Something that will get a lot of republican replies..
 

I want to be politically uncorrect again...

I'm making my money and keeping an eye on US at least for the past 5 years, I've studied the US history and political system at the university, I've studied the US (or anglo saxon) legal system, I own several books regarding the US history and pop culture.

I use English more than my beautiful, but totally worthless mothers language, thanks that I also learned German so I have the only part of Europe that still knows what a real work is on my side.

Among my all time heroes are many Americans, including Ben Franklin or Robert McNamara (who's a little bit contraversial, but extremely bright).

I own more than 2000 music records, out of that about 80 pct. are artists who made it in US, about 80 pct. of my favourite movies are from US, I love the culture of the 50's 60's and 70's when there was no need to overplay if you had a great script.

That was just to assure myself I'm not entirely retarded and to prepair my ego for the massive, massive abuse I'm going to receive from the die hard Republicans out here after they read below.

Here we go:

1)

Does the Republican party appeal to the less educated / more dogmatic thinking / more ignorant class of the US society?


2)

Does the Republican party make it easier for their voters by offering more dogmatism against discussion?


3)

Are the republican voters really more ignorant, or is it also a matter of the neighborhood, where crows are herding with crows and you don't want to dissapoint your "community" by having another political views?

4)

Are the Republicans more liable to attack you in public for your political views than democrats?


And I'm NOT talking about money, because obviously if you inherit a billion of dollars, than usually you want to preserve it somehow and you want someone who'll shoot any bum who would try to break into your golden cage and you don't care who'll care about the bums or whatever.

And of course, I have no doubt there can be an excellent politician and a leader who's a republican as well as there can be an excellent politician and a leader who 's a democrat.

And I'm not in favor of any of those parties, as I believe to push serious structural changes is not a matter of your political preferences, but it's rather a matter of the personal spirit, power, dedication and personality.

I am a big fan of the political style of Barack Obama, I believe he's extremely qualified to act as a president of United States of America.

I hope he will be able to keep the lobby out of his back at least a little bit, and I do hope he'll be able to restore the trust that America lost, and that America deserves worldwide as a great nation, and a country that was a motor and inspiration for the world economy for many decades during the 20th century.

Hit me!

Real Republicans are now independents just so you know

Disclaimer: I am a Moderate Democrat and the answers I provide below are purely about the right wing of the GOP and not statements about actual Intellectual Conserrvatives or Moderate Republicans

1) Does the Republican party appeal to the less educated / more dogmatic thinking / more ignorant class of the US society?

Yes... I am not saying this purely to insult Republicans... The proof is in their own ideology.

Some Examples:

• They don't believe in evolution (which has been proven by the Human Genome Project).
• They believe that the Bible is the "Word of God" and infallible.
• They believe that "the gay" is a form of mental illness and can be cured by prayer
• They promote human life as it pertains to abortion but support the death penalty (even though there have been literally hundreds of cases of innocence proven after the fact)
• The don't believe government should interfere in your private life but want to ban gay marriage

2)Does the Republican party make it easier for their voters by offering more dogmatism against discussion?

Yes... http://www.conservapedia.com/Conservative
>> Literal interpretation of the Bible and rejection of evolutionism

3)Are the republican voters really more ignorant, or is it also a matter of the neighborhood, where crows are herding with crows and you don't want to dissapoint your "community" by having another political views?

I think the answer to this question is subjective person-to-person... but there certainly is alot of evidence to prove ignorance on the part of members of the Republican Party.

The majority of the scurrilous claims made on this page are espoused by the majority of the right wing of the GOP... so much that even members of Congress have stated they believe it.
http://www.conservapedia.com/Barack_Obama

4)Are the Republicans more liable to attack you in public for your political views than democrats?

I think that this depends on the person really. However, I know for a fact that the GOP is much more willing to ostracize and publicly ridicule anyone that offends their ideology. Just ask any Atheist how they are treated by Republicans when the discussion is public.

I'm afraid Carlos that it has become quite apparent over the last couple of years that there is no big difference between the Democrats and the Republicans. They both love big biz and big gov.

im libertarian, you want drugs, porn, and guns, go for it.

and keep the X in Xmas!

I don't agree with this statement... if you are talking about washington politicians this might apply... but it doesn't apply to the average citizen.

I agree...I was speaking in regards to the politicians.....not much choice between the 2.:mad:

The meat of your thread makes it very apparent that you are not an American and only have an outside media fed view of America. All of your comments actually apply to both parties these days. Americans in general are being led and hearded by power hungry and money hungry politicians.

Unfortunately the American political system has been for sale now for many years and the insiders from both political parties have abused the trust of the American people and driven this country into the toilet.

Does the Republican party appeal to the less educated / more dogmatic thinking /ignorant class of the US society?

No. There was a time when Republicans were supported by the independent voters & commanded majority rule. President Reagan won 49 states in 1984. The Christians destroyed the party & are responsible for its situation today. They gave the ?middle? away to the democrats.

Does the Republican party make it easier for their voters by offering more dogmatism against discussion?

You ever try having a ?discussion? with an anti fur activist? Or a global warming ideologue? There is no difference in either parties extremists.

Are the republican voters really more ignorant, or is it also a matter of the neighborhood, where crows are herding with crows and you don't want to dissapoint your "community" by having another political views?

Republican voters have changed. There used to be independents & economic republicans in the party. They were driven out by Bush. Everything you believe about the party is because of Bush & the Christians.

Are the Republicans more liable to attack you in public for your political views than democrats?

No. There are plenty of left wing nuts that will do the same thing.

I agree.

well at least by 1984 even old Ronnie figured out which party he wanted to be in lol

The problem with these Reagan-loving Republican wannabes of today is even their idol was a flip flopping party switcher, the whole "Reagan Democrat" thing is silly and shows how they are nothing more than idealogical fence sitters who go whichever way Bill Oreilly points them now.

remember Rons big quote: "I didn't leave the Democratic Party. The party left me." LOL

1. Yes ... Southern red states, perfect example.
2. Yes ... They really know how to K.I.S.S. (keep it simple, stupid)
3. Maybe ... However, ignorance in America practically knows no boundaries
4. Maybe ... Depends on what you mean by "attack"

i think the reagan democrats are now just democrats. people think obama is a big lib but he is actually a centrist. if he was as lefty as kerry then Palin would be running the show today. sadly both parties have abandoned the idea of fiscal responsibility so moderate republicans, who are republican on economic issues but liberal on the social issues, they have nowhere to go. its really not healthy to have one party rule. there is nothing to stop obama from spending this country to bankruptcy. with the blob of baby boomers retiring, its just a matter of time. repubs will be back when they realize it was the economy, & not christ, that made them a majority party.

Anyone who doesn't agree with Obama's administration these days is more or less considered a terrorist. When Bush was in office anyone who didn't agree with his ways was considered terrorist. Everyone needs to check themselves who thinks people shouldn't be critical of ANY political figure. I think both are/were lying pieces of shit. The truth is both of them are working towards a "common purpose" (Look that up for the UK/EU) and working with the Counsel on Foreign Relations among others. The entire White House, Congress, and most of the House is full of CFR much like the UK/EU is full of Common Purpose. Nothing has changed between Bush and Obama. Nothing. It's still the same agenda just a different puppets selling it. By the time Obama's first term is up he will be so despised both sides of that political spectrum will be nothing but history. Hopefully sooner because this country and the world for that matter can't take much more of what these people on both sides of the pond are doing to it.

the answer to all of those questions is no.
you simply have that impression because of the ultra liberal filter that your information comes to you by.

You could ask the same questions about the Democrats and the answers would be the same.

I'm with CIVMatt here the real Liberty loving people in this country have abandoned both major parties. They are independents, constitutionalists and libertarians.

We have given government so much control over our lives that it is now consuming us, it has become ridiculous, you can't even pay me to clip your toenails without my having permission from the government to do it and making sure the government gets its cut...and I don't mean of the clippings.

Sadly we have no place left to go where we can be free.

:2 cents:

Nevertheless, I doubt anyone can match the trick the last version of republican ubermensch mob pulled - a second most expensive war conflict in US history without any real result apart from destabilizing one of the most stable countries in the middle East.

Well I sure expected your answer to be more nasty.

:winkwink:

Yes, I have to admit that, unfortunately I don't remember (meaning remember well) personally anyone else than Bill Clinton and George Bush Jr. which is of course flawing the impression, as it's a day and a night, if we would be talking about political qualities / abilities.

Unfortunately, the Bush legislative gave Republicans a very bad name.

I actually kind of liked John McCain, I guess he mainly lost because of Bush and the past 8 years.

Try to live in Europe and you'll emmigrate back within weeks.

This is just my opinion:
1)Does the Republican party appeal to the less educated / more dogmatic thinking / more ignorant class of the US society?
I don't think it does any more than the democrats appeal to the lesser educated liberals. For me the main difference is that the democrats have convinced a group of people that they can't exist without the governments help while the republicans have managed to convince an entire group of people to vote against their own best interests (from a financial standpoint). If you look over the last 28 years (since Reagan won in 1980) we have had 20 years of Republicans in the white house and 8 years of democrats. During that time we also had 16 years where the republicans owned the senate and 6 years where they owned the senate, house and white house. During this time the average annual income in the country has gone up $9,000 per year (adjusted to today's dollar) of that $7,500 came during the 8 Clinton years and the other $1500 is spread out across the three republicans. It is pretty clear that if you make very little money it is in your best interest (financially speaking) to vote democrat. They are more likely to give you a tax cut or credit or they are more likely to start/fund some kind of program that will benefit you. The proof is in the pudding. Under Clinton the middle and working class took a big pay increase. Under the others they gained little and in most years gained nothing or actually lost money. Yet, the republicans have convinced many poor, religious people to vote for them because they have convinced them that the evil democrats will force them to have abortions, take away their deer hunting rifles and teach their 6 year old how to put a condom on with their mouth.

2)Does the Republican party make it easier for their voters by offering more dogmatism against discussion?
On some issues yes and on others no. During the Bush years though there was a feeling by many republicans that if you didn't support Bush, the Patriot Act and the war in Iraq you were somehow not a patriot. The republicans do have it easier on some levels. They can point the finger and yell, "Liberal!" and they have been able to turn that word into some kind of evil statement. Those in the middle are not offended because they don't see themselves as liberals and even most liberals are not offended because to them it isn't a bad thing, but for hardcore republicans "liberal" is the ultimate slur. Yet the democrats can't return the favor and say, "Religious whack job!" Because there are a lot of people in the middle who are religious and would take offense to that. So in some ways the republicans can offer a more dogmatic point of view.

3)Are the republican voters really more ignorant, or is it also a matter of the neighborhood, where crows are herding with crows and you don't want to dissapoint your "community" by having another political views?

I think it is an even mix. I was listening to Howard Stern before the election and they sent a guy into Harlem to ask people there about Obama. As you would expect he enjoyed huge support in that neighborhood. The catch was they asked the people about their support for Obama's policies only they used all of McCain's instead and every single person they talked to agreed with these policies and were ready to vote for Obama. They had no idea where he stood on the issues, but they were ready to vote for him. So I think ignorance is all over the place. People use a lot of stupid reasons to choose who and what they vote for so I don't think it is contained to one party. If I had to pick I would say the republicans are a little more ignorant simply because of the religion aspect. There was a piece on CNN where they went to a conservative part of Ohio during the election and talked to about 10 different people. All of them said the same thing. They said they thought Obama had better ideas and would be a better president, but they were not voting for him because he was pro choice. As long as a candidate is pro life they will vote for him. That is the deciding factor for them. When you operate in such absolutes you open yourself up to ignorance.

4)Are the Republicans more liable to attack you in public for your political views than democrats?
I don't think they are any more than the democrats are willing to attack. The only possible option is the liberal argument I made above, but in my life I have probably seen more democrats and liberals protesting than conservatives and republicans.

Anyway, sorry for the long post.

This is true. Both parties want you to believe that they are the majority in this country when it isn't true. More people are registering as independents these days (or switching party affiliations to independent) than both parties combined.

The hard part is getting the independents to actually vote for an independent candidate. If everyone that complained about only have two choices for president had voted for a third party candidate, we would have a third party in this country. No, they wouldn't have won, but they would have gotten a lot of votes, qualified for federal matching funds, gotten a ton of press and put themselves on the map and in a good position to elect people at the local and state levels and make a legit white house run in the next election.

But people won't do that. They would rather pick one of the two and bitch about it than actually do something about it.

I live in a pretty ok neighborhood. my immediate neighbors are dentist, lawyer, restaurant owner, insurance company owner, hedge fund owner, and several others. out of about the 15 or so of us, there's one democrat.
I guess we could all be stupid but odds are against it. :winkwink:

if this is true. its simply luck of the draw. wait 4 years and look at it again. :winkwink:

In other words, could this be also very badly paraphrased that democrats are more targeting the poor and problematic while Republicans target more the conservative / orthodox among of those less educated classes?


Interesting observation, regarding the "patriot act" I doubt they had other chance to justify their huge theft of government money called Iraq other way than to paint a new devil on the wall and call all "patriots" to arms.

Good point, absolutely believe that.

Thanks for the long post

I doubt there is a realistic chance of any independent candidate having a real chance in the two parties climate and dedicated core voters.

But, let's try to fantasize, who could this be?

Is there a personality, that would be so universal, that people COULD consider voting for, no matter what their party preference is?

Nowhere did I mention that money would be the matter of the question, I would even expect more of the poorer classes voting democrats aka more benefits (at least on the paper).

If I do have money, than of course my main interest is to preserve it.

no, you mentioned intelligence. Only unsuccessful idiots believe that success is about luck.
Ergo, in my experience, the intelligent vote republican.

I just looked up an overview of the 20th century presidents and among my favorite personalities that I've at least read about, it's about 50 / 50 republicans vs. democrats.

I'm a huge fan of Calvin Coolidge actually, I think he was the coolest president in the US history, ever since I read the US modern history book for the first time, I knew that the "Silent Cal" had to be the man, I'll go visit his museum one day.

He's an absolutely cult figure among those good friends, who're also interested in modern history!

I think the democrats knowingly go after the poor and problematic. They are the party that doesn't want anyone to fail. They are the party that wants everyone to be equal and I think they purposely target those who are in need.

The republicans do target lower income people as well, but I think they do it more from the religion aspect. They target them with things they know will sell like gun control and abortion and a strong military.

To me it is just opposite sides of the coin. Both parties target poor people with their ideals, they just go after different demographics and use different tactics.




If Clinton would have tried to pass the patriot act (during a time when there was no terrorist attack on US soil) the republican ran house and senate would have tore him apart. Only when the nation was scared and looking for security was something like this possible. The modern republican party is nothing like the republican party used to be. They are not for less government. Under Bush they created an entire new branch of government (homeland security) and the patriot act alone is one of the biggest piece of government intervention crap ever to pass. They say they are for less government, but really they are not. They say they are for more state and local government's rights. But that is not true either. They are for those rights, as long as those rights coincide with what they believe. For example, the state I live in passed a measure making doctor assisted suicide legal. The Bush administration ran to the state and challenged it. The challenge kind of worked and it ended up back on the ballot where it passed again and again they challenged it. Eventually their challenges were overruled and the law was put into effect to which they then said they may still go after doctors who prescribe the drugs on a federal level. They did the same thing with medical marijuana.

To me it is all a means to an end. The democrats will use the economy and they will use the excuse of helping those who cannot help themselves or who are less fortunate as a way to pass their far reaching government programs. The republicans will use the "sanctity of life" and the security of the country as their way of doing the exact same things.

It is true. And it may just be dumb luck that things worked out that way. As for the next four years. I guess we will know then.

I disagree. Not too long ago Ross Perot got a lot of votes. He was kind of a nut case and if it wasn't for his dropping out and acting kind of crazy he probably would have gotten more. His reform party had money, had a large collection of people who were part of it or willing to vote with them and they even help elect Jesse Ventura governor or Minnesota. Then they collapsed on themselves. I thin it was for a few reasons. The didn't have much of a party infrastructure, they didn't have a party "line" so people didn't know what they generally stood for then they started picking stupid candidates like Pat Buchanan.

It is not something that would happen overnight, but it could happen. Just about everyone I know expresses how they don't like the two candidates we eventually end up with during presidential elections. If all of those people voted third party it would shake things up in a hurry.

The question is, if even that successful and intelligent individual voting democrats is still intelligent and successful considering your party preference.

:winkwink:

Yes, know a bit about that case, but who could be THAT independent candidate?

How were Bloomberg's preferences, is he not too much of a business identified person that doesn't have that much to say to masses?

Who could it be - Mel Gibson, Oprah Winfrey, Jesus?

Damn y'all stay stuck in the bullshit Republican/Democrat paradigm huh? When the fuck are you going to wake up?

The republicans never had majority rule in this country.That's why they started courting the religious starting with the moral majority. If they didnt start appealing to wackos it was getting harder and to win elections. The dems controled the senate and congress for 40 yrs.

Ignore 12clicks. His vision of reality is rather blurred by his political preferences.

Here's a good answer to the first question you asked:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politic..._United_States

Probably meant to say his "version" of reality... nice try though...

This is actually a great remark I forgot to quote.

No, I meant to say "vision". Although "perception" might have been a better word. Either way, however, "version" most definitely wasn't the word I was going for. Blurred vision, after all, makes rather more sense than a blurred version.

No, you could not say the same about both parties. There's a damn good reason why most people with a higher education are democrat/liberal. I'm pretty sure that obviously intelligent repubs such as 12clicks have some kind of childhood trauma that is affecting their decision making in this regard, or he just liked John Wayne's characters a little too much. This claim that all politicians are the same is bullshit as well. A copout so you don't have to feel guilty about educating yourself about individuals in our government.

That is the million dollar question. A celeb? No. It would have to be someone like Bloomberg who has some kind of experience running a business or a city or state. Maybe a former governor or mayor of a big city. Or someone like Ron Paul who is affiliated with big party, but who doesn't really subscribe to many of their philosophies.

This person would need to have a pretty good chunk of money or some connections that could get them cash and do some fund raising.

It wouldn't be easy, but it could be done. Take for example if 15 million people who were not happy with either Obama or McCain voted for Bob Barr? The day after the election he would be the talk of the nation. He would have instant credibility and a voice on the national stage. He could use that instant fame to raise money and bring a message to a national stage. It would be up to him to then take that fame and manifest it into something of substance, but if nothing else it would send a message to both the republicans and the democrats that they better get their shit together.

serious post I want to give a serious answer. I think there are 2 factors that lead toward republicans having any power at all.

they appeal to
1) the religious minded, america is far more religious than other first world countries and that lends itself to conservativeness.

2) money. the dream and idea that they will one day be rich and should not pay a lot of taxes. even the obama plan that goes back to pre-last president tax rates for the top 2%


But the reality is that there are 79 more dems in the congress and that will drive Obama to the left and they are only 1 vote away from not having any power at all in the senate. And probably 2 liberal appointments to the court during the obama first term should change things for the better.

our politics is in deep shit because both parties suck balls.

Lots of reasons to reject the republicans. They sold out the idea of balancing budgets, small government & low taxes. They sacrificed these ideas so they could fight a "crusade" against terrorism, force terry shiavo to stay alive & let main street do anything they wanted so long as the lobbyists keep the campaign money flowing (Delay inc)

Dems are not a better party. They do not stand for the ideas of our founding fathers, which is that of limiting the power of government to regulate the people. Dems want to use the power of government to redistribute wealth from working people to lazy dumbasses like Octomom, allow unqualified students into law school over qualified ones because their skin is darker, & wants amnesty for illegal immigrants & george bush. Why bother enforcing our laws after they are broken, right Obama?

I do think the repubs took things too far with limiting government power. They seem to think that means the government should do no oversight (SEC, FDA) should not be prepared for disasters (FEMA), & they should give corporate america whatever it wants (bank & energy deregulation). Worse, they think the government should limit the freedoms of minorities they dislike (porn, gays) So i cannot defend this republican party.

But don't be fooled that Dems will protect our free speech because all the dems & Bill Clinton passed COPA. If it were not for the federal courts, there would be no porn in america at all. Obamas only solution to problems is more government & more spending. Show me one thing he does not want to spend more money on.

Just understand that neither party stands for people that truly believe in limited government & freedom. Those people are now independents, libertarians, ron paul dead enders, & bloggers. There is no party for that.

what do you tell them *YOU* do though? LOL

"nice to meet you mr Mainstream, can i take pics of your daighter?"

1)

Does the Republican party appeal to the less educated / more dogmatic thinking / more ignorant class of the US society?


this question is filled with nuance. in many cases yes, their primary power base is made of people who tend to be very closed minded and vote from a sense of "morality" coupled with fear of large government (which is ironic for so many reasons, but that's another discussion). the modern republican party figured out the power of the more dogmatic/religious part of the country around the era of ray-gun. it's a front though. they have the incredible ability to convince these people to constantly vote against their actual interest (economic specifically) under the guise of preserving the morals and security of this country. it's really a strange paradox. bottom line, they use emotional knee jerk reactions to hot button issues to get votes, however the people who really benefit from that party being in power are the minority in that particular caucus.

2)

Does the Republican party make it easier for their voters by offering more dogmatism against discussion?


yes, that is the whole point of it. it provides people with a platform based more on zealotry and emotional response than on actual reason. it's much easier to vote from your gut than to actually sit down and think an issue through. the way the party markets their beliefs allows for people to have reasonable justification for their stance without having to examine the issue and think things through.

3)

Are the republican voters really more ignorant, or is it also a matter of the neighborhood, where crows are herding with crows and you don't want to dissapoint your "community" by having another political views?


it's a bit of both. in most cases it seems that you start with a person who wants their beliefs reinforced instead of challenged and that becomes compounded with a lack of knowledge about the actual issues and an inability or unwillingness to logically examine facts. this isn't the case for all of them of course, but the vast majority of their voting block seems to support that. you will also have the people who are more of the barry goldwater type that are just sticking with the party because they know nothing else, or like the other party even less. that is one of the biggest problems with having a two party system. while you do have the benefit of a very stable system of government, most of the time it removes any real choice from the system and you always end up with a compromise.

4)

Are the Republicans more liable to attack you in public for your political views than democrats?


yes. i have experienced this more times than i care to count. they will be aggressive with their beliefs and try to brow beat you in to agreeing with them. when that doesn't work, or when you clearly prove that they don't have a firm grasp on the information surrounding the issue they will either start saying really nasty, often personal things, or will do the political equivalent of stick their fingers in their ears so they can't hear you. that is one of the things that has always frustrated me the most about dealing with them. i am willing to admit when i am wrong, or don't understand something completely. i am willing to change my opinion if i find better evidence supporting a contrary opinion. generally speaking though this is not the case with modern neo cons. there is honestly enough here for me to right a fucking thesis on. it's a complex problem without a visible solution. the only way it is going to be fixed is if people wake up and actually start thinking for themselves rather than allowing people to dictate their thoughts based on a few emotional issues.

i tend to vote democrat, obviously, but not because of choice. i usually tend to be about a 50/50 split with where my issues lie, but it just so happens that the issues the democrats tend to support mean more to me than the ones the republicans support. it's really not a good position to be in. i hate siding with one party specifically but with the degeneration of the modern republican party i don't really feel that i have much choice.

what i really want is a party of common sense individuals that decide things on an issue by issue basis instead of knowing their opinion based on a by line.

As yours is blurred by your lack of success in all aspects of life

Just as you can't imagine my life, I can't imagine yours. :jester: