A change in the GOP?

[YPestis]

Does anyone see the current election as a turning point for the progressive politics? Throughout the 90's, we saw the rise of the Religious Right. Bush's two elections brought upon the current GOP strategy of playing to the Base. The GOP used to be about taxes and small govt, they now seemed controlled by people whose only priority is abortion, gays and turning the country into a theocracy. Climate change is somehow a big hoax perpetrated by those PhD climatologists and evolution was invented by atheist scientists (you know, the ones who brought you vaccines, antibiotics and heart transplants).

I've seen Republican leaning friends turned off by such wing-nuts. One staunch Republican friend has disavowed the Pat Robertsons from the GOP. He used to insist that the religiosity is just a show by Republicans to get votes, nothing more. Another friend would love to vote Republican but find himself increasingly at odds with their social issues. He was elated when Obama won because the GOP was just "run by crazies". My own husband grew up Republican, voted that way in prior elections but now talk more like a Democrat than me (who is a card carrying one). He's probably more of an independent, but has been so turned off by the talk of gays, rape, creationism and Tea Partiers that he thought this election may actually be good for the GOP because it may kick the crazies out.

We got fundies who feel their beliefs represent the "real" America, that they are "this close" to overturning abortion, who are oblivious to the acceptance of gays in our society.....until this election. Now, finally, I feel fundies are starting to realize a big chunk of the country don't share their beliefs, care little for abortion as a national issue and don't care if gays marry.

I feel that the past two decades has seen a right ward drift in national politics and we now may be witnessing a slow re-emergence of liberalism again. In the 90's, people saw the emergence of the religious right. Bush acknowledged their power and specifically catered to them at the expense of...everyone else. The Tea Party, despite their talk of taxes and small govt, is just a progression of right-wingers brandishing their confidence in their domination of the GOP. To them, it wasn't good to be right of center, one has to be crazy right-wing to be a "real" republican. We got a generation of young conservatives people who are used to being wooed by national candidates despite their fringe politics. People had spitting competition to see who was more crazy conservative. Meanwhile on the Democrat side, "liberalism" was a taboo word, and it was all about being moderate and playing to the center.

Now, I hope we are see the shift back to the Left. I would love for the GOP controlled by moderates again. I would love for "liberal" to not be a pejorative in national politics. I like to think this election will see the start of that. I am not a flaming Leftist, but I'm sick of the Jim Duggars thinking their beliefs represent the rest of America, or that they are 'this close' to establishing a theocracy. They are not. I hope the next 10 years will see the ever expanding rise of gay rights, continued protection of abortion rights, a paying down of our national debt through equitable budgetary cuts (not just non-defense cutbacks), and acceptance of the plurality of this country. I also hope to see fundies fall back and realize that America is changing and the lifestyle and period they strive for will never come back. Maybe it will make them rethink their own place in the universe.

[lilwriter85]

I'm also hoping for the GOP to be controlled by moderates again. I have a couple Republic relatives who swing voted in this election because they were fed up with a lot of the crazies. One of my Republican relatives gets annoyed with the fundies who actually believe that abortion will be overturned and who are anti-gay.

[ElphabaGalinda]

I hope so, because there should be two viable options for people who aren't crazy. My hope is that social issues have no place in a presidential election ever again. Social issues are not part of elections in most developed countries (at least not in Canada anymore), and the US should follow that pattern.

[Guest Anonymous]

I'd LIKE to ascribe good intentions to them, but snakes never stop slithering

[valsa]

I hope so, because there should be two viable options for people who aren't crazy.

I don't think we're ever going to lose the two-party system.

Politicians love power, no matter which end of the spectrum they're on. Once it's made abundantly clear (ie- once you leave the Fox News studio and join reality) that you cannot retain power on the highest level of this country by catering to the most extreme of the right wingers, they'll move left (at least in the presidential race) It'll be slow going and there will be distinct side-stepping of social issues ("Gay marriage is a question left up to the states, not the federal government", "Abortion is legal although we do need to reduce how often it happens"- you know, basically how the Democrats sounded 10-20 years ago) with increased focus on economics, which is an issue they still have some viability with.

Granted, local Republicans will likely stay as crazy conservative as they already are (because it's much easier to get elected on a local level and still be batshit) but even they will eventually start to mirror the leaders of the party.

[Seven Severn]

Now, I hope we are see the shift back to the Left. I would love for the GOP controlled by moderates again. I would love for "liberal" to not be a pejorative in national politics. I like to think this election will see the start of that. I am not a flaming Leftist, but I'm sick of the Jim Duggars thinking their beliefs represent the rest of America, or that they are 'this close' to establishing a theocracy. They are not. I hope the next 10 years will see the ever expanding rise of gay rights, continued protection of abortion rights, a paying down of our national debt through equitable budgetary cuts (not just non-defense cutbacks), and acceptance of the plurality of this country. I also hope to see fundies fall back and realize that America is changing and the lifestyle and period they strive for will never come back. Maybe it will make them rethink their own place in the universe.

I have to confess that I hope the bolded and underlined (mine) doesn't happen. I want them to realize their "mistake" in nominating Romney and double down on the crazy. More than anything I want them to think that the reason Romney didn't win was because he wasn't conservative enough and that they have to go with a True Believer™ next time. Yes, I know that a sane, Ike-like Republican party would be good to work with, but in order for the Republican party to be acceptable to me and everyone I know they'd have to lose all the Jesus shit, think abortion should be legal with few if any restrictions, think that women, gays and people with brown skin are real human beings and full-fledged citizens, etc, etc. And now they've become Democrats.

[BravaAmica]

We got fundies who feel their beliefs represent the "real" America, that they are "this close" to overturning abortion, who are oblivious to the acceptance of gays in our society.....until this election. Now, finally, I feel fundies are starting to realize a big chunk of the country don't share their beliefs, care little for abortion as a national issue and don't care if gays marry.

Fundies, with their skewed ideals of the past and their innate ability to deny things like reality, are incapable of such introspection. If anything, this election will ramp up the crazy. Fundies (and those that want to use them for political gain) are going to only get louder and Louder and LOUDER until they are forcibly removed from the political sphere. I hope it doesn't come to that but the fundie sub-culture has been involved in politics for too long- courted, flattered and thrown bones like DOMA- to go away quietly.They are not going to go quietly and we can't ignore them like we would a toddler clamoring for attention.

I feel that the past two decades has seen a right ward drift in national politics and we now may be witnessing a slow re-emergence of liberalism again.

I truly hope you are correct.

I hope the next 10 years will see the ever expanding rise of gay rights, continued protection of abortion rights, a paying down of our national debt through equitable budgetary cuts (not just non-defense cutbacks), and acceptance of the plurality of this country.

I hope so as well. I truly don't understand why so many people think they have the right to decide who someone can marry, what health care decisions a woman can make and why it's wrong for other people to be a different race, religion, gender and morals. I don't support laws that forbid them practicing their religion. I DO support laws that forbid them from inflicting their beliefs on others, though. My personal choices don't affect them. I;m not going to allow theirs to affect me.

I also hope to see fundies fall back and realize that America is changing and the lifestyle and period they strive for will never come back. Maybe it will make them rethink their own place in the universe.

I hope that as well. I would love nothing more than for fundies to shut the fuck up, stay on their homesteads, pretend they're still in the 19th century and remove themselves completely from the public sphere. But like I said, fundies aren't introspective. They aren't capable of such critical thinking, much less applying that to their own beliefs and minds. So the thing to do is watch dog them until they're out of the public sphere. They aren't going to do anything like realize their beliefs actually harm others.

edited for riffles. Again.

[BravaAmica]

I have to confess that I hope the bolded and underlined (mine) doesn't happen. I want them to realize their "mistake" in nominating Romney and double down on the crazy. More than anything I want them to think that the reason Romney didn't win was because he wasn't conservative enough and that they have to go with a True Believer™ next time. Yes, I know that a sane, Ike-like Republican party would be good to work with, but in order for the Republican party to be acceptable to me and everyone I know they'd have to lose all the Jesus shit, think abortion should be legal with few if any restrictions, think that women, gays and people with brown skin are real human beings and full-fledged citizens, etc, etc. And now they've become Democrats.

Do you think that would be enough to get the Republican party to dump the jesus bullshit? Because it took decades for it to manifest- like since the early 1970s (wasn't Nixon the first candidate who moralized abortion and thus mobilized the religious right?), I think. So it would take a long time for the RNP to dump the crazies. Perhaps it would happen faster since we're in the information age but, still, it'd be a long time.

The RNP would have to change its mission statement to something like, "We're not going to challenge settled law like voting rights, a woman's right to choose, ect. to focus on fiscal responsibility. And we're also committed to the separation of church and state." Which I don't see happening.

[argypargy]

I hope this is the tipping point, but there are still a lot of Republicans who think Romney lost because he wasn't conservative enough.

[BravaAmica]

I hope this is the tipping point, but there are still a lot of Republicans who think Romney lost because he wasn't conservative enough.

I hope so as well. But I don't think so. I think they're going to double and triple down on the crazy. Hopefully they will implode and leave us in peace.

[Witsec7]

The republicans are the party of denial. Denial is what lost the election for them. Denial is going to give Obama 3 potential SC appointments. I suspect that the republican party will split, further diluting their influence. It's all going to be fun to watch.

[YPestis]

I hope so as well. But I don't think so. I think they're going to double and triple down on the crazy. Hopefully they will implode and leave us in peace.

Well, the problem is that I also don't want a one-party system. Even if I agreed with everything a party stood for, I would still be wary of them holding so much power. Political parties have a tendency to split off into smaller splinters even when they hold all the cards. Plus, the US is so large I doubt having a one party rule would satisfy the majority of the populace.

If enough people feel disenfranchised about their elected leader, another group will rise to promote opposing viewpoints. As much as I dislike certain conservative tenents, I don't believe that making their political representatives go away is healthy in a democracy, nor will it see their ideas disappear. I believe democracy is a great system to allow people of opposing viewpoints to live together.

For the past two decades, I feel conservatives have held too much power over the political scene. It was a race to the bottom to see who was more conservative. Since when was it mainstream politics to push out political moderates? Yet that was what Tea Partiers and major power players in the GOP did. They were advocating polices NOT representative of the majority of the population. In many ways, it was a rule by a loud minority. I"m hoping that the GOP will see they've gone too far right and start acknowledging the more moderate voices in their party. Compromises are at the heart of living in a diverse society. The GOP forgot that. I'm hoping this election has reminded everyone that no one wants to be marginalized. However, if your politics is fringe, you have to be prepared to make far more compromises than mainstream moderates...that's just the nature of democracy, that the majority's vote takes precedence.

[BlueChair]

The whole American political landscape has moved to the right over the last two + decades. If the Democrats try to do anything remotely progressive or something that would have represented the heart and soul of their party 50 years ago, they are labeled socialists and commies. The only way for the Democratic party to get back to business is for the whole political system to take another shift back to the left. Then normal Democratic platform issues will seem just that: normal. No more claims of extremism when they are just trying to do what they are meant to be doing.

I think the religious right may have bottomed out with how far they can take things. It's too early to tell, but I'm hoping that's what this last election was starting to reveal.

[valsa]

Well, the problem is that I also don't want a one-party system.

There's never going to be a one-party system (well, not anytime soon at least. Once hyperintelligent cats take over though, all bets are off) Republicans will shift to the left and, in turn, so will Democrats. Maybe we'll actually have "conservative" and "liberal", instead of "ultra conservative" and "moderate". Won't that be nice?

[ElphabaGalinda]

There's never going to be a one-party system (well, not anytime soon at least. Once hyperintelligent cats take over though, all bets are off) Republicans will shift to the left and, in turn, so will Democrats. Maybe we'll actually have "conservative" and "liberal", instead of "ultra conservative" and "moderate". Won't that be nice?

That's what I hope happens. Obama is a moderate, and roughly the equivalent to our Conservatives here. I'd like both parties to become more liberal, so that the brand of ultra conservative that is the current Republican party is no longer acceptable in national politics.

I like the three party system we have in Canada, especially after the last election when NDP has become a more viable option.

[Coconut Flan]

A friend of mine this weekend said that what the Democrats stand for today is what the Republicans stood for 40 years ago. I'm no historian so I can't validate that, but the descent into Jerry Falwell type rhetoric scares me. At the time, he was seen and mocked for being on the fringe. Now some of the guys make him look reasonable. It has to change.

[valsa]

I like the three party system we have in Canada, especially after the last election when NDP has become a more viable option.

I think if we had a viable three-party system in the U.S., half the voting populations' heads would explode from confusion. Not to mention there'd be even more political ads :cry:

[BlueChair]

A friend of mine this weekend said that what the Democrats stand for today is what the Republicans stood for 40 years ago. I'm no historian so I can't validate that, but the descent into Jerry Falwell type rhetoric scares me. At the time, he was seen and mocked for being on the fringe. Now some of the guys make him look reasonable. It has to change.

That's exactly what I was trying to say. The Democrats are now more in line with Reagan and the Republicans are more in line with the likes of Falwell. It's really hard to make and "liberal" changes or improvements when the who political spectrum has shifted so far to the right. When we're all so far to the right, it's the left that seems extreme.

[ElphabaGalinda]

I think if we had a viable three-party system in the U.S., half the voting populations' heads would explode from confusion. Not to mention there'd be even more political ads :cry:

Yeah, your elections also last years, while ours last a few weeks, and we never get quite as many crazy ads. It's just nice to have a option that is liberal, an option that is conservative and an option in the middle. Though conservative doesn't even mean the same thing. I think about 40 years ago Obama would be considered a typical republican, so I hope it goes back in that direction.

[tadpole]

I came across this article and thought it might apply here:

ericgarland.co/2012/11/09/letter-to-a-future-republican-strategist-regarding-white-people

[GolightlyGrrl]

A friend of mine this weekend said that what the Democrats stand for today is what the Republicans stood for 40 years ago. I'm no historian so I can't validate that, but the descent into Jerry Falwell type rhetoric scares me. At the time, he was seen and mocked for being on the fringe. Now some of the guys make him look reasonable. It has to change.

Well, people do call Obama a Rockefeller Republican and I tend to agree. He's hardly a far lefty. When idiots call him a Socialist I just roll my eyes.

[valsa]

Well, people do call Obama a Rockefeller Republican and I tend to agree. He's hardly a far lefty. When idiots call him a Socialist I just roll my eyes.

When idiots call him a socialist I want to hit them in the head with a dictonary.

[jjmennonite]

I hope so, because there should be two viable options for people who aren't crazy. My hope is that social issues have no place in a presidential election ever again. Social issues are not part of elections in most developed countries (at least not in Canada anymore), and the US should follow that pattern.

Here in Alberta (Canada's Bible Belt) we actually did have an upstart party, WildRose Alliance Party, in our last provincial election, who were talking crap about abortion and gays. They are now the official opposition. I believe they kicked out the evangelist minister candidate who had anti-gay rhetoric on his personal blog, though.

I doubt that would happen in Ontario.

I have limited contact with my fundy relatives, so I forget how crazy those points of view are, but I remember the propoganda, as a child. Then we (fundies) were afraid of communism - not gays or abortions.

[ElphabaGalinda]

Here in Alberta (Canada's Bible Belt) we actually did have an upstart party, WildRose Alliance Party, in our last provincial election, who were talking crap about abortion and gays. They are now the official opposition. I believe they kicked out the evangelist minister candidate who had anti-gay rhetoric on his personal blog, though.

I doubt that would happen in Ontario.

I have limited contact with my fundy relatives, so I forget how crazy those points of view are, but I remember the propoganda, as a child. Then we (fundies) were afraid of communism - not gays or abortions.

I know very little about the Wildrose Alliance party other than they're crazy, but I did mean at a federal level, specifically for Prime Minister, they wouldn't be talking about gays or abortions. No one who wants to be prime minister would have a chance if they spoke about such things. Even Stephen Harper, who was once publicly against gay marriage, won't talk about it anymore.

No that would never happen in Ontario, and most of the crazy MPs do seem to come from Alberta, but I think that's part of the reason that a prime minister can't be openly anti choice or openly anti gay marriage. Because they need all the other provinces to win, particularly they'd need the big cities, and they wouldn't get that if they openly showed their crazy.

Out of curiosity, do you get that sort of crazy propaganda for federal elections as well? And have you ever heard of a Canadian fundie who's against universal healthcare? That's one thing I've never understood about fundies. The federal conservative party, although has its flaws, does not use crazy social conservatism as part of its platform like the American Republicans.

[jjmennonite]

Yes, good ol' Stevie is from here. And he is a born-agian Christian. And he did allow the abortion debate in parliament after he promised not to.

What I remember from my childhood, when Trudeau was about to be elected, was my aunt saying 'He is a Communist. He is going to turn Canada into a Comunist country.' Imagine that said by somebody with a very pinched face and lots of fear in their voice.

I hear very little in the media about that stuff now.