Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
July 25, 2014, 06:20:48 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Don't forget to get your 2013 Gubernatorial Endorsements and Predictions in!

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  General Politics
| |-+  Individual Politics (Moderators: Grad Students are the Worst, Torie, Sheriff Buford TX Justice)
| | |-+  Republicans: What faction do you belong to?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 Print
Poll
Question: Who do you identify the most with?
New Right   -3 (11.5%)
Religious Right   -3 (11.5%)
Corporate Right   -6 (23.1%)
Libertarian Right   -9 (34.6%)
Old Right   -5 (19.2%)
Show Pie Chart
Total Voters: 26

Author Topic: Republicans: What faction do you belong to?  (Read 1248 times)
Senator TNF
TNF
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9429
Palestinian Territory, Occupied


View Profile
« on: September 18, 2012, 11:20:20 am »
Ignore

The New Right takes its cues from Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. Militarily aggressive, socially conservative (but not loud about it), and fiscally pragmatic. The New Right tends to not be concerned with deficit spending and isn't skittish about enacting new or expanded social welfare programs. Key interest is foreign policy, however, and the promotion of a 'New American Century.'

The Religious Right includes Mike Huckabee. Foreign policy tends to be pragmatic, with isolationists and interventionists lump together, and social conservatism is paramount. Typically fiscally in the center or to the right, but again, not one of their highest priorities. The number one priority for the religious right is social issues.

The Corporate Right was once the dominant faction of the Republican Party, but has largely been eclipsed since the rise of Reaganite conservatism as the dominant force in the party. Corporate Right leaders include Presidents Herbert Hoover, Dwight Eisenhower, Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, and George H.W. Bush. The motto of this faction might be "What's good for general motors is good for America." Realist in foreign policy, socially moderate or liberal (with nearly no emphasis on social issues) and fiscally conservative. Should not be confused with the Libertarian Right, which is much different.

The Libertarian Right developed in the 1930s in opposition to the New Deal. Largely focused on economic issues, they go a step further than fiscal conservatism and actively seek to reduce the functions of government altogether. Socially libertarian (which is different than being socially progressive; i.e. let to each his or her own), fiscally to the right of the Corporate Right and isolationist or non-interventionist in foreign affairs. The Tea Party is the modern manifestation of the Libertarian Right, with leading figures such as Gary Johnson.

The Old Right descends from the anti-state politics of Thomas Jefferson. To the right of even the Libertarian Right, the Old Right combines social reaction (actively repealing socially progressive legislation) with economic reaction and foreign policy isolationism. Tough most of the Old Right are not openly racist, there are some quite interesting views within the movement on race, much of which are racist in origin. Leading figure is Pat Buchanan.
Logged

Iron King SJoyce
sjoycefla
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8786
United States


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: September 18, 2012, 01:25:50 pm »
Ignore

Were I in the Republican Party (a move that I have considered), I would fall in the Libertarian Right (although I doubt that the Tea Party (specifically its Palinesque figures) would fall there) and would be very sympathetic to the similar policies of the Old Right (which could be better symbolized by Paul maybe and entitled paleoconservatives/paleolibertarians).
Logged

Cobbler
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 807
United States


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: September 18, 2012, 01:31:02 pm »
Ignore

I'd be in the Corporate Right. I'd also be sympathetic to the Libertarian Right, but I'm not fiscally conservative enough to classify my economic views as libertarian.
Logged


Quote
Economic score: +2.19
Social score: -5.74
ChairmanSanchez
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14756
United States


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: September 18, 2012, 02:50:43 pm »
Ignore

Old Right
Logged

America's like that hot chick everyone wants, and illegal immigrants are all the nerds that she should say "no" to.
Duke
AHDuke99
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19574


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: September 18, 2012, 03:00:18 pm »
Ignore

Corporate right. Everyone knows I am still a Republican because I'm a corporate whore. Tongue
Logged
R2D2
20RP12
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21729
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.55, S: -7.91

View Profile
« Reply #5 on: September 18, 2012, 04:11:16 pm »
Ignore

Libertarian Right, with a few teaspoons of Corporate Right and Old Right thrown in.
Logged

Senator Goldwater
Republitarian
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8115
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.94, S: -3.83

View Profile
« Reply #6 on: September 18, 2012, 05:33:23 pm »
Ignore

I'm probably a mixture of Libertarian Right, New Right, & Corporate Right.
Logged

Maxy
mah519
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 11474
Germany


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: September 18, 2012, 06:58:12 pm »
Ignore

Libertarian Right and Old Right, some sympathies to the Corporate Right.
Logged

Zuza
Full Member
***
Posts: 169
Russian Federation
View Profile
« Reply #8 on: September 18, 2012, 09:54:47 pm »
Ignore

To which faction belongs Romney? Corporate Right?
Logged
Maxy
mah519
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 11474
Germany


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: September 18, 2012, 11:12:46 pm »
Ignore

To which faction belongs Romney? Corporate Right?

He has a bit of Corporate Right, but he leans New Right and even a bit of Religious Right, especially since the primaries.
Logged

Lt. Governor TJ
TJ in Cleve
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4666
United States


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: September 18, 2012, 11:18:58 pm »
Ignore

Religious Right would probably be the best fit, though not being a Protestant puts me at odds with much of the Religious Right on occasion.
Logged
Senator TNF
TNF
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9429
Palestinian Territory, Occupied


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: September 19, 2012, 06:46:39 am »
Ignore

Republicans, is this pretty objective? Are these good categorizations for Republican factions?
Logged

Speaker Dereich
Dereich
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1818


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: September 19, 2012, 05:43:09 pm »
Ignore

Right in the middle of the Corporate Right. Nothing else comes close.
Logged
RogueBeaver
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13899
Canada


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: September 19, 2012, 05:52:18 pm »
Ignore

Mixture of Libertarian (economic) and New (social/military).
Logged

7.35, 3.65

« Les plus nobles principes du monde ne valent que par l’action.  »

- Charles de Gaulle


Is it excessive to hold a politician's feet to the fire for giving his base the run around at every turn?
Oldiesfreak1854
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8626
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.13, S: 1.91

P P P

View Profile WWW
« Reply #14 on: September 19, 2012, 05:58:29 pm »
Ignore

Either new right or corporate right, I don't fit especially well in any of these.  And Pat Buchanan is not a racist.
Logged

Quote from: Dwight D. Eisenhower
There is nothing wrong with America that the faith, love of freedom, intelligence, and energy of her citizens cannot cure.
JCL and the Geologist
JohanusCalvinusLibertas
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3976
United States


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: September 20, 2012, 07:21:45 pm »
Ignore

Where the Old, Libertarian, and Religious Right meet.
Logged

Congressional Races
Jackie Walorski (R/IN-2)
Marlin Stutzman (R/IN-3)
Todd Rokita (R/IN-4)
Chard Reid (Lib/IN-5)
Luke Messer (R/IN-6)
Carlos May (R/IN-7)
Larry Bucshon (R/IN-8)
Todd Young (R/IN-9)
Tom Massie (R/KY-4)
shua
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 11160
Russian Federation


View Profile WWW
« Reply #16 on: September 20, 2012, 09:43:07 pm »
Ignore

Republicans, is this pretty objective? Are these good categorizations for Republican factions?
It's a good attempt. Some of the descriptions are not how people would describe themselves (ex. I don't think Eisenhower would choose to call himself "corporate").  I think there also needs to be a place for people who are conservative in the sense of traditionalist, but not movement conservatives, who focus on small business and localism, and social conservatism without much sectarian overtones - "Main Street Right", perhaps. There's some overlap with the Old Right, but these are people whose views are less strident than the descritpion suggests, and may be inheritors of Burke as much as Jefferson.
The thing to consider is, these are strands held in common as often as they are factions,  with the greatest number drawing on more than one and not identifying with any one exclusively.
Logged

Supersonic
SupersonicVenue
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4965
United Kingdom


Political Matrix
E: 3.61, S: 0.35


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: September 23, 2012, 07:54:56 am »
Ignore

The New Right is probably closest to me. If only because of foreign policy.
Logged

Being a Libertarian is like having a fever, either you sweat it out or you die from it.
Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 29151
United States


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: September 23, 2012, 10:34:45 am »
Ignore

All of the above and yet at same time, none of them entirely. Tongue Perhaps the best for me would be a fiscally conservative, anti-populist New Rightist, if such is possible. I consider myself an inheritor of Burke and Hamilton, yet with the lessons of hindsight about the negative impacts of gov't going to far during various periods of the 20th century and today. But in spite of that, I do think there is a limited role for Gov't to play. At the same time, I hate the idea of the gov't actively deciding specific winners and losers in most instances so that is more Libertarian then a corporate rightist. I also think that while a strong federal gov't is necessary just like Hamilton and Burke did for the purposes of security and stability, but that it has also been taken too far in modern times and that there is a place for states rights as a means of preserving an important check on federal power.

As for the history, "The Corporate Right" would have moved towards or became the Libertarian right to an extent in the 1930's. Prior to that, they saw Gov't largely as a tool for their own benefit through stability, trade protection and currency regulation. When it was taken further than that, not for their benefit, but at their expense they began to embrace a more anti-gov't posture, one that just a few decades prior they would have scorned. Stability was a forgone conclusion with a century+ long established gov't system and laws, trade protection was starting to hurt them more then help and the Fed had been created. Their desires realized, they had no need to maintain an advocacy for stronger gov't. They would still support policies that benefit them, but would oppose anything that didn't. A nuance which continues to this day.

New Right is merely a combination of several of the others, most notably the Religious Right and the Corporate/Libertarian Right. In 2000's, the former really got the upper hand on the latter. However, the rise of the Tea Party, and the nomination of Mittens provides the possibly of restoring the blance between them atleast to the extent that such existed in the 1990's. Had the opposite occured, the risk would have been a decline of that fiscal conservative/libertarian quadrant's base or potential base to the point that reversal became impossible and Conservatism ended up being defined by Huckabee. Scary thought. Tongue

Edit: Yes, I do realize that Corporate Right, Libertarian Right and Fiscally Conservative aren't exactly the same thing. They do overlap considerably, espeically when talking about their base, which is usually middle, upper middle and upper class income levels and more highly educated people. The constant overtures to the Social Conservatism and let downs for these three groups since the 1990's, means that this demographic has been leaving for the Democrats. Without them in primaries, poorer, less educated populists will gain more influence in the primaries creating a self-fulling prophecy of socially conservative, big gov't populism.


Republicans, is this pretty objective? Are these good categorizations for Republican factions?
It's a good attempt. Some of the descriptions are not how people would describe themselves (ex. I don't think Eisenhower would choose to call himself "corporate").  I think there also needs to be a place for people who are conservative in the sense of traditionalist, but not movement conservatives, who focus on small business and localism, and social conservatism without much sectarian overtones - "Main Street Right", perhaps. There's some overlap with the Old Right, but these are people whose views are less strident than the descritpion suggests, and may be inheritors of Burke as much as Jefferson.
The thing to consider is, these are strands held in common as often as they are factions,  with the greatest number drawing on more than one and not identifying with any one exclusively.

I agree completely.
« Last Edit: September 23, 2012, 10:43:41 am by Senator North Carolina Yankee »Logged

He's BACK!!! His Time Has Come Once Again! Now We're All Gonna Die! No One is Safe From His Wrath!



Oldiesfreak1854
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8626
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.13, S: 1.91

P P P

View Profile WWW
« Reply #19 on: September 23, 2012, 12:03:54 pm »
Ignore

All of the above and yet at same time, none of them entirely. Tongue Perhaps the best for me would be a fiscally conservative, anti-populist New Rightist, if such is possible. I consider myself an inheritor of Burke and Hamilton, yet with the lessons of hindsight about the negative impacts of gov't going to far during various periods of the 20th century and today. But in spite of that, I do think there is a limited role for Gov't to play. At the same time, I hate the idea of the gov't actively deciding specific winners and losers in most instances so that is more Libertarian then a corporate rightist. I also think that while a strong federal gov't is necessary just like Hamilton and Burke did for the purposes of security and stability, but that it has also been taken too far in modern times and that there is a place for states rights as a means of preserving an important check on federal power.

As for the history, "The Corporate Right" would have moved towards or became the Libertarian right to an extent in the 1930's. Prior to that, they saw Gov't largely as a tool for their own benefit through stability, trade protection and currency regulation. When it was taken further than that, not for their benefit, but at their expense they began to embrace a more anti-gov't posture, one that just a few decades prior they would have scorned. Stability was a forgone conclusion with a century+ long established gov't system and laws, trade protection was starting to hurt them more then help and the Fed had been created. Their desires realized, they had no need to maintain an advocacy for stronger gov't. They would still support policies that benefit them, but would oppose anything that didn't. A nuance which continues to this day.

New Right is merely a combination of several of the others, most notably the Religious Right and the Corporate/Libertarian Right. In 2000's, the former really got the upper hand on the latter. However, the rise of the Tea Party, and the nomination of Mittens provides the possibly of restoring the blance between them atleast to the extent that such existed in the 1990's. Had the opposite occured, the risk would have been a decline of that fiscal conservative/libertarian quadrant's base or potential base to the point that reversal became impossible and Conservatism ended up being defined by Huckabee. Scary thought. Tongue

Edit: Yes, I do realize that Corporate Right, Libertarian Right and Fiscally Conservative aren't exactly the same thing. They do overlap considerably, espeically when talking about their base, which is usually middle, upper middle and upper class income levels and more highly educated people. The constant overtures to the Social Conservatism and let downs for these three groups since the 1990's, means that this demographic has been leaving for the Democrats. Without them in primaries, poorer, less educated populists will gain more influence in the primaries creating a self-fulling prophecy of socially conservative, big gov't populism.


You're absolutely right.  I would consider myself somewhere in between New Right and Corporate Right.  I consider myself a fiscally and socially conservative, populist equivalent of Yankee Republican or Rockefeller Republican.
Logged

Quote from: Dwight D. Eisenhower
There is nothing wrong with America that the faith, love of freedom, intelligence, and energy of her citizens cannot cure.
muon2
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8436


View Profile
« Reply #20 on: September 25, 2012, 06:49:02 pm »
Ignore

Government should be fiscally conservative, but with a recognition that government plays a role in providing basic services and maintaining a structure to defend and protect rights. The government has a duty to be accountable to the taxpayer, but not so short-sighted as to miss long-term investments that will benefit the same taxpayer.

Foreign policy should be guided by realpolitik, but with a recognition that there can be times when  higher ideals should be pursued. For example a genocide may need to be viewed beyond the bounds of realpolitik. The US is part of a global economy and foreign policy should reflect that.

Government social policy should lean to the conservative side, with a recognition that social mores are slow to change. The guiding principal is quality of life for a broad swath of the population and identifying when the state's interest requires that it should take a role. Pro-life and pro-green would be compatible in this view.

I wouldn't place the above comfortably in any of the five listed categories.
Logged


Lunar Eclipse of April 15, 2014 with the star Spica.
Anton Kreitzer
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2518
Australia


Political Matrix
E: 8.31, S: 4.27

View Profile
« Reply #21 on: September 26, 2012, 06:54:35 am »
Ignore

Where the Old, Libertarian, and Religious Right meet.

That more or less sums me up as well.
Logged

Senator DC
DC Al Fine
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6891
Canada


View Profile
« Reply #22 on: October 03, 2012, 09:31:20 pm »
Ignore

Where the Old, Libertarian, and Religious Right meet.

^This
Logged

Economic: 3.1
Social: 2.78

Quote from: Don Colacho
The Gospels and the Communist Manifesto are on the wane; the world’s future lies in the power of Coca-Cola and pornography.
Vote UKIP!
MasterSanders
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1001
United States


View Profile
« Reply #23 on: October 04, 2012, 11:08:45 am »
Ignore

If by "New Right" you mean Buckleyite "Fusionist," than yes, I am New Right.
Logged

They call me PR
Progressive Realist
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5385
United States


View Profile
« Reply #24 on: October 04, 2012, 01:13:18 pm »
Ignore

Edit: Yes, I do realize that Corporate Right, Libertarian Right and Fiscally Conservative aren't exactly the same thing. They do overlap considerably, espeically when talking about their base, which is usually middle, upper middle and upper class income levels and more highly educated people. The constant overtures to the Social Conservatism and let downs for these three groups since the 1990's, means that this demographic has been leaving for the Democrats. Without them in primaries, poorer, less educated populists will gain more influence in the primaries creating a self-fulling prophecy of socially conservative, big gov't populism

Umm....aren't a good number of Religious Right types (especially younger ones, relatively speaking) solidly middle to upper middle class in both income and education levels?

I do agree that the poorer members of this demographic are more likely to be populist on issues like economics, trade, and the role of the federal government. But that's to be expected, no? (Think of the difference between a poor rural Southern Baptist from Texas and a wealthier counterpart from the Dallas or Houston suburbs). 
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines