WTF GOP

[Bronzeage]

I'm well aware of the religious right's agenda. My point is that they haven't gotten any significant part of that agenda enacted. Yes, a few states have enacted measures that place minor restrictions on abortions, but unless they can nullify Roe v. Wade, there's little that they can do. The left has been far more successful at getting their programs enacted even though they are probably fewer in number than the religious right. Certainly there are fewer gays in this country than religious conservatives, but gays have gotten nearly everything they wanted. I suspect that religious conservatives also vastly outnumber environmentalists as well, but environmentalists have gotten nearly everything they have demanded except the most unfeasible demands.

The topic if the discussion is the GOP and how they came to be in the state they find themselves today. The religious right bears a great deal of responsibility for this.

The problem with determining if there are more religious conservatives than gay people is deciding whether gay religious conservatives should be counted twice.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Claiming that the religious right represents the Republican Party is like claiming that Occupy Wall Street represents the Democratic Party.

See when you say stuff like this, it becomes very hard to read further.

Did or did not Pat Robertson, Mike Huckabee, Michelle Bachman, and Rick Santorum make serious runs for the presidency? All darlings of the religious right. Three have held national office.

Show me the occupy candidates currently holding office?

I will wait.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

They (the RR) can close every abortion clinic in every red state.


Hardly a minor thing.

 

[boneyard bill]

See when you say stuff like this, it becomes very hard to read further.

Did or did not Pat Robertson, Mike Huckabee, Michelle Bachman, and Rick Santorum make serious runs for the presidency? All darlings of the religious right. Three have held national office.

Show me the occupy candidates currently holding office?


I will wait.

Huckabee never held national office nor did Pat Robertson. I have already responded to the rest of your post earlier in this thread.

- - - Updated - - -

They (the RR) can close every abortion clinic in every red state.


Hardly a minor thing.

Simply not true. They can't or they would.

 

[boneyard bill]

The topic if the discussion is the GOP and how they came to be in the state they find themselves today. The religious right bears a great deal of responsibility for this.

The problem with determining if there are more religious conservatives than gay people is deciding whether gay religious conservatives should be counted twice.

I think we've trod this path before. First of all, the Republican Party is not in bad shape. So they lost the last presidential election. So what? They lost by only four percent, and the primary reason for that is that those RR stayed home because the GOP nominee was a Mormon. In fact, Republicans and Democrats have switched control of the presidency every eight years since WW II. The only exceptions are Jimmy Carter's one term and George H.W. Bush's victory after Reagan.

Secondly, the RR has gained nothing from the GOP so it hasn't hurt the GOP. I would agree that if the GOP actually accommodated the RR that it would hurt them. Just as the Dems lost the South in 1992 when they actually passed a gun control law, the Republicans would lose a lot of supporters if they succeeded in outlawing abortion. But they haven't done that, and so many fiscal conservatives still align with the GOP who likely would desert them over abortion.

 

[Bronzeage]

I think we've trod this path before. First of all, the Republican Party is not in bad shape. So they lost the last presidential election. So what? They lost by only four percent, and the primary reason for that is that those RR stayed home because the GOP nominee was a Mormon. In fact, Republicans and Democrats have switched control of the presidency every eight years since WW II. The only exceptions are Jimmy Carter's one term and George H.W. Bush's victory after Reagan.

Secondly, the RR has gained nothing from the GOP so it hasn't hurt the GOP. I would agree that if the GOP actually accommodated the RR that it would hurt them. Just as the Dems lost the South in 1992 when they actually passed a gun control law, the Republicans would lose a lot of supporters if they succeeded in outlawing abortion. But they haven't done that, and so many fiscal conservatives still align with the GOP who likely would desert them over abortion.

Not in bad shape? They have a major faction who gave the election to the Dems, rather than vote for a Mormon. How does that fit into the definition of "not in bad shape"?

If the RR has gained nothing from the GOP, what are they going to do? They have no where else to go. The problem the GOP must face is simple. The RR has enough control over the nominating process to insure a moderate-middle Republican cannot be nominated.

 

[boneyard bill]

Not in bad shape? They have a major faction who gave the election to the Dems, rather than vote for a Mormon. How does that fit into the definition of "not in bad shape"?

If the RR has gained nothing from the GOP, what are they going to do? They have no where else to go. The problem the GOP must face is simple. The RR has enough control over the nominating process to insure a moderate-middle Republican cannot be nominated.

I don't see your point. Yes, the RR has no where to go even though they've gotten next to nothing from the GOP. At least the GOP won't promote what the RR is against as much as the Dems will. That's about as far as it goes. But I don't see where they have all that much power in the nominating process either. After all, they couldn't stop the nomination of Romney even though he is a Mormon, and he is exactly the moderate/middle type that you have said the RR won't allow.

Where IS the RR candidate? Since Pat Robertson, the only true RR guy to run has been Mike Huckabee. He won the RR vote because he's a former Baptist minister and knows how to talk their language. But Huckabee wasn't particularly "rightist" on non-social issues. Fiscal conservatives consider him a big spender, and on foreign policy he was too moderate for the neo-cons.

As far as I can see, the RR has simply had very little influence on GOP policy, but even on candidates. They haven't really been able to field a solid RR candidate for president. They're forever backing the lesser of two evils and even then, they're usually on the losing side.

 

[Toni]

I don't see your point. Yes, the RR has no where to go even though they've gotten next to nothing from the GOP. At least the GOP won't promote what the RR is against as much as the Dems will. That's about as far as it goes. But I don't see where they have all that much power in the nominating process either. After all, they couldn't stop the nomination of Romney even though he is a Mormon, and he is exactly the moderate/middle type that you have said the RR won't allow.

Where IS the RR candidate? Since Pat Robertson, the only true RR guy to run has been Mike Huckabee. He won the RR vote because he's a former Baptist minister and knows how to talk their language. But Huckabee wasn't particularly "rightist" on non-social issues. Fiscal conservatives consider him a big spender, and on foreign policy he was too moderate for the neo-cons.

As far as I can see, the RR has simply had very little influence on GOP policy, but even on candidates. They haven't really been able to field a solid RR candidate for president. They're forever backing the lesser of two evils and even then, they're usually on the losing side.

OK, explain to me all of the anti-abortion legislation that is being passed in conservative states.

And I would like to point out that the GOP nominated a Mormon, which is a different bent of religious right. However, the religious right factions tend to favor members of their own religious right faction over other religious right factions. Bachmann, Perry and Santorum all had support of various factions of the religious right.

It is important to keep in mind that the religious right is only one faction when it is united against the demon democrats. It is actually a loose alliance of individual factions.

 

[Bronzeage]

I don't see your point. Yes, the RR has no where to go even though they've gotten next to nothing from the GOP. At least the GOP won't promote what the RR is against as much as the Dems will. That's about as far as it goes. But I don't see where they have all that much power in the nominating process either. After all, they couldn't stop the nomination of Romney even though he is a Mormon, and he is exactly the moderate/middle type that you have said the RR won't allow.

Where IS the RR candidate? Since Pat Robertson, the only true RR guy to run has been Mike Huckabee. He won the RR vote because he's a former Baptist minister and knows how to talk their language. But Huckabee wasn't particularly "rightist" on non-social issues. Fiscal conservatives consider him a big spender, and on foreign policy he was too moderate for the neo-cons.

As far as I can see, the RR has simply had very little influence on GOP policy, but even on candidates. They haven't really been able to field a solid RR candidate for president. They're forever backing the lesser of two evils and even then, they're usually on the losing side.

Romney was a moderate/middle type until he ran for the GOP nomination. That is influence on GOP policy. As for RR candidates, Rick Santorum and Michelle Bachmann are perennials. The RR is a millstone around the GOP neck and they will continue to be a liability, despite the voters and money they bring to the table. This makes them a factor in national politics, even if they can't manage to gain anything they truly desire.

If your point is the RR is irrelevant in today's political process, I think you are simply wrong.

 

[fromderinside]

As I see it, religious right breaks down to social issues and racial issues. I'm going out on a limb here. I think I see where fundamentalists (charismatics), both black and white, are conservative on non-racial social issues . I'm pretty sure most religious righties are also racist righties. Else how does anyone explain the blatant attempts by the 'solid racist south' types to constrain voting rights all around the country.

Some issues run in parallel and others run in opposition. For instance gay rights are common across both black and white fundamentalist groups, while abortion is split as is race. White fundies march in lock step on abortion and fear of blacks, Black fundamentalists are obviously against discrimination, except gays, while they are very much in favor of contraception even while they kinda support anti-abortion.

 

[boneyard bill]

Romney was a moderate/middle type until he ran for the GOP nomination. That is influence on GOP policy. As for RR candidates, Rick Santorum and Michelle Bachmann are perennials. The RR is a millstone around the GOP neck and they will continue to be a liability, despite the voters and money they bring to the table. This makes them a factor in national politics, even if they can't manage to gain anything they truly desire.

If your point is the RR is irrelevant in today's political process, I think you are simply wrong.

Bachmann ran for president exactly once. Now she is even retiring from the House. Santorum has also run only once. He is Catholic, not fundamentalist. He will probably run again but, despite being runner-up to Romney, he is only running at about 3% in the polls.

The RR has had some influence on the debate. I wouldn't claim that they are totally irrelevant, but I certainly don't think they fall into the bogey-man category although I'm sure the Democrats use them that way in their fund-raising letters. Keep in mind that the positions championed by the RR are not limited in their support form that group. Lots of people oppose abortion who are not fundamentalists Christians. In fact, polls show the public about even divided on that issue. Attitudes on gay marriage have changed recently, but it wasn't long ago that Obama was counted among the opponents.

Romney switched only on the litmus test issues like abortion and national health care. His campaign wasn't much different from what any moderate would have run on. Virtually any GOP candidate will oppose abortion. John McCain did. Chris Christie does. Christie and Romney were both pro-immigration and ambiguous on amnesty. McCain is decidedly pro-amnesty. All oppose Obamacare.

 

[boneyard bill]

As I see it, religious right breaks down to social issues and racial issues. I'm going out on a limb here. I think I see where fundamentalists (charismatics), both black and white, are conservative on non-racial social issues . I'm pretty sure most religious righties are also racist righties. Else how does anyone explain the blatant attempts by the 'solid racist south' types to constrain voting rights all around the country.

Some issues run in parallel and others run in opposition. For instance gay rights are common across both black and white fundamentalist groups, while abortion is split as is race. White fundies march in lock step on abortion and fear of blacks, Black fundamentalists are obviously against discrimination, except gays, while they are very much in favor of contraception even while they kinda support anti-abortion.

I haven't seen much evidence that white fundamentalists are more racist than other groups and probably less. Since I've moved to Florida, I haven't seen much evidence of racism, but what I have seen comes more from what would be called "rednecks." These aren't typically church-going people.

In Cleveland there was lots of white racism, and it came largely from blue collar whites which would have meant a lot of Catholics in Cleveland. This is not to say that there aren't a lot of black racists as well. But in the Cleveland I think it was the close proximity of blacks and blue collar whites which led to much of the racism. Most white collar workers lived in richer neighborhoods.

 

[Underseer]

I haven't seen much evidence that white fundamentalists are more racist than other groups and probably less. [...]

The Southern Strategy worked. If what you believe were true, then the Southern Strategy would have failed to pull all those Southern voters into the Republican party.

 

[Bronzeage]

Bachmann ran for president exactly once. Now she is even retiring from the House. Santorum has also run only once. He is Catholic, not fundamentalist. He will probably run again but, despite being runner-up to Romney, he is only running at about 3% in the polls.

The RR has had some influence on the debate. I wouldn't claim that they are totally irrelevant, but I certainly don't think they fall into the bogey-man category although I'm sure the Democrats use them that way in their fund-raising letters. Keep in mind that the positions championed by the RR are not limited in their support form that group. Lots of people oppose abortion who are not fundamentalists Christians. In fact, polls show the public about even divided on that issue. Attitudes on gay marriage have changed recently, but it wasn't long ago that Obama was counted among the opponents.

Romney switched only on the litmus test issues like abortion and national health care. His campaign wasn't much different from what any moderate would have run on. Virtually any GOP candidate will oppose abortion. John McCain did. Chris Christie does. Christie and Romney were both pro-immigration and ambiguous on amnesty. McCain is decidedly pro-amnesty. All oppose Obamacare.

You will soon have enough pieces of this hair to share with everyone.