So what now for the Republican right?

Wow, you really got if figured out StpLSD25.
So if you are far right you are for total freedom. As in freedom for large corporations to do anything they want to do, and freedom for middle aged white christian men to tell women what they can or cannot do with their bodies.
And if you are a lefty you are....a nazi?
I think you may have missed a meeting.
Or something.

 

Umm as in, NOTHING. "As in freedom for large corporations..." No! The only reason why large corporations are to be feared is because they're in bed with the American Government. The Military-Industrial complex is several corporations who would lose a job if it were up to me. You're just putting words in my mouth, acting like everyone who may have views that sway to the right act a certain way. Well, that's simply not true.

Leftist believe in BIGGER government. More printing, more borrowing and, more spending. I believe in a limited government that leaves people alone. No stealing large sums of their checks, or giving banks, or any corporation special government benefits. They would have to stick to the Constitution and repeal the NDAA, HR 347, NDRP, CISPA, The Patriot Act, the espionage act and, many more tyrannical laws that gives the government more power than they need or deserve. I'm not a republican, I'm Libertarian.

 

When I say freedom I mean end the Drug war, abolish the IRS, abolish the federal reserve,(go back to a currency based on Gold,) give Americans rights to opt out of Medicare, ObamaCare, Social Security or government mandated anything!!! I also think all taxes should be abolished, and replaced with the fair tax. Legalize gay marriage and stop spying on people. Basically the government should just get out of our lives.

I wasn't saying Liberals were literally like Nazis, but you guys believe in A LOT of government like Nazis do..

 

Oh, I totally agree that there is too much government. And I agree with some of what you are saying.
End "The Drug War" obviously, goes without saying.
Legalize gay marriage, yes.
But I am a horrid socialist I'm afraid. We had the "every man for himself" thing in the UK when mad bitch Thatcher was PM. It was ugly. This means that I think that good health care and education should be available for all - its the only way that a civilised society can advance.
And this has to be paid for.
With taxes and I can see no way around that.

 

The only problem with us complaining about the problem of there being too much government is the fact that we are the minority. I remember from an American Government class in college that the people have the power to change the government from the form it takes now to something more suited to the people's standard, but first the minority has to reach the majority. I do not see that happening any time soon.

 

Well it's not every man for himself. I'd just like to see all that on a state level,(Healthcare and Education) and the ability to opt out. Because, not everyone needs insurance you know?? I don't, and it hardly seems fair that I still have to pay taxes on it.

Also when the government runs education they're essentially controlling the child's mind in their most impressionable years. There's a joke TV show, that showed kids saying the "Pledge of Alligence" and at that end they're like "This is not a form of brainwashing. This is not a form of brainwashing. This is not a form of brainwashing."

Lol it's stupid but I really feel like that's how it is. Even some things on the Liberal agenda and some Liberal people are bad big government ideas. Ted Turner who is an open liberal has come out in support of population control (killing citizens.) and personally I believe some secularist ideas push toward the agenda of the elite. Like gun control. If the government can't trust us with our guns, why would we trust them with theirs??

With the amount of money government prints and spends on wars, a lot more should be going around, I agree. We are at a turning point as society as a whole to invest in things for our betterment. But the current system feeds a select few (including the big corporations you mentioned,) and quite literally destroy the middle class and that's what's happening IMO in this country.

If they fixed the misuse of our money, and malinvestments of our government, I'm sure there would be tons of money to be "redistributed." But in reality the government doesn't own that money they took it from me and you. So it seems more reasonable to me, to let us keep our money; and as consumers the money would stay in the economy (of either country.)

Instead the government "bails out" every failure bank and business.

 

Declaration Of Independence.

 

Well the majority understands somethings wrong. But there's so many explanations on what and how to fix it. But I think if we sent people to Washington to adhere strictly to the Constitution, we'd see a drastic improvement!!!

 

With any luck all of your far right extremists will death march into the sea.

 

Jeez, that's a bit extreme. Do you consider me a "far right extremist?"

 

Again I think one of the problems with the American political system is that it doesn’t have a left, it has a liberal right of centre and a further right party.

The situation it seems to me is that through circumstance and ideology the further right party, the Republican Party has inched so far to the right that it is becoming unsupportable by even by some of those that are to the right of the Democratic party.

Now some may whoop and hope the Republican Party goes the way of the dodo, but I worry for the impact that might have on the US political system, because if the RP does become irrelevant then the US basically becomes a one party state, which is never a great idea.

It could also shift US politics further to the right. Politically it would be advantageous to the Democratic Party to move slightly to the right to poach even more right-winger voters. I mean there is nowhere else for liberals or even left wingers to go.

Can the Republican Party change? In the short term, I’m not sure it can, because I’m not sure it wants to and many Republican supporters will point to the virtual 50/50 popular vote and their continued control of the Senate as reason why they shouldn’t. And the problem is they could be right, a few minor and wholly cosmetic changes in policy (especially toward immigration and women’s rights) and a much more charismatic candidate could do it for them even if their far right stance doesn’t really change that much.

People don’t like change so many will vote for the guy whose there already but when change is forced upon them they often go for change, Obama’s two terms are up next time and often the American public have gone for change (in the main D admins follow R admins that follow D admins).

And of course there are always events, the Democratic race was helped last time by the financial meltdown and this time by Sandy.

But if the Republicans lost the next presidential race and especially if they lost some control on the hill (where they can bloke the President) then I think they will try to change but I expect that would be a slow process, and as I say I fear that by then it would mean that the US would have become a right wing one party state.

 

My solution to the above post (which is only a pipe dream) is that the two major parties split up, so you would have something along the lines of

The New Progressive Party – left

The Democratic Party – liberal

The Republican Party – moderate Right

The New Libertarian Party – neoliberal/free market right

With some type of proportional representation used to elect representatives.

(edit moderate right in a US context)

 

I don't know why you think Americans should grasp a bigger government. The fact of the matter is, we are to the Right on some issues. We have the Right to bear arms in our Constitution. Less government = More Freedom

It was one of our founders Thomas Jefferson who said

"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have. "


"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."

"To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical."


"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."

 

The thing with taxes is that they were supposed to be temporary, to support the war in the freedom against English rule. I guess the people forgot that "temporary" fact and forgot to end the taxes.

 

Hell yeah!!! America needs a 4 party voting system! More choices!

 

Do you think that womens bodies shut down when being raped so as to prevent pregnancy? Tactics such as voter suppression just plain not telling people what you plan to do with your power? Do you believe that we should eliminate minimum wage and that the vast majority of Americans are doing nothing but looking for government handouts?

I consider such out of touch Ideas to be far right extremes, unless you think any of the above is reasonable, there's more that could go up there by the way, then I don't think you are an extremist. Honestly I think most of your extremists are million and billionaires who are jut too out of touch with reality to understand the lives of real people such as you and I.

 

A common thread shared by all Libertarians is the belief that Government does not have the right to tell anyone what they can/cannot so to their own bodies. Women are included in this.

 

When you make posts on a public forum that show total disregard for life and death issues that other people are extremely passionate about, you can't expect to get a free pass from everyone. Sooner or later, somebody is going to say the things that need to be said.

At this point, I'm not sure there is anything anyone could say to PR that would get through to him on any issue. I think he stopped listening to other people a long time ago.

Don't you hate it when people hide behind a computer to say heartless things that they could never get away with saying face to face? It's no fun to be on the receiving end. I can play that game too, but I would say everything I posted to his face, without hesitation.

I strongly agree. Without a healthy, significant adversary, a political party quickly rots from within. We need for the GOP to get its act together and come up with a platform that is relevant in today's world.

I know that it's feasible to have more than two parties under a parliamentary system, but I'm not sure that would be practical under the US constitution. It would definitely require some radical changes.

The Tea Party is now essentially a party within a party, which is very dysfunctional. Nobody knows what to do with that. It's a very uncomfortable situation for John Boehner, made worse by the fact that Eric Cantor is a total dick.

 

don't count on luck! moderates like you will have to prod them with bayonets

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Q3xghOTckM"]BREAKING: Guest Herman Cain calls for a third party - YouTube