does anyone see the republican party turning nationalist?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 09:17:42 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  does anyone see the republican party turning nationalist?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]
Author Topic: does anyone see the republican party turning nationalist?  (Read 2839 times)
🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸
shua
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,665
Nepal


Political Matrix
E: 1.29, S: -0.70

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: July 08, 2013, 12:47:42 PM »

You're on to something in general, I think. This could happen if the masses who vote Republican begin electing their own into high office in large numbers (rather than the typical elite corporate insider who is the stereotypical republican officeholder these days). This is already starting to happen in some ways with the Tea Party movement and such, but I have no idea if it will continue.

are there socialist teapartiers?
I suspect a substantial percent of them happily draw Social Security.

I'd say a larger percent are unhappy about it than among eligible non-teapartiers the same age.
It must be very easy for them to say that, but very hard for their actions to prove it. 4 years ago, they were stirred almost to violence when someone even attempted to slightly alter some of their age-based entitlements.
You mean an enraged mob of teapartying senior citizens tried to kill Paul Ryan?   
Logged
freepcrusher
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,828
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: July 10, 2013, 02:15:10 PM »

changed the title
Logged
Person Man
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,681
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: July 10, 2013, 05:43:15 PM »

Sounds like some variant of populism to me, rather than socialism per se. I don't see the Pubs turning populist unless somehow that manages to attract large numbers of persons of color. Otherwise, I don't see how that works politically. The Dems tend to be more naturally attuned to populistic rhetoric, and for the parties to switch places on this, requires attracting large cohorts of people that more than replace the Torie types who will leave.

You are way overestimating how many "Torie types" that are out there. In many states in the middle is the country, it is because of the populist rhetoric that the Republican party does so well. That's true even in places like the Central Valley and IE in California.

Seriously, the Republican party is guilty of the same class warfare that Democrats are always being accused of, it's just a different style. Dems attack corporate fat cats and good ol boy networks that they see as controlling everybody's lives. Republicans attack ivy leaguers, academic elites and hollywood types claiming that they're trying to reshape and degrade America's values. That type of populist rhetoric is the reason why Republicans have done so well in white rural areas these past few decades.

Its basically the Republican monologue that states "We are the party of the wealthy because we believe everyone can be wealthy. That being said, as an American, you have a right to be poor. Democrats want to take that fundamental freedom to fail away and when that happens, no one will be rich or free. This is because anyone who would sacrifice a little bit of freedom for a little bit of security will get neither. Even if the freedom being sacrifice is the freedom to suck."
Logged
muon2
Moderators
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,788


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: July 10, 2013, 07:37:21 PM »

Sounds like some variant of populism to me, rather than socialism per se. I don't see the Pubs turning populist unless somehow that manages to attract large numbers of persons of color. Otherwise, I don't see how that works politically. The Dems tend to be more naturally attuned to populistic rhetoric, and for the parties to switch places on this, requires attracting large cohorts of people that more than replace the Torie types who will leave.

You are way overestimating how many "Torie types" that are out there. In many states in the middle is the country, it is because of the populist rhetoric that the Republican party does so well. That's true even in places like the Central Valley and IE in California.

Seriously, the Republican party is guilty of the same class warfare that Democrats are always being accused of, it's just a different style. Dems attack corporate fat cats and good ol boy networks that they see as controlling everybody's lives. Republicans attack ivy leaguers, academic elites and hollywood types claiming that they're trying to reshape and degrade America's values. That type of populist rhetoric is the reason why Republicans have done so well in white rural areas these past few decades.

Its basically the Republican monologue that states "We are the party of the wealthy because we believe everyone can be wealthy. That being said, as an American, you have a right to be poor. Democrats want to take that fundamental freedom to fail away and when that happens, no one will be rich or free. This is because anyone who would sacrifice a little bit of freedom for a little bit of security will get neither. Even if the freedom being sacrifice is the freedom to suck."

It hasn't always been viewed as class warfare, but your point is consistent with my earlier post. The packaging changes with the times and the groups in a party's coalition.

The common thread of the GOP since Lincoln's time has been to promote self reliance. Redistribution of wealth as suggested by the OP has rarely fit into that thread. So, it's hard for me to see that thread totally severed, but nothing's impossible in US politics.
Logged
Person Man
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,681
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: July 10, 2013, 07:57:09 PM »

Sounds like some variant of populism to me, rather than socialism per se. I don't see the Pubs turning populist unless somehow that manages to attract large numbers of persons of color. Otherwise, I don't see how that works politically. The Dems tend to be more naturally attuned to populistic rhetoric, and for the parties to switch places on this, requires attracting large cohorts of people that more than replace the Torie types who will leave.

You are way overestimating how many "Torie types" that are out there. In many states in the middle is the country, it is because of the populist rhetoric that the Republican party does so well. That's true even in places like the Central Valley and IE in California.

Seriously, the Republican party is guilty of the same class warfare that Democrats are always being accused of, it's just a different style. Dems attack corporate fat cats and good ol boy networks that they see as controlling everybody's lives. Republicans attack ivy leaguers, academic elites and hollywood types claiming that they're trying to reshape and degrade America's values. That type of populist rhetoric is the reason why Republicans have done so well in white rural areas these past few decades.

Its basically the Republican monologue that states "We are the party of the wealthy because we believe everyone can be wealthy. That being said, as an American, you have a right to be poor. Democrats want to take that fundamental freedom to fail away and when that happens, no one will be rich or free. This is because anyone who would sacrifice a little bit of freedom for a little bit of security will get neither. Even if the freedom being sacrifice is the freedom to suck."

It hasn't always been viewed as class warfare, but your point is consistent with my earlier post. The packaging changes with the times and the groups in a party's coalition.

The common thread of the GOP since Lincoln's time has been to promote self reliance. Redistribution of wealth as suggested by the OP has rarely fit into that thread. So, it's hard for me to see that thread totally severed, but nothing's impossible in US politics.
Was there a time when self-reliance and class warfare didn't come hand in hand since the Democrats moved beyond being the party of Post-Reconstruction Southern Rights and  Tammany Hall?
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.031 seconds with 11 queries.