Will tea parties 'throw bums out' in 2010?

[MikeB]

If they ever did, it's been a long time.  Hint:  Plenty of non-religious people support those planks that you probably think of (incorrectly) as religious issues. 

But you just saw how McCain got trounced, right?  The guy who's biggest issue was earmarks, and who was not known for being especially kind to Jerry Falwell? 

Hint 2:  The holy rollers ARE the fiscal conservatives.  Or at least they're a big chunk of them.  If you want a small-govt. Republican Party, you will need the holy rollers. 

McCain is a RINO, he didn't even have much Republican support, never mind fiscal conservatives support, never mind Religious Right support until Palin got on the ticket. Palin probably unfairly was painted as so religious it drove away enough of the support that Obama won.

Let's look at how McCain ended up on the ticket though. Let's see Huckabee, Romney - i.e. Religious Right. McCain was on the ticket because people didn't want that.

[edit]

BTW I don't even support most of those things. What I do support however is the right of people to do what they want even if I personally disagree with it.

[Perd Hapley]

Yes, he was a RINO.  Those are your choices.  A holy roller or a RINO.  I'm betting you have more in common with the holy rollers than you think.

Oh, but I forgot about Rudy Guliani.  His social liberalism really helped him out, huh? 

[MikeB]

Yes, he was a RINO.  Those are your choices.  A holy roller or a RINO.  I'm betting you have more in common with the holy rollers than you think.

I might, and probably do. I'm not talking about me though. I'm talking about how to win an election. Finding common ground such as the Tea Parties are doing is a good first step.

Oh, but I forgot about Rudy Guliani.  His social liberalism really helped him out, huh? 

Not a fiscal conservative, plus socially liberal, should have run on the Dem ticket.

[Perd Hapley]

How to win an election - throw the Republican base overboard?  That's what you're asking for. 

And we're both forgetting that Romney and Huckabee were also RINOs.  The religious right were as much turned off by their lack of conservative cred as anyone else.  If you didn't already know that, it is only because you aren't aware that the religious right, as a voting block, also votes on guns, fiscal conservatism, deregulation, lower taxes, etc. 

Sadly, there just wasn't a small government candidate, religious or otherwise, that got much support in the Republican primaries. 

[Waits for Microbalrog to show up with stats demonstrating that candidate x got such-and-such percent in such-and-such states.    ]

[Leatherneck]

Hint 2:  The holy rollers ARE the fiscal conservatives.  Or at least they're a big chunk of them.  If you want a small-govt. Republican Party, you will need the holy rollers.

Got any data or facts to back up those two opinions Fistful?

TC

[MikeB]

How to win an election - throw the Republican base overboard?  That's what you're asking for. 

I don't think they need to be thrown overboard. I think they need to learn to compromise. Just for instance a few possibilities:

Drugs: Decriminalize Marijuana. Is it really such a big deal? It would garner a lot of support.

Gay Marriage: Does it really matter that two people of the same sex enter into a contract that is the equivalent of marriage? Get the government out of Marriage all together. Everyone get's a civil union license from the government. Marriage is up to respective Religions. Where in the world does the government get the right to "license" marriages anyways? Never mind say who can get married?

Prostitution: Really don't see how it's illegal anyways? What buisness is it of the government if someone charges for sex? I suppose it's hard to collect taxes, but there are ways to fix that.

Sadly, there just wasn't a small government candidate, religious or otherwise, that got much support in the Republican primaries.

Was there a small government candidate in the primaries at all for the Republican party? I guess Ron Paul, but ...

Anyways we may be getting off-topic, but I guess my point is I hope all these small government people on both sides can learn to compromise.

There also needs to be some compromising the other way to. I don't care if people pray in school, it probably shouldn't be lead by a teacher as part of a class activity. Don't care if there is a christmas tree in a public place. Just for instance.

[MicroBalrog]

But you just saw how McCain got trounced, right?  The guy who's biggest issue was earmarks, and who was not known for being especially kind to Jerry Falwell?

And everybody knew McCain LOVED big government.

[Zardozimo Oprah Bannedalas]

I've seen my fellow religious righties with definite pro-gov tendencies. Maybe it was just shown under Bush, as support for 'our guy'. A common phrase among some of 'em is "there ought to be a law..." They tend to have some anti-corporate and anti-bank tendencies. Maybe it's just in this area.

I don't think they need to be thrown overboard. I think they need to learn to compromise.

When's the last time the religious right didn't compromise? Where's prayer in schools, abortions that can only happen with the permission of a judge, etc? School vouchers?

The religious right's ticked off at not getting what they want despite a majority republican congress, a republican president with a majority republican congress, and so on. They've been old reliable for decades, and haven't gotten too much from the deal.

As for gay marriage - even Californians voted against it. California's not recognized as the religious right, is it?

[MicroBalrog]

Fred Thompson wasn't a holy roller, was he? Was B. Goldwater? There are plenty of choices.

[Strings]

>The religious right's ticked off at not getting what they want despite a majority republican congress, a republican president with a majority republican congress, and so on. They've been old reliable for decades, and haven't gotten too much from the deal.<

Same can very easily be said for gun owners, here.


Bet fistful was expecting me to say something about the religious right...

[Balog]

As for gay marriage - even Californians voted against it. California's not recognized as the religious right, is it?

Ding ding ding! Embracing gay marriage will alienate the conservatives in the party, who still out number the libertarians by a large margin.

Got any data or facts to back up those two opinions Fistful?

TC

About as much data as you have for yours...

[MicroBalrog]

Who said anything about 'embracing' gay marriage? What does 'embracing' gay marriage even mean?

There are at least three potential positions the Party can take:

1. Opposing gay marriage on both state level and through promoting a Federal amendment/set of laws against it.

2. Support gay marriage actively on all levels.

3. Simply don't oppose it on the Federal level and have the states figure it out on their own.

Would option 3 count as 'embracing' gay marriage?

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

Primaries are your friend.

Yup.

[Regolith]

Yes, he was a RINO.  Those are your choices.  A holy roller or a RINO.  I'm betting you have more in common with the holy rollers than you think.

Huckabee was not a fiscal conservative.  He also had that small flaw of apparently wanting the government to become a theocracy.  That tends to rub people the wrong way, for some reason. Even a RINO is preferable to a theocrat.

[Perd Hapley]

Huckabee was not a fiscal conservative.

Yes, I believe I covered that.

Even a RINO is preferable to a theocrat.

There are no theocrats on the American political landscape.

[RocketMan]

Will tea parties 'throw bums out' in 2010?

Nope.  They will have faded from the scene before then, and the public will have moved on to the next fad or sensation.

[Perd Hapley]

Got any data or facts to back up those two opinions Fistful?

TC

Are opinions no longer acceptable?  (And aren't data and facts the same thing?)

I don't have any stats to show you.  I rely on having grown up among the religious right, and my continued association with same. 

There is a common misconception that conservative Christians vote only on social issues.  While this is true for some, religious conservatives live in the same country that other conservative Republicans do.  They listen to the same radio hosts and read the same web sites, more or less.  They have internalized the Reagan brand of conservatism, just like other conservative Republicans have.  The point being, if you want support for small govt. candidates, you would be a fool to ignore them.  But like I said earlier, the socially conservative positions can and should be presented (and defended) without reference to religion or tradition or even the word "values."

[Perd Hapley]

I don't think they need to be thrown overboard. I think they need to learn to compromise. Just for instance a few possibilities: 

First of all let's understand that the religious right are not necessarily the sticking point.  Plenty of non-religious people agree with the Religious Right on these three issues.  You think this would attract voters.  I think it might repel many more. 

Drugs: Decriminalize Marijuana. Is it really such a big deal? It would garner a lot of support.

I think that might be a compromise that's worth trying.  I'm about half-way to a drug-legalization point of view myself.   

Gay Marriage: Does it really matter that two people of the same sex enter into a contract that is the equivalent of marriage? Get the government out of Marriage all together.

Everyone get's a civil union license from the government. Marriage is up to respective Religions. Where in the world does the government get the right to "license" marriages anyways? Never mind say who can get married?

I've noticed that a lot of people talk about that.  I've even seen some religious conservatives support that.  It never seems to have gotten past the talk stage, though, and I'm not sure how realistic it is.

Personally, I have come to the point of considering a compromise on that issue, and I've decided it's not bloody likely.  There has been too much hatred, bigotry and slander from the other side.  When they apologize and admit they were wrong about us and what we believe, and apologize for being so abusive of my side of the issue, I may consider it again. 

Prostitution: Really don't see how it's illegal anyways? What buisness is it of the government if someone charges for sex? I suppose it's hard to collect taxes, but there are ways to fix that.

I think I'd go along with that.  But, like gambling, legalization is an issue no one much cares about.

[Perd Hapley]

Fred Thompson wasn't a holy roller, was he.

If I understood right, he was pretty solidly with the holy rollers on the social issues.  Whether he attended church or seemed religious is really not the point, is it?  I thought we were talking about the platform. 

And Goldwater's not in the game, anymore.

Look, I'm not saying there aren't any small-government atheists.  What I'm saying is that any small-govt. candidate is going to be dead in the water without the votes of that rather sizable contingent of small-govt. voters that are socially conservative. 

[Strings]

>the socially conservative positions can and should be presented (and defended) without reference to religion or tradition or even the word "values."<

I have to agree with fistful here  *shudder*

Problem is, WAY too many social conservatives wrap themselves VERY visibly in the bible. That tends to drive away quite a few who might nominally support them...

 Then too, I'm not a strict social conservative. So I guess I don't really count there...

[Perd Hapley]

Will tea parties 'throw bums out' in 2010?

Yes. Yes, they will.

[griz]

Yes. Yes, they will.

You know, we kind of expect the weatherman to get yesterday's weather correct.

[MechAg94]

You know, we kind of expect the weatherman to get yesterday's weather correct.

Except the climate change guys.  They can't even do that. 

[TommyGunn]

Thread necromancy has evolved into an artform, I see.

[just Warren]

Some places lock threads that have not had a response in x number of days.