Official Republican National Convention 2012 Discussion Thread

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

[

But in any case Jefferson called himself a Republican.

Actually, I don't think he ever did.  The Party was called Democratic-Republicans.

In some cases, both Jackson and Jefferson had instances of a strong federal government, the nullification crisis and McCulloch v. Maryland, respectively.

The term Democratic-Republican is an invention of contemporary historians, not part of the historical record as far as I am aware. Mostly foor that reason it is falling out of use but also because, yes,  as the modern GOP resembles them more rhetorically, the need to emphasis the distinction has also declined.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

But in any case Jefferson called himself a Republican.

Actually, I don't think he ever did.  The Party was called Democratic-Republicans.

Did you even read the Jefferson quote I gave earlier, or do you enjoy looking foolish?  The name Democratic-Republican is a largely ahistorical name given to them to distinguish them from the later National Republicans and the modern Republican Party.  Just like no one ever called himself the Byzantine Emperor, yet we refer to the Byzantine Empire when we wish to speak of the later Eastern Roman Empire of 395-1453.

[後援会]

Do you guys all realize how asinine this debate is? Trying to claim random historical figures for your party just because they were connected with entities that became your party hundreds of years later after going through dozens of total revamps and changes is ridiculous.

We almost all clearly draw upon the legacy of Jefferson and Lincoln, regardless of our party.

Almost all of us, at least.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The GOP of today is closer to the Democratic-Republican party that Jefferson was part of. Why don't the Dems have Wilson-Roosevelt dinners and  the GOP can have Coolidge and Reagan day dinners.

I don't consider Abe a Republican. He was the National Union Party

I disagree entirely. When I think of the connection between Lincoln and the Republican Party, even of today, I think of it in these terms. Lincoln was opposing the party "of the people" and "of popular sovereignty", who were essentially arguing that it took only a 51% majority to deprive a man of his freedom and liberty. The founders, yes slaveholder Jefferson himself, never qualified "All men are created equal" with "except where a majority says otherwise". Therefore, Lincoln and the Republicans, by opposing the extention of slavery and desiring to contain it in the hopes of killing it, were struggling to restore the values of the Republic that were being corrupted by the continued existance of slavery, as well as the notion that the majority vote was the end all be all of a free system. The tyranny of direct democracy being relived in a representative system. Is that not the ultimate ideal of modern conservativism? A system where there are checks and balances, even on the excesses of the populace? Where freedom comes not from the gov't (even an elected one) but it is given by god? Where the intent of the founders is respected, even if they themselves fell short of their own noblest ideals?

The GOP shouldn't abandon Lincoln, it should re-embrace him and seek to maintain that link with him. The Democrats still claim to be the party of the people, even if those people are urban and liberal isntead of rural and agrarian. That is why they maintain their links to Jefferson and Jackson. Why shouldn't the GOP maintain its links with Lincoln?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

But in any case Jefferson called himself a Republican.

Actually, I don't think he ever did.  The Party was called Democratic-Republicans.

Did you even read the Jefferson quote I gave earlier, or do you enjoy looking foolish?  The name Democratic-Republican is a largely ahistorical name given to them to distinguish them from the later National Republicans and the modern Republican Party.  Just like no one ever called himself the Byzantine Emperor, yet we refer to the Byzantine Empire when we wish to speak of the later Eastern Roman Empire of 395-1453.

Indeed, it was "basileus" or Emperor of the Romans.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I really dont like the 'our rights come from nature and god and not from government'....not only is it insulting to the non-religious, it is clearly not accurate. Our rights come from the constitution, the founding document of the government

Jefferson, a Democrat, does not agree.  

Jefferson was a Republican.

Equating the GOP founded in 1854 with the party founded by Jefferson in 1792 is very misleading as the GOP was far more Federalist/Whig, then anything else. On the other hand, Jackson's Democratic party had plenty in common with that of Jefferson in that it was agrarian and aimed far more at small farmers of the South and West.

And today's Democrats would follow the small government policies of Jefferson and Jackson?

The Federalist and Whig parties were the parties in favor of a robust Federal government capable of taking action.

But in any case Jefferson called himself a Republican.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That is because the commerical interests began to see gov't as a bigger threat to them than Daniel Shays or the Parisian mobs beheading people left and right, which is what motivated them in the first place to pursue a strong federal gov't in the 1780's and 1790's with the Federalists. We can probably debate the year that occured (somewhere between 1896 and 1932), but it isn't as if they change party's or their desires to have policies that favored business. The policies and ideological view of gov't deemed most likely to advance their interests changed in reaction to the "party of the people" deciding it was in their best interests to use gov't as a means of serving their interests.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

I really dont like the 'our rights come from nature and god and not from government'....not only is it insulting to the non-religious, it is clearly not accurate. Our rights come from the constitution, the founding document of the government

Jefferson, a Democrat, does not agree.  

Ayn Rand does.

Nope - she believed rights came from nature. As in, her view of human nature as consisting of autonomous individuality.  "Nature and Nature's God" is a claim that rights are intrinsic rather than extrinsic, but secular versions of this claim can exist as well.

Abraham Lincoln disagreed with you about what America's founding document was - subtract fourscore and seven years from 1863.  In some ways the debate over slavery in the US was between privileging the Declaration and its views of natural, inalienable rights, versus privileging the Constitution's acceptance of slavery. The Declaration identifies the source and character of our rights. If rights come from the government, the Declaration's entire argument for independence falls apart. The Constitution (in terms of the Bill of Rights) is more specific on what these rights are but isn't explicit on metaphysics.

Some local branches of Madison's party called themselves "Democratic-Republicans," perhaps as a way of distinguishing them from less democratically inclined members of a predominate party, but Republican was the name of the national party.

[fezzyfestoon]

Do you guys all realize how asinine this debate is? Trying to claim random historical figures for your party just because they were connected with entities that became your party hundreds of years later after going through dozens of total revamps and changes is ridiculous.

We almost all clearly draw upon the legacy of Jefferson and Lincoln, regardless of our party.

Almost all of us, at least.

Damn, you started off with such promise and just crashed and burned with the concept that modern American politics have anything to do with Jefferson or Lincoln.

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

Yankee, they've (the democrats) have abandoned Jefferson and Jackson and embraced Wilson, Roosevelt and Obama. I'm a lifelong Republican and  I personally don't trace my idealogical roots through Lincolin. This is my republican root tree. Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, Cleveland, Coolidge, Taft, Goldwater, Reagan, Paul. You do bring up a really strong point . Can't the GOP make an argument of claiming Jefferson and Madison as one of their own?

I guess my grandmas New Dealer roots have some side effects I need to get out of me without taking the positives out.

[Eraserhead]

CNN is wowed over Ryan's speech.  They're stopping just short of game changer.  Even James Carville says the Democrats should be nervous.

Really? The Hillary hack who still clearly hates Obama's guts says that Democrats should be nervous? Shocker.

[後援会]

CNN is wowed over Ryan's speech.  They're stopping just short of game changer.  Even James Carville says the Democrats should be nervous.

Really? The Hillary hack who still clearly hates Obama's guts says that Democrats should be nervous? Shocker.

Seriously, I love Obama kool-aid groupthink. It's hilarious. When dissent becomes treason.

I wonder if that's how people started to believe pushing through Obamacare was a good idea.

[Eraserhead]

CNN is wowed over Ryan's speech.  They're stopping just short of game changer.  Even James Carville says the Democrats should be nervous.

Really? The Hillary hack who still clearly hates Obama's guts says that Democrats should be nervous? Shocker.

Seriously, I love Obama kool-aid groupthink. It's hilarious. When dissent becomes treason.

I wonder if that's how people started to believe pushing through Obamacare was a good idea.

Umm, I don't like Obama. So yeah.

[後援会]

Oh. Fair enough. Sorry then.

[You kip if you want to...]

The RNC genuinely has zero enthusiasm.

[argentarius]

Is anyone else really annoyed how the media are acting like this is the Mitt Romney appreciation group convention and not the republican convention. It seems that any speech that doesn't fawn over him is treated like a failure because of it.

[Tender Branson]

When is The Mittens going to speak exactly, so I can set my clock and wake up ?

[Angel of Death]

When is The Mittens going to speak exactly, so I can set my clock and wake up ?

C-SPAN gives it at 10:25pm (ET).

[Eraserhead]

When does the "mystery speaker" come on?

[Likely Voter]

I'm hoping that Clint comes out wearing dark robes with a hood, only to pull it back at the last dramatic moment....he will then rip off the robes revealing he is carrying not one but two Smith & Wesson revolvers which he will calmly place on the podium and make no mention of.

you got that punk?

[tmthforu94]

I'm so excited and enthused for the convention tonight! Hopefully tonight will be as superb as last night was.

[Yank2133]

The RNC genuinely has zero enthusiasm.

Nope.

Conventions in general suck, but one headlined by Mitt Romney sucks even more.

Might watch preseason football........

[SPC]

The RNC genuinely has zero enthusiasm.

Nope.

Conventions in general suck, but one headlined by Mitt Romney sucks even more.

Might watch preseason football........

What are the odds that Romney's speech will be pre-empted by live footing of paint drying, since the latter has a better chance of captivating the audience enough to make them not change the channel?

[Peeperkorn]

At what time does live coverage begin?

[Likely Voter]

Romney excerpts
http://www.politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/2012/08/romney-convention-speech-i-wish-president-obama-had-133881.html

[Peeperkorn]

So the press get the speech earlier....do Americans know the notion of being spontaneous and/or great speakers? In the rest of the world a teleprompter candidate would be the worst gaffe possible