You're saying more than you think here!
The pain you feel today is the strength you'll have tomorrow
Posted on 11/10/2012 3:32:51 PM PST by neverdem
With the loss of the 2012 election, there is much talk of how the Republican Party must do some soul-searching. How will the GOP wage successful campaigns when demographic and cultural changes favor the opposition? Increasingly, the answer is that the party's party is over, that it must move into the future or be relegated to the past. "Dispense with the social issues!" we're counseled. "Don't trouble over abortion or faux marriage and instead just focus on fiscal matters."
Yet this appeal is the result of critics expressing what makes them uncomfortable, as opposed to actually observing the facts on the ground. How do I know? It's simple: the minority voters everyone is so desperate to woo are more socially conservative than are whites.
--snip--
Of course, some assume that traditionalist social positions are the problem because the GOP's touting them hasn't won over minorities. After all, such matters involve deeply held principle, right?
But this gets at the problem: the people in question find fiscal liberalism -- otherwise known as getting free stuff -- even more compelling (a few different kinds of prejudice factor into their preferences as well).
So you want to keep the GOP relevant? Here's a proposition. Let's woo that sought-after Hispanic voting block by offering the whole loaf: social conservatism and quasi-socialist policies...
--snip--
This America would be browner and bluer, but also likely less accepting of homosexuality and abortion. It would be too poor to finance the big social programs you want; however, while Big Brother might have to recede, he could be replaced by Big Daddy: society may well be more patriarchal. And if there's a huge influx of Muslims? Ha!.
Oh, you feminists will wail and gnash your teeth -- insofar as you're still around. But few of you will remain, given...
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Setting aside completely the sometimes-considerable merits of various immigration reform measures, I think these analyses are off base. First, there are real questions about the degree to which immigration policies -- rather than deeper issues such as income and ideology -- drive the rift between the GOP and Latinos. Remember, passage of Simpson-Mazzoli in 1986 was actually followed two years later by one of the worst GOP showings among Latinos in recent history.
--snip--
If we build in an estimate for the growth of the various voting-age populations over the past four years and assume 55 percent voter turnout, we find ourselves with about 8 million fewer white voters than we would expect given turnout in the 2008 elections and population growth.
The GOPe and Romney blew it most likely with the white working class. With all the dead Mexicans from Fast and Furious, the Latino vote could have been more depressed, but I'm not aware of any effort by the Romney campaign to make them aware of Fast and Furious. With all of the blunders and idiocy in the Obama administration this election was Obama's to lose, but Romney lost.
Sorry, that is a total fantasy.
The author claims 75% of Hispanics oppose abortion.
Completely wrong.
After the 2010 election, Pew Research surveyed Hispanics on 12 key political issues.
Abortion came in at #10.
Nationally, the non-white abortion rate is twice as high as the white rate.
In California, the abortion rate for Hispanics is higher than the rate for Blacks, and both are well above the white rate.
In California, Hispanics opposed same sex marriage because they are openly anti-gay, just like American Blacks.
The political salvation for Conservatives will come by converting white voters and increasing our turnout.
As the Democrat Party begins to look more and more like South Africa, that will get easier and easier.
Thanks for the link.
You really are at the wrong forum, your anti-conservative trolling is a joke.
Post after post of you telling us that we need to stop the conservatism because it is outdated and out of style and won’t win over liberals.
Here's something else to consider:
One of the flaws of the GOP's campaign against Obama was that it was based on assertions that were -- surprisingly -- verifiably false. For example, the GOP has been painting Obama as a president who is hell-bent on raising taxes -- and that would seem like something that's beyond question. And yet here we are in late 2012 ... more than a decade after most of the "Bush tax cuts" were implemented ... and more than seven years after Barack Obama begain railing against those tax cuts as a U.S. Senator from Illinois ... and those Bush tax rates are still in place.
It is ironic that you quote this on your page YET apparently have no concept of what it means? RE:
Running on social values is the deluded fantasy. And it’s precisely what’s killing the GOP with younger voters in particular. I’m around people in their 20s and 30s quite a bit, and this is what I consistently hear from them they find alienating about the current GOP platform.
I suggest more Hayek for you -maybe you will finally "get it"?
Good point, SoConPubbie. But I wonder if those early anti-sodomy laws were passed almost as if they were nothing more than a formality to codify something that those people considered self-evident ... almost like laws that outlawed suicide (WTF?). I can’t imagine those laws were passed to address some kind of pressing need back in the 1790s, can you? LOL.
“Jackass statement of the day!
If we become more like them, we’ll lose worse.”
No disagreement with you there.
But — what are you going to do about the new “ladyparts voters”? (I take the claim for this new term)
70% of them voted for the ‘rats. They are a growing demographic (young, single women).
And they are but one of several growing demographic groups on the other side.
The right has a real problem here. The country is dividing, and the people “on the left” are growing in numbers, while the people “on the right” aren’t (in fact, many conservatives are from the World War II generation and on the verge of dying off).
Conservatives are waging a war of attrition. Unfortunately, it’s our side that is attritin’ more rapidly!
...and Tytler too.
Heh, that’s actually a really good point re: many in the GOP painting Obama as a tax-raising fiend given the fact that he hasn’t actually done this (yet).
I suppose a counterpoint at least, is he does often talk about upping taxes “bla bla millionaires billionaires fair share bla bla”. And I do believe he’d raise taxes of course given decent political cover (i.e. 2nd term)… but, since he hadn’t actually done so, perhaps in some way this made Obama’s naysayers look the fool for being klaxons on this issue in the eyes of those without strong opinions about Obama, which may’ve hurt the process of building a case against him.
Arguably there’s a lot of echo chamber effect / bunker mentality among GOP voters, such that everyone’s mutually agreeing with and reinforcing antipathies against Obama, which causes us to lose perspective on the fact that… other non-Democrat voters may not feel quite the same as we do.
The author claims 75% of Hispanics oppose abortion.
Completely wrong.
After the 2010 election, Pew Research surveyed Hispanics on 12 key political issues.
Abortion came in at #10.
Nationally, the non-white abortion rate is twice as high as the white rate.
In California, the abortion rate for Hispanics is higher than the rate for Blacks, and both are well above the white rate.
Not one of those statements gives any indication of how many Hispanics approve or disapprove of abortion.
It Is Time to Throw the Social Conservatives Out of the GOP (Not)
A sizable portion of those black and hispanic voters voted GOP despite disagreeing with the GOP on fiscal issues. But they are strongly social conservative and could not vote for the party of killing kids and gay marriage. So they voted GOP.You throw out the social conservatives and you throw out those hispanic and black voters. Further, you make it harder to attract new hispanic voters who happen to be the most socially conservative voters in the country.
I'm not sure social conservatives would find Hayek much to their liking… for instance, from his essay Why I Am Not a Conservative (Note: 'liberal' here means classical-liberal):
The typical conservative is indeed usually a man of very strong moral convictions. What I mean is that he has no political principles which enable him to work with people whose moral values differ from his own for a political order in which both can obey their convictions. It is the recognition of such principles that permits the coexistence of different sets of values that makes it possible to build a peaceful society with a minimum of force. The acceptance of such principles means that we agree to tolerate much that we dislike. There are many values of the conservative which appeal to me more than those of the socialists; yet for a liberal the importance he personally attaches to specific goals is no sufficient justification for forcing others to serve them. I have little doubt that some of my conservative friends will be shocked by what they will regard as "concessions" to modern views that I have made in Part III of this book. But, though I may dislike some of the measures concerned as much as they do and might vote against them, I know of no general principles to which I could appeal to persuade those of a different view that those measures are not permissible in the general kind of society which we both desire. To live and work successfully with others requires more than faithfulness to one's concrete aims. It requires an intellectual commitment to a type of order in which, even on issues which to one are fundamental, others are allowed to pursue different ends.
It is for this reason that to the liberal neither moral nor religious ideals are proper objects of coercion, while both conservatives and socialists recognize no such limits. I sometimes feel that the most conspicuous attribute of liberalism that distinguishes it as much from conservatism as from socialism is the view that moral beliefs concerning matters of conduct which do not directly interfere with the protected sphere of other persons do not justify coercion. This may also explain why it seems to be so much easier for the repentant socialist to find a new spiritual home in the conservative fold than in the liberal.
You're saying more than you think here!
The pain you feel today is the strength you'll have tomorrow
?
The echo chamber...
The pain you feel today is the strength you'll have tomorrow.
Lol. In retrospect it makes me question if I came off too fervent at times attempting to explain to various persons why Obama sucks, etc…
True America conservatives wish to maintain the moral/social values that are a result of organic spontaneously evolved self-ordering decision making that premises our culture and civil society.
True American conservatives see a limited role for government in maintaining this civil order and as such in opposing the imposed social engineering that is primarily imposed upon the citizenry by force of tyrannical government that attempts to redefine through subjective rational basis and mob rule what has already been defined organically e.g. homosexual sex in the military!
You wish to abandon this ground to the leftists and focus upon balancing a national checkbook? What do you think at least some of the money is being spent on if it is not the imposition of rationally based leftist morality upon the citizenry?
What say you about homosexuals in the military, homosexual marriage, and abortion -- It would appear you are a Libertarian e.g. a cafeteria conservative e.g. a RINO?
Nice try, troll-boy.
About 50% of whites think abortion should be illegal.
About 60% of whites vote for the GOP, the pro-life party.
According to your post, 75% of Hispanics want abortion to be illegal.
However, 70% of Hispanics vote for the abortion party.
Numerous surveys have found that 75% of Hispanics describe themselves as “Conservative.”
However, 70% of Hispanics vote AGAINST the Conservative party.
Perhaps the GOP should encourage them with Amnesty?
We tried that, in 1986.
Reagan gave 3 million Hispanics amnesty.
Remember what happened in 1988?
GHW Bush got the SMALLEST percentage of Hispanic votes ever recorded by any GOP nominee before him.
One more thing on the alleged “social conservatism” of Hispanics...
In California, Hispanics also have the highest rate of incarceration, the highest rate of school dropouts, and the highest rate of out-of-wedlock births, higher than Blacks, actually.
That's what you call socially conservative?
Bottom line...
They aren't going to vote for us, neverdem.
They don't like Conservatives, and they reject Conservative principles every time they vote.
No matter what compromise we make, they are NOT going to vote for our side.
>> Adapt or die. With this last election we can no longer afford to run on traditional values,
Nonsense. We only need to ditch the archaic vernacular.
Midterms!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.