Skip to comments.Should the GOP dump social issues?
Posted on 03/31/2013 10:26:22 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Recently reporter Thomas Edsall - who has spent most of the last 30 years covering politics for the Washington Post and the New Republic - had some advice for the GOP. He draws upon some recent polling data to argue that "the Republican Party can afford to marginalize . . . Christian right leaders because evangelical social conservatives . . . are not going to vote Democratic." Thus, he reasons that Republicans can, as he puts it, "concede defeat in the culture war" in the hopes of picking up more socially liberal voters.
Mr. Edsall might want to check with Governor Mike Huckabee, who knows a thing or two about evangelical voters. Huckabee suggested that evangelicals will "take a walk" from the GOP if the party supports gay marriage. He might also want to consider the 1996 Presidential election, when Bill Clinton carried red states such as Kentucky, Tennessee, West Virginia, Missouri, and Louisiana.
President Clinton's wife is the likely Democratic nominee in 2016, and it's safe to say that the Clintons - with their deep roots in Arkansas - know how to reach evangelical voters, especially if the GOP acts like it doesn't want them. I would also note that in both 2008 and 2012, the GOP did nominate Presidential candidates who were not popular with social conservatives - and those candidates fared poorly in the fall campaign. Next time around, conservative voters might just stay home, or throw their support to a democrat who they see as more sympathetic to the middle class. But, of course, the question of what sort of culture our children are going to inherit is a lot more important than the results of any one election.
The social issues are not merely a political football...
(Excerpt) Read more at lauraingraham.com ...
I thought they already had.
Dumpe social issues?
Like life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.....sure why not, what good are they anyway.
This implies that they didn’t already dump them...not to mention every other type of issue.
No! They should DEFINE them.
and all those voters with them?
Liberals keep moving the goal posts of what words mean.
Call them on it.
its not like they are fiscally conservative either
//the Republican Party can afford to marginalize . . . Christian right leaders because evangelical social conservatives . . . are not going to vote Democratic.” //
Newsflash...some of us don’t vote Republican anymore either.
They dumped us a long time ago, Romney was the last straw. It is time to dump them for a CONSERVATIVE party and let them go the way of the whigs.
I am a Christian first, a conservative second, and left the GOP and joined the Constitution party.
Should the GOP keep selling out . . . ? What’s left to sell? They’ve all but signed their souls on the infernal dotted line in their own blood.
The "social issues" would be properly addressed if "conservatives" would quit voting for statism and collectivism at the federal level. Look where were are now - about 3 X the global GDP in debt - $150+ TRILLION and counting.
Run for office or elect conservatives at the state and local level where social issues can be lawfully addressed.
The GOP should focus on the budget and related economic issues. The cost of government is leading to many social ills.
But, the GOP will not focus on the budget and related economic issues because they are pigs at the trough not interested the least in reducing the size of government.
i don’t care , i am done with ‘em as a whole. until rino leadership is gone and conservatives run it, i’m done with em as a group.
PELLEY: Well, the platform as written at this convention for the Republicans does not allow for exceptions on abortion with regard to the health of the mother or rape or incest. Is that where you are?
ROMNEY: No. My position has been clear throughout this campaign. Im in favor of abortion being legal in the case of rape and incest, and the health and life of the mother.
Should the GOP dump social issues?
***Speaking as a socon, they already have. The GOP is on the same road the Whigs were on when the Republican party was formed. How many Whigs do you know today? The GOP is similarly doomed.
From my home page...
Im a big tent republican.
Heres an analogy to work with. Take a small box and fill it with some rocks. Then add some rice, filling it to the top. Now take all the same stuff, but in a different order. Put in the rice first, then add the rocks. What youll find is that if you put in the big stuff first, the small stuff will fit around it. But if you put in the small stuff first, the big stuff wont have room. The republican tent is the box. The Big issues are the socon issues, to be put in first. The little issues are things that can be accommodated around the bigger stuff. A candidate who tries to focus on the smaller issues first and leave out the bigger issues has no way of getting all of us into the tent. He splits the party. The candidate who gets the big stuff right and as much of the little stuff that will fit, he can fit more into the tent. Were often amazed at how much rice can keep fitting in. Folks such as Rudy or Romney flunk some of the big issues, and on some of the little issues it looks to me like anyone elses rice would do just as well. All that remains for us to agree on is which are the bedrock principles and which are not. Why would there be so much invective aimed at rudy or romney from the right? Because there are some bedrock principles that he is leaving out. Bad move. I see rudybot and romneybot postings all the time saying that they would vote for Hunter or Palin, and I see socon postings that say they would not vote for rudy or romney. Thats a BIG indicator of a few bedrock principles that are being left outside the tent in order to let in some rice.
"What difference does it make?"
Only if they wish to win women’s votes.
The GOP doesn't have to dump social issues; they just need people who can argue their case like mature adults.
If the social issues had been debated from a constitutional perspective, the culture war would have been won forty years ago. The right to life would have been preserved as a 4th Amendment guarantee. Ditto the other blatant abuses of Amendments 1, 2, 4, 5, 9, and 10.
The GOP doesn’t even stand up for the constitution. The GOP is statist pure and simple.
However, conservatives should drop the marriage thing; we’ve lost. We let them control the verbiage and they got us. Gay marriage is out of the tube and no one is getting it back in. It’s a question of when.
We have a real chance with abortion. If diversity is to be praised, then we need to consider the human rights of the old and the very young on the same level. Grandpa might not be convenient when he’s got alzheimers and the kids are busy with their own families. A baby on the way when you’re not married etc is also not convenient. But they both have rights.
We need to fight more for religious freedom for Christians. Jews and Muslims enjoy a certain deference for their religions in USA public life. Christians do not. At my local mall, a “White Rabbit” came for the last few weekends. Gd forbid they call him an Easter bunny. Passover is allowed to speak its name: no one calls it Flat Cracker Week. During Ramadan no one has to say The One Where We Eat Only After Sundown. But we have Holiday Trees and White Rabbits so as not to offend non Christians with the actual names of their holiday.
Sme of these social issues are pure freedom issues and we need to keep fighting for them.
Lifestyle choice is freedom. If people can marry anyone they like, then people should also be free to homeschool, to raise their children in any religion, and to refuse medical treatment or eat weird things.
It’s all about the constitution. Liberty.
You destroy Virtue, you collapse civil society.
“Free Republics need to promote public Virtue.” (Montesquieu). The only purpose for “education” is to teach Virtue (all Founders and goes back to Socrates).
Sex Ed in public schools is destroying the morality of children. Google Lukacs and how he collapsed Hungary with Sex Ed.
All economic disasters come from a immoral society-—you can’t have an flourishing economy if there is no trust.
That is why the Marxists try to group everyone and make them hate each other. Fear is essential to totalitarian society. (Montesquieu).
That aside. You can’t promote Vice-—it corrupts the next generation.\
All Marxism promotes Vice-—so we need a police state.
Hey look! Another surrender conservative!
Some things are appropriate for the federal government to deal with. Should a child be a child in one state and not a child in another?
“However, conservatives should drop the marriage thing; weve lost.”
Another Vichy Conservative! Gosh, it’s good we’re weeding them all out now!
Reform America? No. The Left wants to Deform America!
No, might not vote Democrat, but might not just vote - at all. At some point, they're gonna start shooting instead of voting.
Liberals go to the Church of the Stinky Donut Hole...
If the Supreme Court says that Obamacare is constitutional because of the taxing power of Congress, then DOMA is constitutional tax policy...
That was the calculation they made with Romney and lost badly. Christian evangelicals won't vote for Democrats, but they won't vote for socially liberal Republicans either...they'll just stay home like last time. Same result---Rat win.
Socially liberal atheist society are NEVER fiscally conservative. It is ridiculous to de-couple the social from the fiscal. The leftist are TRYING to produce a form of heaven on earth, play God so to speak. And that is a very expensive undertaking.
I meant to say: “Socially liberal atheistic societies are NEVER fiscally conservative.”
Party leaders want “liberal-lite”, conservatives want Reagan. So far, “liberal-lite” has lost two big ones in a row.
I guess Rush Limbaugh is a Vichy conservative, too.
Should they dump what forms the foundation of a good, free and moral society?
Only if they want complete disaster and defeat....
I say we should encourage them to go full Left so they can become part of the Dim Party and we can start a new one - the Conservative Independent Party.
No evangelical I know of will vote for a Clinton.
However, plenty of evangelicals I know of have had it up to their back teeth with moderate to liberal Republican candidates and are ready to find, or support, a party which will embrace them. And no, it’s not Democrats.
My Southern Baptist friends recoiled at the idea as real sin seemed to be wrapped up in drinking, smoking, cussing and illicit sex.
Food for thought???
They appear to be in the process of doing so. And if they do, I just stay home. There is no point in choosing between Democrats and Democrats who have Rs next to their name, contrary to what the GOP-E shills who post here think.
Hey if you want to quit and give up on marriage, absolutely.
But, I thought it was the social conservatives who were responsible for the loss, like always. Are you sayin’ it ain’t so? /sarc
We have to fundamentally change the Republican primary process or we will continue to lose.
How about a CONSTITUTIONAL party instead?
Conservative implies keeping the status quo, which, since 1910+ has grown and usurped more Rights than naught.
I too threw the level and $$ into the (C) and (L) parties.
Federalism is a two edged sword that cuts in the direction of ever greater power and restricting liberty - not protecting it.
Keep feeding the beast. I'm done with it. My mother had a saying - "hope in on hand and Sh-- in the other and see which one gets filled first" I guess you haven't had your fill of sh-- yet...
But not unborn children. It’s a-ok in all 50 states to kill one.
That’s the point. If you don’t believe unborn children are actually people, you are going to side with ‘states rights’ on this issue.
Some things are the purview of the states - protecting the life of unborn children is not one of these.
If the GOP could get the economy right, and the size of government right, they wouldn’t have to worry about social issues.
You have your facts backward. There are states which have implemented the most restrictive bans on abortion. That kind of momentum, especially when those states actually protect liberty versus your dream of relying on the Fedgov to uphold virtues, will turn the tide against tyranny. Your solution is a totally lost cause.
New Deal. New Society, New Federalism, compassionate consertativism - it's all the same thing from both parties - the idea of those in power trumps the constitution.