Beth Fukumoto switching parties
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 11:51:24 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Gubernatorial/State Elections (Moderators: Brittain33, GeorgiaModerate, Gass3268, Virginiá, Gracile)
  Beth Fukumoto switching parties
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3]
Author Topic: Beth Fukumoto switching parties  (Read 4500 times)
Figueira
84285
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,175


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #50 on: February 05, 2017, 10:37:40 AM »

You don't have to be "far left" to oppose Trump or to hold liberal views on women's issues, haha.

You certainly can't really be a Republican with those opinions, though. At least not openly.

You can call yourself a Republican and have any viewpoint.

But  I was responding to someone who called the women's marches "far left."
Logged
MasterJedi
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,554
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #51 on: February 05, 2017, 10:47:17 AM »

Yea, the Northern Strategy is not one I support. It may have worked in 2016, but it won't long term.

Minority Outreach is a must have for a future GOP.

You had that chance after 2012, you've lost that chance after 2016. The base hates minorities and the fiscal conservatives want to cut off all aid to anyone who's poor, especially minorities. Threatening to send in the Feds to minority areas isn't going to work.
Logged
Deblano
EdgarAllenYOLO
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,680
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #52 on: February 05, 2017, 02:07:40 PM »

She didn't leave the party.  The party left her.
Not so much left her, as literally forced her out.
Logged
hopper
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,414
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #53 on: February 05, 2017, 03:13:04 PM »

Yea, the Northern Strategy is not one I support. It may have worked in 2016, but it won't long term.

Minority Outreach is a must have for a future GOP.

You had that chance after 2012, you've lost that chance after 2016. The base hates minorities and the fiscal conservatives want to cut off all aid to anyone who's poor, especially minorities. Threatening to send in the Feds to minority areas isn't going to work.
Hate is a strong word but you are always gonna have people that have crazy views wether it be on the left or the right. The Republicans have had chances to cut off aid to the poor in the from 2001-2006 when they had control of the whole government and they didn't do it and I doubt Trump is gonna sign off on cutting aid to the poor.
Logged
MasterJedi
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,554
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #54 on: February 05, 2017, 04:42:09 PM »

Yea, the Northern Strategy is not one I support. It may have worked in 2016, but it won't long term.

Minority Outreach is a must have for a future GOP.

You had that chance after 2012, you've lost that chance after 2016. The base hates minorities and the fiscal conservatives want to cut off all aid to anyone who's poor, especially minorities. Threatening to send in the Feds to minority areas isn't going to work.
Hate is a strong word but you are always gonna have people that have crazy views wether it be on the left or the right. The Republicans have had chances to cut off aid to the poor in the from 2001-2006 when they had control of the whole government and they didn't do it and I doubt Trump is gonna sign off on cutting aid to the poor.

The party then was much more mainstream conservatism. The Tea Party groups and fiscal crazies weren't in control then like they are now. They're starting on it in Wisconsin, to cut of people from welfare if they use drugs/can't find employment, even if they have children.
Logged
FairBol
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,807
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #55 on: February 08, 2017, 11:33:49 AM »

One of the Republicans that serves in my hometown just flipped as well....sucks.  Sad
Logged
ajc0918
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,862
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #56 on: February 08, 2017, 01:08:20 PM »

One of the Republicans that serves in my hometown just flipped as well....sucks.  Sad

Who? What position?
Logged
Young Conservative
youngconservative
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,029
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #57 on: February 08, 2017, 09:44:47 PM »

From what I read, She hasn't left yet. She's only considering it. Regardless, she's more liberal than a lot of Hawaii Democrats...
Logged
smoltchanov
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,376
Russian Federation


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #58 on: February 08, 2017, 11:17:57 PM »

From what I read, She hasn't left yet. She's only considering it. Regardless, she's more liberal than a lot of Hawaii Democrats...

So what?? Every Republican legislator must be more conservative then all Democrats??? Bull*hit...
Logged
SATW
SunriseAroundTheWorld
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,463
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #59 on: February 08, 2017, 11:37:16 PM »

From what I read, She hasn't left yet. She's only considering it. Regardless, she's more liberal than a lot of Hawaii Democrats...

So what?? Every Republican legislator must be more conservative then all Democrats??? Bull*hit...

Yes, the point of political parties is not to be erratic in ideology. I support having strong pragmatic and centrist wings in both parties. But I am 100% opposed to having arch-conservative Democrats and arch-liberal Republicans. Hyperpartisanship is horrible for a society, but some level of partisanship is necessary to have a coherent ideology.

Logged
smoltchanov
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,376
Russian Federation


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #60 on: February 08, 2017, 11:55:36 PM »
« Edited: February 08, 2017, 11:57:22 PM by smoltchanov »

From what I read, She hasn't left yet. She's only considering it. Regardless, she's more liberal than a lot of Hawaii Democrats...

So what?? Every Republican legislator must be more conservative then all Democrats??? Bull*hit...

Yes, the point of political parties is not to be erratic in ideology. I support having strong pragmatic and centrist wings in both parties. But I am 100% opposed to having arch-conservative Democrats and arch-liberal Republicans. Hyperpartisanship is horrible for a society, but some level of partisanship is necessary to have a coherent ideology.



The key word is some. Obviously Republican party will be mostly conservative, and Democratic - mostly liberal for conceivable future. But, as i said many times - US has only 2 big political parties, and so the keyword here is mostly. Not 5-6 parties (and even more), as in Europe, where there is an ample choice for voters of any  ideological sort - from communists to ultra-rightists. In US a people like me now have no party to vote for, because there is no "party of center" anymore (earlier more or less composed from minority wings of both parties), but a big gaping hole. For Democrats we are "too conservative", for Republicans -"way too liberal". So, i greatly prefer a situation of 1970th, when i began to study American poilitics (yes, with Javits and Case on one side, and with Gramm and Stump and even McDonald - on other) to present boring uniformity and "litmus tests". Not long ago Republicans were able, for example, to win seats in Marin county (California), and on Manhattan, while Democrats were quite competitive in Deep South (with proper candidates). What now??? Ideologically pure bubbles? Idiocy..
Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,357


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #61 on: February 09, 2017, 01:39:43 AM »

From what I read, She hasn't left yet. She's only considering it. Regardless, she's more liberal than a lot of Hawaii Democrats...

So what?? Every Republican legislator must be more conservative then all Democrats??? Bull*hit...

Yes, the point of political parties is not to be erratic in ideology. I support having strong pragmatic and centrist wings in both parties. But I am 100% opposed to having arch-conservative Democrats and arch-liberal Republicans. Hyperpartisanship is horrible for a society, but some level of partisanship is necessary to have a coherent ideology.



On social issues i believe it should be based on what states you represent.  So dems in south should be more socially conservative then republicans in the north east .
Logged
smoltchanov
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,376
Russian Federation


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #62 on: February 09, 2017, 04:15:19 AM »

From what I read, She hasn't left yet. She's only considering it. Regardless, she's more liberal than a lot of Hawaii Democrats...

So what?? Every Republican legislator must be more conservative then all Democrats??? Bull*hit...

Yes, the point of political parties is not to be erratic in ideology. I support having strong pragmatic and centrist wings in both parties. But I am 100% opposed to having arch-conservative Democrats and arch-liberal Republicans. Hyperpartisanship is horrible for a society, but some level of partisanship is necessary to have a coherent ideology.



On social issues i believe it should be based on what states you represent.  So dems in south should be more socially conservative then republicans in the north east .

+100. I always said "district rules!". In South a Democrat with socially conservative and economically centrist (usually, sometimes even moderate conservative) views is perfectly natural, because considerable part (frequently - a majority) of district voters hold these views. In North-East an economivcally centrist and socially liberal Republican is as natural because of the same reason. But national parties often insist on "party purity and discipline" and run "loyal soldiers", who hold a views unacceptable to majority of district voters, and thus unelectable, but "fit national mold". BOTH parties...
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderators
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #63 on: February 09, 2017, 10:42:19 AM »

Its only natural to switch because it opens up opportunities for advancement.
Logged
smoltchanov
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,376
Russian Federation


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #64 on: February 09, 2017, 11:20:38 AM »

Its only natural to switch because it opens up opportunities for advancement.

In Hawaii - yes. Mike Gabbard switched in 2007 (despite being rather socially conservative Republican before that), and, by the same logic - many Democrats switch to Republican party in the South. But there is a minus too: it leads to the above mentioned "ideologically pure bubbles" with, essentially, 1-party system almost of authocratic sort. Try to be a conservative Republican in SF, or a liberal Democrat in North Texas - you will need a lot of nerves, endurance and character..
Logged
RINO Tom
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,002
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.45, S: -0.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #65 on: February 09, 2017, 11:33:53 AM »

From what I read, She hasn't left yet. She's only considering it. Regardless, she's more liberal than a lot of Hawaii Democrats...

So what?? Every Republican legislator must be more conservative then all Democrats??? Bull*hit...

Yes, the point of political parties is not to be erratic in ideology. I support having strong pragmatic and centrist wings in both parties. But I am 100% opposed to having arch-conservative Democrats and arch-liberal Republicans. Hyperpartisanship is horrible for a society, but some level of partisanship is necessary to have a coherent ideology.

The extent to which either of these existed, of course, is grossly exaggerated by high school history teachers so that they can explain to teenagers why the South and North once voted differently and fit it into a day-long unit, LOL.
Logged
smoltchanov
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,376
Russian Federation


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #66 on: February 09, 2017, 11:45:31 AM »

From what I read, She hasn't left yet. She's only considering it. Regardless, she's more liberal than a lot of Hawaii Democrats...

So what?? Every Republican legislator must be more conservative then all Democrats??? Bull*hit...

Yes, the point of political parties is not to be erratic in ideology. I support having strong pragmatic and centrist wings in both parties. But I am 100% opposed to having arch-conservative Democrats and arch-liberal Republicans. Hyperpartisanship is horrible for a society, but some level of partisanship is necessary to have a coherent ideology.

The extent to which either of these existed, of course, is grossly exaggerated by high school history teachers so that they can explain to teenagers why the South and North once voted differently and fit it into a day-long unit, LOL.

Yeah. Even the most liberal Republicans (like those i mentioned) were closer to pragmatic moderate-liberal Democrats of their time then to "bold progressives" of today. And even the most conservative Democrats of post-World war II period (say, in House), with possible lone exception of Larry McDonald, were still somewhat more pragmatic and less ideologically conservative then truly conservative Republicans...
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3]  
« 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 0.052 seconds with 11 queries.