If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Daily Kos)   More GOP infighting: The moderates are revolting   (dailykos.com) divider line 227
    More: Followup, GOP, infighting, Speaker Boehner, moderates, Saxby Chambliss, Health Care, International, American Solutions  
•       •       •

9528 clicks; posted to Politics » on 11 Nov 2012 at 9:39 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



227 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-11 09:46:36 PM  
The real RINO's are the members of the Theocratic-Industrial Complex.

A little religion and encouraging business is republican, but they've been using the whole chicken.
 
2012-11-11 09:46:52 PM  
They won't fall apart, because they will find another boogey man...and if they don't have Obama, they will find someone else (remember McCarthy) and that is a fact.
 
2012-11-11 09:47:31 PM  

mikemoto: Before you liberals get too cocky, you might want to look to Canada where the Conservative Party took an unbelievable shellacking in 1993. Take a guess which party controls their government now.


It's also not the same conservative party. The Progressive Conservatives lost badly, the current party is the Conservatives, a lot of the same folk, but slightly more to the right. You could also say that the Liberal party also has fielded some brutal candidates since Chretien as a reason for the current situation.

csb time: I bumped into former PM Brian Mulroney on the street in Toronto (without bodyguards), he seemed like a nice guy.
 
2012-11-11 09:50:31 PM  
img507.imageshack.us

agrees

/oblig
//no need to thank me citizens
 
2012-11-11 09:51:46 PM  
If the Republican Party would just quit bashing immigrants, science, gays, and women's reproductive health and prove to me that 'trickle down' actually works, I might be convinced to vote for them again.

But then they'd be Democrats, so who cares anyway?
 
2012-11-11 09:52:38 PM  

mikemoto: Before you liberals get too cocky, you might want to look to Canada where the Conservative Party took an unbelievable shellacking in 1993. Take a guess which party controls their government now.


Well yeah, but just how conservative is Canada's conservative party compared to the US Democrats? There's nothing wrong with sane conservatism.
 
2012-11-11 09:53:17 PM  

StreetlightInTheGhetto: Ambivalence: mikemoto: Before you liberals get too cocky, you might want to look to Canada where the Conservative Party took an unbelievable shellacking in 1993. Take a guess which party controls their government now.

Candian conservatives aren't equatable to US Conservatives. Not by a long shot.

Canadian conservatives are equatable to US Blue dogs at WORST.

Eh... dammit. You're probably right. I'm rusty on my understanding of current Canadian politics since I stopped going over the border on a monthly basis and moved out of the CBC broadcast range. I still kind of hate Harper, though.

Then again, I got to high-five multiple Canadians at a show last night because Michigan voted against Mr. Burns.
So in that spirit of camaraderie even Harper gets a pass for the time being.



brantgoose: Remember your horror movies: what you get back from the grave is not what you buried. 

Oh, I am totally going to have to steal that from you for future use.


Mr. Stotch, I know what you're thinking. I'm here to talk you out of it.
 
2012-11-11 09:53:43 PM  
Newsflash....the GOP is revolting.
 
2012-11-11 09:55:00 PM  
The GOP has a faux reorganization every few years.

Southern Strategy --> Moral Majority (too preachy) --> Christian Coalition (preachy + business, but still a bit too preachy) --> Neocons (all the hate, half the religion) --> Teabaggers (twice the hate, twice the stupidity, with implausible deniability for the Bush years)...

It's just McDonalds or Coke changing logos and slogans to get the same set of workers to vote for the rich.
 
2012-11-11 09:56:14 PM  
We know they are revolting. Can you tell us a bit about what is going on now?
 
2012-11-11 09:56:54 PM  
I can handle the Moderates, it's the current status quo of the GOP that I find revolting. A bunch of whiny 4 year olds who had their popsicles taken away.
 
2012-11-11 09:58:03 PM  

mikemoto: Before you liberals get too cocky, you might want to look to Canada where the Conservative Party took an unbelievable shellacking in 1993. Take a guess which party controls their government now.


Canadian conservatives are basically Democrats. Still, this country is pretty firmly center-right, so it's not like we'll see any kind of Sweden-like Socialist Democracy anytime soon. Moderate Democrats like Obama, Clinton, Reid et al. will be the loudest voices in the party (in terms of national direction) for the foreseeable future.
 
2012-11-11 10:02:27 PM  
28.media.tumblr.com
Stupid Saxby Chambliss.
 
2012-11-11 10:03:26 PM  

mikemoto: Take a guess which party controls their government now.


The Liberals handed them the initial minority on a plate and they bought their second term majority the old fashioned Bush way: by stimulating a housing bubble of catastrophic proportions. The Cons won't see a third term.
 
2012-11-11 10:04:26 PM  
Both parties should be split into two.
 
2012-11-11 10:05:05 PM  

mikemoto: Before you liberals get too cocky, you might want to look to Canada where the Conservative Party took an unbelievable shellacking in 1993. Take a guess which party controls their government now.


That happened in 1992 and gave us Newt Gingrich and the Bush years. One can only hoped the American populace has learned.
 
2012-11-11 10:05:57 PM  
Brantgoose, Jean Charest is no longer the Quebec premier. He got defeated in september and has fled the country gone on a 6 month world tour.

/Not going to quote your wall of text, since Fark Mobile doesn't allow me to edit it to keep only the relevant bits.
 
2012-11-11 10:06:03 PM  
I'm waiting for the return of the Whigs.
/We need more men like Millard Fillmore!
 
2012-11-11 10:06:24 PM  
One of two things has to happen within the GOP:

Either they have to disavow the Teahadists in their ranks, toss them out, admit they MUST move back towards the center (although they'll likely stay farther right than they were) in order to regain the support of the right-moderates in the nation; or,

They will have to continue to move farther right, in which case there will be a breakaway of the moderates among them and the formation of a center-right third party.

There's really no third option for the Republicans at this point. If they continue to court the far right ultranationalists and Tea Party conservatives, they will continue to lose the center and moderate-right within their own ranks. Now, those moderates can either defect to the left, which is increasingly doubtful as the nation continues to polarize, or they'll have to move to the Libertarians and change the focus of that party's economic philosophy (because pure Randian economics can't work in today's political climate) or else form their own New Republican party).

Probably tossing the Teahadists is the easiest course open to them, since it would be easier to put in old-school politicians in most areas; but we'll see if the Tea Party, having tasted the heady nectar of political power, are willing to go back to being on the outside looking in.
 
2012-11-11 10:07:26 PM  

brantgoose: Remember your horror movies: what you get back from the grave is not what you buried.


I knew there was a good reason I had you faved.
 
2012-11-11 10:10:46 PM  
The line I found disturbing nfrom that articl is this one:

"First, of course, is that the GOP won't be able to get anywhere near 50% of the vote. Democrats will win. More so, democrats can win without the need for blue dogs. We will be able to pass progressive legislation without needing to water it down."

This is precisely what happened between 1972 and 1980. The repubs disgraced themselves, the government was thrown into the hands of the Democrats and they proceeded to push through thoughtless progressive legislation that wrecked the economy and paved the way for the Reagan Revolution. Come to think of it, it happened again in 2000 when the Democrats disgraced themselves (or were tricked into giving the appearance of being disgraced), the government was thrown into the hands of the repubs and they proceeded to push through thoughtless conservative legislation that wrecked the economy and paved the way for Obama. If the Democrats can keep their pants zipped up, avoid hubris and put country before ideology, they have a chance of holding on to power; more importantly, of doing something useful with it. But they probably won't. 

Wouldn't it be nice to having two grown-up parties again, one dedicated to making the country a better place for the poor and the disadvantaged, one to keeping the country on an even financial keel, neither particularly interested in poking their noses into other people's bedrooms? Sigh, the good old days...
 
2012-11-11 10:11:20 PM  
I expect there to be much wheeling and dealing during the lame duck session, just as there was in 2010. If there's one thing you can count on Republicans for, it's giving up their ideals and values the second there are no electoral consequences for it.
 
2012-11-11 10:12:36 PM  
That's one of the stupider political posts I've ever read. The whole post can be summed up as: Moderates from the other party may bail, which will cost them votes, which will allow us to kick our own moderates to the curb! Wonderful idea, you'll have the shortest lived super majority since . . . the last time the Democrats had a super majority.
 
2012-11-11 10:13:14 PM  
The moderates are revolting
classiccinemaquotes.com
They soitenly are...
 
2012-11-11 10:14:17 PM  
They've always been revolting. Now they're rebelling.

i.ytimg.com
 
2012-11-11 10:17:33 PM  

Wireless Joe: The moderates are revolting
[classiccinemaquotes.com image 454x365]
They soitenly are...


*shakes impotent fist of rage*
 
2012-11-11 10:18:55 PM  

Kurmudgeon: /We need more men like Millard Fillmore!

  
 
2012-11-11 10:19:41 PM  
As if the Republicans have a choice. The Tax cuts are expiring. They can either be on the right side of history, or kiss control of Congress goodbye in 2014. What would you do?

The fallout from the most extreme public will be glorious as they realize they're irrelevant and antiquated. I'm genuinely excited.
 
2012-11-11 10:20:39 PM  
Well crap...

Kurmudgeon: /We need more men like Millard Fillmore!

 

www.mindhuestudio.com
 
2012-11-11 10:25:48 PM  

RedPhoenix122: Kittypie070: Boehner must be a librul plant, right?

Of course, I've seen him golfing with the enemy.

[i.usatoday.net image 490x360]


You know Boehner doesn't seem unreasonable. He spouts a little demagoguery once in awhile but it's just lip service. It seems him and Obama have a pretty well thought out compromise put together but Boehner knows he can't get the wingnuts to go along.
 
2012-11-11 10:31:38 PM  
Mark the year on your calendar. 2014. We Minnesotans shall remove the Michele Bachmann, the chair of the Tea party, from office. Republicans, this one's free.
 
2012-11-11 10:31:56 PM  

brandent: RedPhoenix122: Kittypie070: Boehner must be a librul plant, right?

Of course, I've seen him golfing with the enemy.

[i.usatoday.net image 490x360]

You know Boehner doesn't seem unreasonable. He spouts a little demagoguery once in awhile but it's just lip service. It seems him and Obama have a pretty well thought out compromise put together but Boehner knows he can't get the wingnuts to go along.


Yeah, but if you get enough moderates to jump on board you can get things done and give the 'wingnuts' cover in this regard. In a certain way, it is almost a win-win for the republicans.

What the democrats risk here is that they get the tax increases passed and tax revenue fails to rebound from the hole it has been in for the last 4 years. Especially if all the spending cuts that each side says needs to be implemented fail to materialize and the deficits stay in the $1T range.
 
2012-11-11 10:32:36 PM  

Gyrfalcon: One of two things has to happen within the GOP:

Either they have to disavow the Teahadists in their ranks, toss them out, admit they MUST move back towards the center (although they'll likely stay farther right than they were) in order to regain the support of the right-moderates in the nation; or,

They will have to continue to move farther right, in which case there will be a breakaway of the moderates among them and the formation of a center-right third party.

There's really no third option for the Republicans at this point. If they continue to court the far right ultranationalists and Tea Party conservatives, they will continue to lose the center and moderate-right within their own ranks. Now, those moderates can either defect to the left, which is increasingly doubtful as the nation continues to polarize, or they'll have to move to the Libertarians and change the focus of that party's economic philosophy (because pure Randian economics can't work in today's political climate) or else form their own New Republican party).

Probably tossing the Teahadists is the easiest course open to them, since it would be easier to put in old-school politicians in most areas; but we'll see if the Tea Party, having tasted the heady nectar of political power, are willing to go back to being on the outside looking in.


It's the ultranationalists. They're killing the willagers.
 
2012-11-11 10:33:12 PM  

Dr. DJ Duckhunt: Mark the year on your calendar. 2014. We Minnesotans shall remove the Michele Bachmann, the chair of the Tea party, from office. Republicans, this one's free.


As a conservative, I would applaud that.
 
2012-11-11 10:34:16 PM  

clambam: The line I found disturbing nfrom that articl is this one:

"First, of course, is that the GOP won't be able to get anywhere near 50% of the vote. Democrats will win. More so, democrats can win without the need for blue dogs. We will be able to pass progressive legislation without needing to water it down."


Agreed...this is wishful thinking. Not only is it unlikely in the extreme given the makeup of the Democratic party right now, but the backlash would be epic. The Dems just need to stay center-right, minding the store and rebuilding the economy without going off the deep end over guns, climate change or any of a number of other hot button issues.
 
2012-11-11 10:35:55 PM  
<b><a href="http://www.fark.com/comments/7428808/80631883#c80631883" target="_blank">Stone Meadow</a>:</b> <i>clambam: The line I found disturbing nfrom that articl is this one:

"First, of course, is that the GOP won't be able to get anywhere near 50% of the vote. Democrats will win. More so, democrats can win without the need for blue dogs. We will be able to pass progressive legislation without needing to water it down."

Agreed...this is wishful thinking. Not only is it unlikely in the extreme given the makeup of the Democratic party right now, but the backlash would be epic. The Dems just need to stay center-right, minding the store and rebuilding the economy without going off the deep end over guns, climate change or any of a number of other hot button issues.</i>


As a libby liberal...

I concur.
 
2012-11-11 10:36:52 PM  

machodonkeywrestler: One can only hoped the American populace has learned.


LOL!
 
2012-11-11 10:37:13 PM  

GAT_00: People are blowing this out of proportion again. I swear articles are being rerun from 2008 at this point. The GOP will not fall apart.


I agree. I think what you're going to have are the strategists and leaders among the GOP decide that they need to moderate their message, then those people will lose their primaries to more conservative challengers (perhaps backed by the tea party, perhaps not), then those more conservative challengers will be elected or not in the general election depending upon how batshiat insane they are.

In other words, just like the last 4 years.
 
2012-11-11 10:41:29 PM  

mikemoto: I'm totally confused here. Others are saying the Conservatives in Canada are to the left of the US Republican Party. You seem to be saying the opposite.


The current iteration of the federal Conservative Party is indeed not unlike the Republican Party, although not quite as batshiat insane.

By the way, Obama, were he in Canada, would be considered a red Tory, so it's always amusing to hear some folks call him a communist.
 
2012-11-11 10:41:30 PM  

The Great Gazoo: GAT_00: People are blowing this out of proportion again. I swear articles are being rerun from 2008 at this point. The GOP will not fall apart.

I agree. I think what you're going to have are the strategists and leaders among the GOP decide that they need to moderate their message, then those people will lose their primaries to more conservative challengers (perhaps backed by the tea party, perhaps not), then those more conservative challengers will be elected or not in the general election depending upon how batshiat insane they are.

In other words, just like the last 4 years.


I told a conservative friend of mine that the tea party cost the GOP the senate.

His response was "How so?"
 
2012-11-11 10:42:40 PM  

Stone Meadow: Agreed...this is wishful thinking. Not only is it unlikely in the extreme given the makeup of the Democratic party right now, but the backlash would be epic. The Dems just need to stay center-right, minding the store and rebuilding the economy without going off the deep end over guns, climate change or any of a number of other hot button issues.


That is a good point. One of the things that killed the dems where I am from is Clinton's steamrolling of some retarded environmental regulations/executive orders that had little support at the time. The backlash was swift and it is just now that democrats are starting to rise again here in the intermountain west. In fact, they are doing pretty well in some states like Montana, Colorado and Nevada. Hell, even here in Idaho, we had a Democratic Rep for a few years. However, that is something that can quickly change if the dems over-reach. It is always a tight-rope with party politics as being inclusive can often create friction with well defined ideals.
 
2012-11-11 10:46:20 PM  

The Great Gazoo: I think what you're going to have are the strategists and leaders among the GOP decide that they need to moderate their message, then those people will lose their primaries to more conservative challengers


Not really. If you aren't smart enough to know how to push hard and fast during the primaries and then moderate your message during the general election, you are usually not smart enough to fill out the paperwork in the first place.

However, with some of those in 'my' party, I have to wonder sometimes.
 
2012-11-11 10:47:38 PM  

Gyrfalcon: Probably tossing the Teahadists is the easiest course open to them, since it would be easier to put in old-school politicians in most areas; but we'll see if the Tea Party, having tasted the heady nectar of political power, are willing to go back to being on the outside looking in.


I don't think this is really that difficult of a thing to force to happen. I also believe that it is completely out of the GOPs hands. The tea-party was essentially, nurtured and created by fox news, under the guise of a grass roots movement (something we all know to be utter codswallop). If Fox News was willing to completely marginalize these idiots that would be the end of them. They have one outlet for their idiocy, and while the right-wing derp-o-sphere-of-tubes will continue to carry their water for them, they simply don't have enough penetration into American households to make a difference. They are loud for sure, but have a tiny amount of real influence. It only seems like they have more because they are generally walking lock-step with Fox.
Were Fox willing to not give them air-time, the tea party would die on the spot and moderate republicans would have a shot.

On a side note it is sickening that an entertainment outfit has so much control over our politics. Unfortunately, there is no legal mechanism available to lessen their influence.
 
2012-11-11 10:52:06 PM  

HeadLever: One of the things that killed the dems where I am from is Clinton's steamrolling of some retarded environmental regulations/executive orders that had little support at the time.


Um, yeah.

I kinda remember it more as Gore distancing himself from Clinton because of impeachment nonsense and realizing a bit too late that that was kind of a stupid thing to do + social conservatives realizing hating on the gays could bring out the votes (checking Wiki they started doing those in 1998 but they picked up the most steam in 2004...).

Environmental regulations killing the Dems post-Clinton? Really? That's seriously the only time I've ever heard that theory. Maybe they lost some moderate conservative voters but those voters weren't about to leave the GOP just yet in 2000 anyway. Republicans had their act together at the time, especially for midterms + bringing together disparate elements like the evangelical right and the fiscal conservative folks. That helped.
 
2012-11-11 10:55:27 PM  

Uchiha_Cycliste: On a side note it is sickening that an entertainment outfit has so much control over our politics. Unfortunately, there is no legal mechanism available to lessen their influence.


My friend and I wandered into a diner in Ypsiltucky side of Ypsilanti, MI right before the elections and sat down and ordered before we saw the sign directing people to come to the Tea Partiers Meeting. I tried to bet him $5 that they'd all be white and over 40. He declined. Turned out they were all white and likely collecting Social Security (he should've gone up on the minimum age part of my bet and doubled the bet) And one guy had a cowboy hat! In Michigan!

So not legal, no, but if you challenged any of them to a footrace you'd win easy.

/extrapolate that as you will
 
2012-11-11 10:57:20 PM  
There are still moderates in the GOP? Really?
 
2012-11-11 10:58:50 PM  

HeadLever: The Great Gazoo: I think what you're going to have are the strategists and leaders among the GOP decide that they need to moderate their message, then those people will lose their primaries to more conservative challengers

Not really. If you aren't smart enough to know how to push hard and fast during the primaries and then moderate your message during the general election, you are usually not smart enough to fill out the paperwork in the first place.

However, with some of those in 'my' party, I have to wonder sometimes.


I'm saying they'll lose their next primary based on the moderation of their message NOW. The rank and file GOP voters are saying that they don't want to hear anything about compromise, moderation, inclusiveness. The politicians realize that it's necessary, but the ones who lead the way will lose their next primary based on what they say and do today.
 
2012-11-11 10:59:58 PM  
What the author of this article doesn't seem to realize is that if the GOP splits into three factions that some Democrats will leave the Democratic party to join at least two of them. Maybe not in large numbers at first but it will happen.
 
2012-11-11 11:03:24 PM  

mikemoto: Another thing to ponder. After 1964, you could easily have written this same article. Goldwater lost far more convincingly than Romney had and where were we 4 years after that? Also, one would assume Hillary is the frontrunner for 2016. Don't be so sure that she's a lock to win the presidency.


I don't think Hillary is a safe assumption. Between Franken, Warren, Castro, etc., the Democratic party has a lot of rising stars that could upset her yet again, even assuming she does take another stab at it.

Remember, many assumed that Hillary would be the frontrunner for 2008, too. And the Clinton administration was a lot fresher in people's minds then.
 
2012-11-11 11:03:55 PM  

StreetlightInTheGhetto: Um, yeah.

I kinda remember it more as Gore distancing himself from Clinton because of impeachment nonsense and realizing a bit too late that that was kind of a stupid thing to do + social conservatives realizing hating on the gays could bring out the votes (checking Wiki they started doing those in 1998 but they picked up the most steam in 2004...).

Environmental regulations killing the Dems post-Clinton? Really? That's seriously the only time I've ever heard that theory. Maybe they lost some moderate conservative voters but those voters weren't about to leave the GOP just yet in 2000 anyway. Republicans had their act together at the time, especially for midterms + bringing together disparate elements like the evangelical right and the fiscal conservative folks. That helped.


I don't think you understood my point. Might want to re-read. The dems were placed on the sword HERE before Lewinsky was a household name. Also, social conservatives are not quite the presence here in the intermountain west as say.... the South. Most of the conservatives here are more of the 'fiscal' variety.

You may not be familiar with terms like 'the War on the West' or 'Cattle-free by 93', but for folks that lived and worked here (especially in the rural areas), it was big news. Of course, the intermountain west has always been small potatoes in the policital grand scheme of things, so this was not big national news at the time. However, it had big impacts upon the policital makup of the states that were in the middle of it.
 
Displayed 50 of 227 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report