Is the Republican Party America's natural governing party?

POSTED BY: Skywalken
UPDATED: Friday, April 7, 2006 04:56
VIEWED: 6016
PAGE 2 of 3

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 NEXT PAGE

FREDGIBLET

Thursday, March 30, 2006 11:01 PM

I think that the reason for the Republican partys' success in this century is simple. The run on platforms of morality and cutting taxes. In my experience the average Republican is a W.A.S.P. that pushes for religious rules to be made law, and there is a large group of people who believe that is is just to force Christian rules on others (interestingly many of them would hate to have Islamic or Hindu rules forced on them). As for the taxes, the Democrats do waste a lot of money on social programs that are of dubious value so I can't really fault the Republicans for cutting them and trying to cut taxes. However I can fault the current government for increasing spending and cutting taxes (any accountants who can tell us what happens when you do that?).

CITIZEN

Thursday, March 30, 2006 11:16 PM

Quote:
(he actually didn't get elected the first time, if you want to get technical about it)

Sounds like G W Bush.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.

RUE

Friday, March 31, 2006 1:55 AM

Since the Civil War (when the Republican party was formed), Republicans have held the WH for 60 years, Democrats for 87.

Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.

CARTOON

Friday, March 31, 2006 3:17 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Since the Civil War (when the Republican party was formed), Republicans have held the WH for 60 years, Democrats for 87.

Not even close.

It's Republicans 92 (giving the current president the remainder of his term), Democrats 56.

REPUBLICANS:
Lincoln through Arthur: 1861-1885*
Harrison: 1889-1893
McKinley through Taft: 1897-1913
Harding through Hoover: 1921-1933
Eisenhower: 1953-1961
Nixon through Ford: 1969-1977
Reagan through Bush: 1981-1993
Bush Jr.: 2001-

DEMOCRATS:
Cleveland: 1885-1889, 1893-1897
Wilson: 1913-1921
FDR & Truman: 1933-1953
JFK & LBJ: 1961-1969
Carter: 1977-1981
Clinton: 1993-2001

*EDIT: Even though Lincoln's VP, Johnson was a Democrat (who was never elected as President) he succeeded and essentially maintained Lincoln's Republican cabinet and administration.

CHRISISALL

Friday, March 31, 2006 4:11 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by STDOUBT:

Supposedly the natural governing party in the USA
is The People.
An argument could be made, however, that the natural governing party is any body of criminals
who can convince The People that they are made up of two opposing parties. It's called 'divide and conquor'. And it worked.

STDOUBT, my MAN!!!
"A government is a body of people, usually, noteably, un-governed."

Chrisisall

KUANGZHEDE

Friday, March 31, 2006 4:22 PM

good thread, I would have to agree with the overwhelming evidence shown in this forum that the Republican party is America's natural governing party. While we do now live in a "big brother" mind set do to acts of terrorism that some president failed to prevent, and I do not mean Bush (in office for 6 months...takes about two years to plan an attack of that scale and with goverment resources not going to proper intelligent agencies...you do the math), the right, historically, is about protecting American's freedom to pursue happiness and limited goverment interference. The left is more along the lines of taking away peoples rights for the majority of the disenfranchised aka socialism. The "we take from the hard working rich and give to the lazy ass poor." The left views freedom from a different point of view then the right. The right concentrates on protecting a person's freedom so they have the ABILITY to produce without unjust persecution. Freedom for the left means: Freedom to have free education, free subsidised healthcare, free food stamps, etc while taking away the constitutionally protected freedoms of the middle and upper class. If you take my money and give it to someone else because I have worked harder and earned more, you are stealing from me and in turn hurting supply side economics, hurting the economy overall, and putting the poor in a worse position then if they let the capital of the well-to-do's be spent back into the system, creating lower cost on items. You can give the poor more of my tax's but if i do not spend my money, prices will go up, and the extra money the poor recieved will not overtake the difference between rising cost and there increased supplimentation.

Kuang Zhe De

HERO

Friday, March 31, 2006 5:46 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Skywalken:
So is the Republican Party America's natural governing party?

I don't think America has a natural governing party. The whole concept smacks of entitlement and I think thats the quickest way to lose elections, heck thats half the Democrats problem in recent years, particularly with the African-American community.

Democrats need to get off their buts and start offering solutions instead of expecting support on principal. "Vote for us because we're Democrats" isn't an effective long term strategy for governing.

On that note, Republicans are showing signs of developing a similar flaw. "Vote for us because we're not Democrats" is what I'm starting to see. We're not there yet, but if we don't watch out, it could happen.

H

CREVANREAVER

Friday, March 31, 2006 5:47 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by KuangZheDe:
The left is more along the lines of taking away peoples rights for the majority of the disenfranchised aka socialism. The "we take from the hard working rich and give to the lazy ass poor." The left views freedom from a different point of view then the right. The right concentrates on protecting a person's freedom so they have the ABILITY to produce without unjust persecution. Freedom for the left means: Freedom to have free education, free subsidised healthcare, free food stamps, etc while taking away the constitutionally protected freedoms of the middle and upper class. If you take my money and give it to someone else because I have worked harder and earned more, you are stealing from me and in turn hurting supply side economics, hurting the economy overall, and putting the poor in a worse position then if they let the capital of the well-to-do's be spent back into the system, creating lower cost on items. You can give the poor more of my tax's but if i do not spend my money, prices will go up, and the extra money the poor recieved will not overtake the difference between rising cost and there increased supplimentation.

Well-written libertarian analysis of the modern American left.

CHRISISALL

Friday, March 31, 2006 5:55 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by CrevanReaver:

Well-written libertarian analysis of the modern American left.

If he was describing the left, then I'm right.

He is, in fact, describing the looney left fringe, as I would say W is representative of the looney right.
Somewhere in the middle we all come closer to agreeing on many points, left or right, I think.

Nothing's free, and war is not the solution to every economic problem.

Liberal Libertarian Chrisisall

ZANARY

Friday, March 31, 2006 9:10 PM

This has stayed more civil than any political debate I've seen in years....

I tend to think the Republican Party is the natural governing party...and the Democrats are the reason why, particulary lately.

The Dems have an unfortunate amount of input from the celebrity fold-like they know more about leadership than anyone else. I've yet to see that most celebs ever like anyone that would make a good Commander-in-Chief during a time of crisis.

In any case, I tend to think that both political extremes are horrifying, and that a true centrist with the right backing could take an election from the two "main" parties.

Some of us can always hear music.

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 NEXT PAGE