot".

Call me cynical.
 
Just the Facts
Free Thinker
+2
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morganView Post

Big assumption here Machjo - IF Obama follows through with his increased taxes on any person or entity (that's important as many/most small business' will now qualify), you will see a reaction from these groups.

You can assess the nature of the reaction for yourself, but we can both agree that it probably won't result in expansion and higher wages

It's a great opportunity for Canada to entice American business to come here. Could be a boon for us if we stop being so darn nice and actually promote ourselves above others. Imagine the possibilities....Microsoft, Boeing, Exxon, ConocoPhilips, GE etc. etc. Heck, we could get the entire U.S. Military complex to move to Canada!!
 
damngrumpy
No Party Affiliation
#13
The hardest reality for the Republicans is this, They Lost Period. That was totally unexpected.
The reason is not so much the mainstream Republicans it was the tourists in the party. The
large group of malcontents and obstructionists, the zealot Born Again Christians and the fact
that the mainstream Republican Party didn't have the guts or the power to kick them to hell out.
Imagine legitimate rape, or passing laws against women's right to chose. Now some may say
that is a noble cause for an extreme right wing conservative. The problem is women are more
likely to vote, women think more about the social issues and what is good for their children and
the future of those children. In addition women don't subscribe to the old right wing nonsense
that its a man's world, as it were.
Right there they shut down a large voting block with nonsense.
Then there is the immigration issue where the immigrants who became citizens became very
uneasy about the treatment they might receive from their government Immigrants voted for
Obama.
Youth have issues they want on the table, education, pot laws.. jobs and a host of others they
voted for Obama
Republicans should get the picture, bad mouthing people, being inflexible and disruptive is not
the way to get elected period.
 
coldstream
+2 / -1
#14
The Republicans are going to have to expel the Tea Party and radical libertarians.. and quit compromising of real conservative values and economic policies (which have nothing to do with NO government and free markets.. quite the opposite).. if they ever hope to regain the White House.
 
Nuggler
+1
#15
Quote: Originally Posted by karrieView Post

Would you respect the politician who doesn't believe anything, but just changes his platform according to whatever will get him elected?


Seems to work for the neocons up here..........what with being all transparent and all.
 
In Between Man
Free Thinker
+1
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by karrieView Post

Would you respect the politician who doesn't believe anything, but just changes his platform according to whatever will get him elected?

Quote: Originally Posted by Just the FactsView Post

It worked for Barry.

It sure did!

Barry IRREFUTABLY flip-flopped on "gay marriage":

Timeline Obama and same sex marriage - YouTube



Sure looks like Barry "changed his platform according to whatever would get him elected" if you ask this cat. Eh Karrie? What's up with that? Huh?, *jabs in ribs*...

I'd also like to point out that although Romney flip-flopped on the issue of abortion, which makes it difficult for one to truly know where he stands, we know EXACTLY where Obama stands on the issue, and his position is not one us conservatives can support.
 
Just the Facts
Free Thinker
+2
#17
Quote: Originally Posted by damngrumpyView Post

The hardest reality for the Republicans is this, They Lost Period. That was totally unexpected.
The reason is not so much the mainstream Republicans it was the tourists in the party. The
large group of malcontents and obstructionists, the zealot Born Again Christians and the fact
that the mainstream Republican Party didn't have the guts or the power to kick them to hell out.
Imagine legitimate rape, or passing laws against women's right to chose. Now some may say
that is a noble cause for an extreme right wing conservative. The problem is women are more
likely to vote, women think more about the social issues and what is good for their children and
the future of those children. In addition women don't subscribe to the old right wing nonsense
that its a man's world, as it were.
Right there they shut down a large voting block with nonsense.
Then there is the immigration issue where the immigrants who became citizens became very
uneasy about the treatment they might receive from their government Immigrants voted for
Obama.
Youth have issues they want on the table, education, pot laws.. jobs and a host of others they
voted for Obama
Republicans should get the picture, bad mouthing people, being inflexible and disruptive is not
the way to get elected period.

So, in summary, the Republicans lost because they're not Democrats, and because people believed the BS they heard on MSNBC. I guess I can't disagree with that.
 
karrie
No Party Affiliation
#18
Quote: Originally Posted by In Between ManView Post

It sure did!

Barry IRREFUTABLY flip-flopped on "gay marriage":

Timeline Obama and same sex marriage - YouTube



Sure looks like Barry "changed his platform according to whatever would get him elected" if you ask this cat. Eh Karrie? What's up with that? Huh?, *jabs in ribs*...

I'd also like to point out that although Romney flip-flopped on the issue of abortion, which makes it difficult for one to truly know where he stands, we know EXACTLY where Obama stands on the issue, and his position is not one us conservatives can support.

Oh jab away alley, but really, one issue changing, versus an entire party rewriting their platform with the express purpose of winning an election... there's a difference.
 
EagleSmack
+4
#19
Quote: Originally Posted by In Between ManView Post

It sure did!

Barry IRREFUTABLY flip-flopped on "gay marriage":

BLASPHEMY! Obama did not flip-flop on gay marriage... he "evolved".

Republicans flip-flop... Democrats "evolve".
 
BaalsTears
-1
#20
Quote: Originally Posted by MachjoView Post

So they should just step out of politics altogether? I disagree. The US needs a liberal conservative alternative, which it does not have right now.

The US is a political regime that needs to go the way of the Soviet Union into the dust bin of history.
 
Just the Facts
Free Thinker
+3
#21
Obama has all kinds of flip-flops:

www.cafepress.com/+obama+flip-flops (external - login to view)
 
BaalsTears
+1
#22
Quote: Originally Posted by KreskinView Post

They could start with using good old American values, like working together rather than making obstruction their primary mission.

American political culture doesn't work like that. Democrats and Republicans aren't internal political opponents. They are mortal enemies who want to see each other's ideologies totally destroyed.
 
In Between Man
Free Thinker
#23
Quote: Originally Posted by BaalsTearsView Post

American political culture doesn't work like that. Democrats and Republicans aren't internal political opponents. They are mortal enemies who want to see each other's ideologies totally destroyed.

Exactly! I had knots in my stomach when Romney said he would "work with Democrats". When do we get to take the "we win, you lose" approach with them?
 
petros
+1
#24
 
In Between Man
Free Thinker
#25
Quote: Originally Posted by karrieView Post

Oh jab away alley, but really, one issue changing, versus an entire party rewriting their platform with the express purpose of winning an election... there's a difference.

You've gone from Romney flip flopping to now an entire party. I don't get that.
 
karrie
No Party Affiliation
+2
#26
Quote: Originally Posted by In Between ManView Post

Exactly! I had knots in my stomach when Romney said he would "work with Democrats". When do we get to take the "we you win, you lose" approach with them?

That is so disappointing coming from you. Love thy neighbour really has no meaning for you does it? I can't fathom the mental process that instead says 'crush your neighbours views and eradicate them', while still preaching about Christianity.
 
Cannuck
No Party Affiliation
#27
I've respected three (major) Canadian politicians in my life.

1. Preston Manning because he believed in democracy and financial responsibility and (for the most part) is responsible for the current position Canada is in economically compared to the rest of the world. He brought fiscal responsibility to the forefront of political and public discussion.

2. Ralph Klein because he said what he was going to do and he did it. I didn't always agree with him but I respect somebody who doesn't manage by opinion polls.

3. Pierre Trudeau because...well...see Ralph Klein
 
karrie
No Party Affiliation
+1
#28
Quote: Originally Posted by In Between ManView Post

You've gone from Romney flip flopping to now an entire party. I don't get that.

Oh.... you've played a mental trick on yourself. Read the OP, and read my reply. I never said diddly squat about Romney. The OP is about the whole party reinventing itself.
 
BaalsTears
#29
I think it's important that Postmodern Liberalism be seen to fail disastrously for America. That means Obama will have to be stymied regardless of the consequences. Let the credit limit deadline expire without action. That will trigger another credit downgrade. Let Sequestration happen. Let middle class income taxes soar, and living standards decline.
 
petros
#30
Quote: Originally Posted by In Between ManView Post

You've gone from Romney flip flopping to now an entire party. I don't get that.

Look at who Romney was and his policies prior to the election, he supported Obama heavily. He had to appear to be different during the election. What he rambles on about IS party policy. Leaders aren't gods.

Have I ever mentioned to you to never trust a politician or Gov? If I have, did you take heed?
 

Similar Threads

8
Searching For Sugar Man
by Cannuck | Nov 1st, 2012
0
Searching for meaning .
by china | May 15th, 2008
9
Searching for a Book
by I think not | May 18th, 2006
5
job searching
by daria26mtl | May 10th, 2006
no new posts