Wulaw Horn
1,000+ Posts
RIP to the Ronnie Reagan revolution, John McCain is going put the last shovel full of dirt on top of it on Super Tuesday. Now we have the Socialist party vs the Moderate liberal party. Bye Bye conservatism.
THe death of a Revolution
- Thread starter Wulaw Horn
- Start date
I'm not depressed at all. Of course I'm more of a centrist Republican. Even so the important thing is not to have a candidate that mirrors your beliefs 100%. The important thing is to have a candidate who mirrors your beliefs 80% and who can beat the candidate whom you despise.
Just exactly what would McCain do or not do which would dishearten Reaganites? Don't tell me about the past and wring your hands; tell me about your fears for the future.
There are four major issues which I worry about as far as a President's position - socialized medicine, immigration, the war on terror and federal spending. I'm comfortable with McCain on all four.
Understand that the Dems control Congress. If you think the President can rule like a king you are wrong.
Just exactly what would McCain do or not do which would dishearten Reaganites? Don't tell me about the past and wring your hands; tell me about your fears for the future.
There are four major issues which I worry about as far as a President's position - socialized medicine, immigration, the war on terror and federal spending. I'm comfortable with McCain on all four.
Understand that the Dems control Congress. If you think the President can rule like a king you are wrong.
bozo_casanova
2,500+ Posts
I think the Reagan Revolution has run its course, just as the New Deal coalition started to come apart in the 1960s. The conservative movement really came out of the suburbs of the Sun Belt, where people did not need "big government". California and Florida now have many of the problems that the Northeast and Midwest had around the middle of the last century and this makes people more reliant on government. Texas, Arizona, Nevada, and Georgia are starting to have more problems with sprawl and environmental concerns, and government is the only entity that can solve these problems, so government becomes more acceptable. I think Crist and Schwarzenegger are the future of the Republican party, because their states are post-Sun Belt, so they are a bellwether of what is to come.
So Goldwater, Reagan, and Bush were the future when the nation was moving to the Sun Belt, and they helped create a coalition that transformed the nation, but taxes and government can only be cut so much, and then new ideas are needed.
So Goldwater, Reagan, and Bush were the future when the nation was moving to the Sun Belt, and they helped create a coalition that transformed the nation, but taxes and government can only be cut so much, and then new ideas are needed.
Michael Knight
1,000+ Posts
Ha ha, some people are so deluded. Do you seriously believe any candidate is socialist or that somehow mccain is a liberal?
Ha ha, some people are so deluded. Do you seriously believe any candidate is socialist
_________________________________________________
Hillary most definitely is. She believes government is the answer for everything and should control everything. She has stated she wants government controlled healthcare. She is stated she wants to take profits from corporations and reinvest it for the public good...meaning she wants the government to have it. She wants to raise taxes on people for more government intervention...China is a socialist government but it still has a capitalistic based economy...that is the Hillary model.
_________________________________________________
Hillary most definitely is. She believes government is the answer for everything and should control everything. She has stated she wants government controlled healthcare. She is stated she wants to take profits from corporations and reinvest it for the public good...meaning she wants the government to have it. She wants to raise taxes on people for more government intervention...China is a socialist government but it still has a capitalistic based economy...that is the Hillary model.
washparkhorn
2,500+ Posts
Let the Republican Circular Firing Squad commence firing.
SubliminalHorn
500+ Posts
I know what you mean. I'm going to miss the last 7 years of a fiscally responsible government.
Wait....
Wait....
Fried JJ Pickles
1,000+ Posts
McCain is politically to the right of GWB, GHB and Mitt Romney.
If nominated, he will be the most conservative R candidate for president since Reagan in 1984. McCain is to the right of his party on campaign finance reform and abortion. Outside of that, he's further right than most Republicans.
So, no, it won't be McCain that killed the Reagan revolution.
If nominated, he will be the most conservative R candidate for president since Reagan in 1984. McCain is to the right of his party on campaign finance reform and abortion. Outside of that, he's further right than most Republicans.
So, no, it won't be McCain that killed the Reagan revolution.
Wulaw Horn
1,000+ Posts
Socialized Medicine- McCain will give in to go along with the libs.
Immigration- McCain and Kennedy are bedfellows on that one
War on Terror- wants to close down Gitmo- end any kind of torture- I disagree (lambast away libs) I want waterboarding and whatnot as options on the table when conducting an interrogation
Government spending- he might try to reign it in, but I really don't see him taking any kind of hard line with the democrats in congress.
I'm going to throw in tax policy and he's no reaganite their (or friend of me). He ain't making any tax cuts permanent, we'll see the death tax back in full effect. I really, outside of his stance on iraq, cannot see one reason to vote for him- not one.
If we are going liberal let the Dems do it and let them suffer the consequences electorally when it doesn't work (and if it does work- I'll be happy as an american to see it).
McCain is so freaking wrong for this party.
And don't even get me started on the abomination that is his position on Campaign Finance and the Fairness doctrine. He is anti free speach.
Disagree about whoever said Bush is not a rightful heir to Reagan- He's a social conservative, he cut taxes, and he's for strong defense- go out and get the enemy w/o blinking (some one say thinking- but they said the same about Reagan).
Bush's problem, to the extent that he has one, is that he can't communicate on nearly the level Reagan did. But Bush is an heir to the Reagan legacy- to my way of thinking.
Immigration- McCain and Kennedy are bedfellows on that one
War on Terror- wants to close down Gitmo- end any kind of torture- I disagree (lambast away libs) I want waterboarding and whatnot as options on the table when conducting an interrogation
Government spending- he might try to reign it in, but I really don't see him taking any kind of hard line with the democrats in congress.
I'm going to throw in tax policy and he's no reaganite their (or friend of me). He ain't making any tax cuts permanent, we'll see the death tax back in full effect. I really, outside of his stance on iraq, cannot see one reason to vote for him- not one.
If we are going liberal let the Dems do it and let them suffer the consequences electorally when it doesn't work (and if it does work- I'll be happy as an american to see it).
McCain is so freaking wrong for this party.
And don't even get me started on the abomination that is his position on Campaign Finance and the Fairness doctrine. He is anti free speach.
Disagree about whoever said Bush is not a rightful heir to Reagan- He's a social conservative, he cut taxes, and he's for strong defense- go out and get the enemy w/o blinking (some one say thinking- but they said the same about Reagan).
Bush's problem, to the extent that he has one, is that he can't communicate on nearly the level Reagan did. But Bush is an heir to the Reagan legacy- to my way of thinking.
Wulaw Horn
1,000+ Posts
JJ-
I assume you mean to say that McCain is to the LEFT of the party on Abortion and campaign finance (you wrote right- I'm assuming it's a typo)
I assume you mean to say that McCain is to the LEFT of the party on Abortion and campaign finance (you wrote right- I'm assuming it's a typo)
Michael Knight
1,000+ Posts
Thank god its ******* over then. War mongers and corporate stooges have ****** this country good.
Wulaw Horn
1,000+ Posts
Wildcat- Overreact much?
I think I said on another thread I'd just as soon see some manner of fence along with amnesty. I'm not talking about the berlin wall- I'm talking about some barrier- along with enforcement of our laws.
Now I'm VERY pro-immigration. I think we ought to let as many people in the country as we need/want. I'm not saying shut the border down, I'm saying know who is in your country and make sure they pay the taxes that they are supposed to.
Stabone- as to the waterboard- I know that's not a popular opinion on here, but whatever. Assume you've got someone who planted a nuke at the super bowl on sunday. We've got him in custody. I want them to waterboard him, rip off his scrotum and feed it to him, kill his wife and kids, strip him naked and bathe him in bacon fat- pretty much whatever it takes to figure out what's going and stop whatever is gonna happen.
But your opinion is much more noble and popular on an ivory tower debate board like this. I didn't say I want waterboarding for all, I said I didn't want anything off the table.
I think I said on another thread I'd just as soon see some manner of fence along with amnesty. I'm not talking about the berlin wall- I'm talking about some barrier- along with enforcement of our laws.
Now I'm VERY pro-immigration. I think we ought to let as many people in the country as we need/want. I'm not saying shut the border down, I'm saying know who is in your country and make sure they pay the taxes that they are supposed to.
Stabone- as to the waterboard- I know that's not a popular opinion on here, but whatever. Assume you've got someone who planted a nuke at the super bowl on sunday. We've got him in custody. I want them to waterboard him, rip off his scrotum and feed it to him, kill his wife and kids, strip him naked and bathe him in bacon fat- pretty much whatever it takes to figure out what's going and stop whatever is gonna happen.
But your opinion is much more noble and popular on an ivory tower debate board like this. I didn't say I want waterboarding for all, I said I didn't want anything off the table.
Michael Knight
1,000+ Posts
Captain Murphy
250+ Posts
The "Reagan Revolution" was made possible by "Reagan Democrats." In 1980, a majority of Americans identified themselves as Democrats. In other words, Ronald Reagan became President because he appealed to a broad range of Americans.
McCain is like Reagan in this respect. The reason he polls so well against potential Democratic rivals is that he appeals to large numbers of voters who identify themselves as Democrats and independents.
As for the war on terror, McCain has called for MORE TROOPS in Iraq. If McCain were President, the "surge" would have happened a long time ago.
McCain is like Reagan in this respect. The reason he polls so well against potential Democratic rivals is that he appeals to large numbers of voters who identify themselves as Democrats and independents.
As for the war on terror, McCain has called for MORE TROOPS in Iraq. If McCain were President, the "surge" would have happened a long time ago.
UT-69745551
250+ Posts
Austintxusa
2,500+ Posts
Wulaw Horn
1,000+ Posts
Creed- your argument is absurd and illogical.
It goes logically something like this
1) John McCain was tortured
2) You've never been tortured
3) Ergo, you can't disagree with McCain's stance on torture.
Well, I'm reasonably certain he is not the only American POW ever to be tortured (there were thousands in Veitnam alone- right).
I'd further postulate that of those hundreds or thousands of GI's that got tortured if you asked them should we waterboard suspected terrorists to get information from them if we can reasonably believe it will save lives you'd have 1000 different shades of an answer.
Why is John McCain's viewpoint better than any other POW in torture camp? What if they disagree? What if there is no consensus?
See- b/c he's not the only guy it ever happened to he's not the only one with the right to an opinion- even accepting your POV that you have to have suffered torture to have an opinion on it.
Like I said- I'm not advocating it- I'm saying I think it's foolish to say close down Gitmo and take options off the table that are proven to work.
The Super Bowl nuke scenario is really far fetched rigth? I mean I read about it in a Tom Clancy book- so it's just pure fiction and unimaginable right?
The funny thing is, the next Tom Clancy book I read had a guy flying a passenger airplane into Congress to unseat our Government. Crazy ****- huh- that would never happen right?
Well I'm pretty sure the terrorists did that just 5 years or so later- if you can dream it it can happen- to say that's outside of the realm of possibility is ridiculous. Say you find that a little far fetched though- are you really going to argue that we will never have someone detained that might have information about a plan, that could we extract said information could save lives?
I think that would be an absurd hypothesis. SSo then the argument becomes how far do you go and a balancing test between the rights of the accused and the safety of the thousands.
Let's just say I believe in erring on the side of the safety of the thousands. But I think it's fair to say reasonable minds can and do disagree on that notion.
It goes logically something like this
1) John McCain was tortured
2) You've never been tortured
3) Ergo, you can't disagree with McCain's stance on torture.
Well, I'm reasonably certain he is not the only American POW ever to be tortured (there were thousands in Veitnam alone- right).
I'd further postulate that of those hundreds or thousands of GI's that got tortured if you asked them should we waterboard suspected terrorists to get information from them if we can reasonably believe it will save lives you'd have 1000 different shades of an answer.
Why is John McCain's viewpoint better than any other POW in torture camp? What if they disagree? What if there is no consensus?
See- b/c he's not the only guy it ever happened to he's not the only one with the right to an opinion- even accepting your POV that you have to have suffered torture to have an opinion on it.
Like I said- I'm not advocating it- I'm saying I think it's foolish to say close down Gitmo and take options off the table that are proven to work.
The Super Bowl nuke scenario is really far fetched rigth? I mean I read about it in a Tom Clancy book- so it's just pure fiction and unimaginable right?
The funny thing is, the next Tom Clancy book I read had a guy flying a passenger airplane into Congress to unseat our Government. Crazy ****- huh- that would never happen right?
Well I'm pretty sure the terrorists did that just 5 years or so later- if you can dream it it can happen- to say that's outside of the realm of possibility is ridiculous. Say you find that a little far fetched though- are you really going to argue that we will never have someone detained that might have information about a plan, that could we extract said information could save lives?
I think that would be an absurd hypothesis. SSo then the argument becomes how far do you go and a balancing test between the rights of the accused and the safety of the thousands.
Let's just say I believe in erring on the side of the safety of the thousands. But I think it's fair to say reasonable minds can and do disagree on that notion.
Weekly Prediction Contest
* Predict TEXAS-KENTUCKY *
Sat, Nov 23 • 2:30 PM on ABC
Recent Threads
-
The Media Industry
- Started by texas_ex2000
- Replies: 8K
- West Mall
-
President Biden Accountability Thread
- Started by 2003TexasGrad
- Replies: 4K
- West Mall
Prediction Results Threads
