53% of Americans Think Republicans are Too Extreme

[Kravmaga]

Denying that there is a problem was not the issue….it was the failure to recognize a shift/change in our culture. We have shifted from a land of opportunity to the land of entitlements. The question now is will the Republican Party change their principles just for votes…that scares the living shit out of me.

 

[Mac1958]

Denying that there is a problem was not the issue….it was the failure to recognize a shift/change in our culture. We have shifted from a land of opportunity to the land of entitlements. The question now is will the Republican Party change their principles just for votes…that scares the living shit out of me.

And there it is.

The culture has changed right under conservatives' noses, and they're evidently just now seeing it. Changing a culture doesn't happen overnight, and this has been brewing for decades.

They can't change the culture back in one election. They can't play the "my way or the highway" game that they're trying to play. If they want to move the country away from the entitlement mentality at this point, they're going to have to settle for incremental victories -- which is precisely what the Left did.

The crazies, the absolutists in the party, don't see that. They think they can change the culture overnight, and they're wrong.

.

 

[freedombecki]

Denying that there is a problem was not the issue….it was the failure to recognize a shift/change in our culture. We have shifted from a land of opportunity to the land of entitlements. The question now is will the Republican Party change their principles just for votes…that scares the living shit out of me.

And there it is.

The culture has changed right under conservatives' noses, and they're evidently just now seeing it. Changing a culture doesn't happen overnight, and this has been brewing for decades.

They can't change the culture back in one election. They can't play the "my way or the highway" game that they're trying to play. If they want to move the country away from the entitlement mentality at this point, they're going to have to settle for incremental victories -- which is precisely what the Left did.

The crazies, the absolutists in the party, don't see that. They think they can change the culture overnight, and they're wrong.
.

Absolutists?

Sorry, Mac, your simplification of my party's alleged shortcomings ignore some of the problems of our time:

(1) A corrupt leftist, lockstep press that worships the financial rewards provided by wealthy people who manipulate the loyal opposition

(2) A corrupt election mechanism controlled by corrupt former ACORN members and supporters who are using omerta to commit voter fraud. This type of fraud gaming is difficult but not impossible to catch. The problem is that problem is pandemic and is suspected of being the cause for why polls did not match vote counts and the unlikely scenario of multiple districts reporting 99% or higher vote counts for Democrats. The only time that has occurred in American history has been tracked to fraud, but omerta frauds are harder to track, but will eventually surface.

(3) The Democrats are promising small groups huge benefits and keeping the benefits rolling when money runs out by printing more paper money and using that to back their schemas.

(4) The US National Debt is now at 16.4 trillion dollars. There is no plan underway that I am aware of to prioritize spending, putting national security issues first. Instead, we're hearing about Obamaphones and welfare fraud with more than one case of people inventing so many identities they're collecting up to a million apiece, and many are doing more than 2 paychecks apiece in a fraudulent way.

Something will give with this most corrupt government ever. The President spends at least an hour a week announcing how he is going to "ruin" Republicans for not cooperating with his massive spendathon that has brought us 2 downgrades that I know about and an uncertain fiscal future.

 

[007]

I'd love to see this happen. If the hardcore absolutists are so sure they can win on their own -- and they clearly are -- then they should stop complaining about "RINO's" and moderates and get on with it. Start a new party, let's go.

What are they waiting for?

.

They're no more "hard core absolutists" than liberals are. In fact at this point the greatest "hard core absolutists" in our government is obama. To him it's "my way or the highway." You know it, I know it, we all know... however it seems only those who don't worship obama will admit it.

The republicans need to find their back bone and get rid of the weasels. Yes, conservatism can win, someone who will stand their ground will win, we found that out in 2010 when the Tea Party gave the democrats a "shellacking." The only people that are all up in arms and ridiculing and calling names are the "hard core libroid hacks," because UNDERSTANDABLY, they HATE true conservatives and are doing everything in their power to run them down, so they created this false narrative that true conservatives can't win, when nothing could be further from the truth. Romney got the moderate vote in HUGE numbers, those coveted MIDDLE ground people, and he still LOST the election. Why? Because he DIDN'T GET THE CONSERVATIVE VOTE! The republicans need a person to say what needs to be said and not be afraid. I see the republicans right now as a bunch of discombooberated pussies afraid of everything. When they find their balls they'll reemerge as winners. 'Til then, they'll keep losing elections.

We'll have to disagree on who the hardcore absolutists are. Right now, all I see (and all voters see) is a small group from one party in one of the three branches of government holding everything up because they absolutely refuse to budge on anything.

But anyway, I'm trying to get to the bottom line here, and it's been tough as hell for me to get a straight answer from the others.

You're saying that, if the GOP gets rid of those they feel are RINO's and moderates, they'll be able to win more elections?

.

Yup.

 

[elvis]

They're no more "hard core absolutists" than liberals are. In fact at this point the greatest "hard core absolutists" in our government is obama. To him it's "my way or the highway." You know it, I know it, we all know... however it seems only those who don't worship obama will admit it.

The republicans need to find their back bone and get rid of the weasels. Yes, conservatism can win, someone who will stand their ground will win, we found that out in 2010 when the Tea Party gave the democrats a "shellacking." The only people that are all up in arms and ridiculing and calling names are the "hard core libroid hacks," because UNDERSTANDABLY, they HATE true conservatives and are doing everything in their power to run them down, so they created this false narrative that true conservatives can't win, when nothing could be further from the truth. Romney got the moderate vote in HUGE numbers, those coveted MIDDLE ground people, and he still LOST the election. Why? Because he DIDN'T GET THE CONSERVATIVE VOTE! The republicans need a person to say what needs to be said and not be afraid. I see the republicans right now as a bunch of discombooberated pussies afraid of everything. When they find their balls they'll reemerge as winners. 'Til then, they'll keep losing elections.

We'll have to disagree on who the hardcore absolutists are. Right now, all I see (and all voters see) is a small group from one party in one of the three branches of government holding everything up because they absolutely refuse to budge on anything.

But anyway, I'm trying to get to the bottom line here, and it's been tough as hell for me to get a straight answer from the others.

You're saying that, if the GOP gets rid of those they feel are RINO's and moderates, they'll be able to win more elections?

.

Yup.

We've been clobbered twice in a row now running moderates. GOP will not take another chance on a moderate.

 

[Plasmaball]

We'll have to disagree on who the hardcore absolutists are. Right now, all I see (and all voters see) is a small group from one party in one of the three branches of government holding everything up because they absolutely refuse to budge on anything.

But anyway, I'm trying to get to the bottom line here, and it's been tough as hell for me to get a straight answer from the others.

You're saying that, if the GOP gets rid of those they feel are RINO's and moderates, they'll be able to win more elections?

.

Yup.

We've been clobbered twice in a row now running moderates. GOP will not take another chance on a moderate.

I don't predict things, but if you remove these people, you wont win the white house ever again. That group will become so small and irrelevant. You remain with the house because of the rinos and moderates.

But hey go ahead shoot yourself in the foot. It will be amusing watching you flail around( don't mean literal you).

 

[elvis]

Yup.

We've been clobbered twice in a row now running moderates. GOP will not take another chance on a moderate.

I don't predict things, but if you remove these people, you wont win the white house ever again. That group will become so small and irrelevant. You remain with the house because of the rinos and moderates.

But hey go ahead shoot yourself in the foot. It will be amusing watching you flail around( don't mean literal you).

Lmao. I do not support the extreme fringe, ala Santorum, Palin, bachmann. I just think that is the direction the party is heading. Plus the fact the GOP has a "next in line" mentality. That would imply a Santorum nomination. God help us.

 

[Plasmaball]

Denying that there is a problem was not the issue….it was the failure to recognize a shift/change in our culture. We have shifted from a land of opportunity to the land of entitlements. The question now is will the Republican Party change their principles just for votes…that scares the living shit out of me.

And there it is.

The culture has changed right under conservatives' noses, and they're evidently just now seeing it. Changing a culture doesn't happen overnight, and this has been brewing for decades.

They can't change the culture back in one election. They can't play the "my way or the highway" game that they're trying to play. If they want to move the country away from the entitlement mentality at this point, they're going to have to settle for incremental victories -- which is precisely what the Left did.

The crazies, the absolutists in the party, don't see that. They think they can change the culture overnight, and they're wrong.
.

Absolutists?

Sorry, Mac, your simplification of my party's alleged shortcomings ignore some of the problems of our time:

(1) A corrupt leftist, lockstep press that worships the financial rewards provided by wealthy people who manipulate the loyal opposition

(2) A corrupt election mechanism controlled by corrupt former ACORN members and supporters who are using omerta to commit voter fraud. This type of fraud gaming is difficult but not impossible to catch. The problem is that problem is pandemic and is suspected of being the cause for why polls did not match vote counts and the unlikely scenario of multiple districts reporting 99% or higher vote counts for Democrats. The only time that has occurred in American history has been tracked to fraud, but omerta frauds are harder to track, but will eventually surface.

(3) The Democrats are promising small groups huge benefits and keeping the benefits rolling when money runs out by printing more paper money and using that to back their schemas.

(4) The US National Debt is now at 16.4 trillion dollars. There is no plan underway that I am aware of to prioritize spending, putting national security issues first. Instead, we're hearing about Obamaphones and welfare fraud with more than one case of people inventing so many identities they're collecting up to a million apiece, and many are doing more than 2 paychecks apiece in a fraudulent way.

Something will give with this most corrupt government ever. The President spends at least an hour a week announcing how he is going to "ruin" Republicans for not cooperating with his massive spendathon that has brought us 2 downgrades that I know about and an uncertain fiscal future.

1) lol...what partisan bullshit. Its only the left who are in bed with the government. You really are blind.

2)conspiracies is about half the page down. Feel free to visit.

3)wow....democrats are promising things. You come up with that yourself?
I mean that can't be any different when a candidate pledges to fit for prolife rights to a small select group. Or promises no new taxes to a certain grover....

4) well no we have the fical cliff talks that show people are trying to solve the issue. They may not be doing it right, but they are trying.

Its amazing how badly you miss the boat on all 4 points. You like steph, like 007/polewelcher are absolutists in your thinking. You don't budge, you don't think, and you would bring down the nation to get your way.

You are more a burden to this nation than an asset, yet sadly you people don't see this and prefer to dwell in your warped conspiracies, so you can claim you are a victim of big bad government.

 

[Plasmaball]

We've been clobbered twice in a row now running moderates. GOP will not take another chance on a moderate.

I don't predict things, but if you remove these people, you wont win the white house ever again. That group will become so small and irrelevant. You remain with the house because of the rinos and moderates.

But hey go ahead shoot yourself in the foot. It will be amusing watching you flail around( don't mean literal you).

Lmao. I do not support the extreme fringe, ala Santorum, Palin, bachmann. I just think that is the direction the party is heading. Plus the fact the GOP has a "next in line" mentality. That would imply a Santorum nomination. God help us.

Nah I don't think he will be a front runner again. Like I said they push more to the right and use polewelcher type opinions they will never see another seat again.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Denying that there is a problem was not the issue….it was the failure to recognize a shift/change in our culture. We have shifted from a land of opportunity to the land of entitlements. The question now is will the Republican Party change their principles just for votes…that scares the living shit out of me.

You should be more frightened of your ignorance and stupidity to believe such nonsense.

You’re correct about one thing, however, society has changed.

We’ve not only become a land of greater opportunity, but a land of greater opportunity for more Americans than any time in the past. We’ve become a Nation if diversity – with regard to race, ethnicity, religion, and sexual orientation, and we’ve become a Nation that welcomes and embraces diversity.

The problem for the GOP is their opposition to diversity and change, they seek to stifle dissent and impose conformity. Conservatives are engaged in a fruitless reactionary battle to return America to an idealized past that never existed in the first place.

 

[Kravmaga]

Name calling…ouch! Diversity is great and I have no issues with the changes in our society in that respect; however, if I do not agree with the liberal point of view on entitlements then I am stifling dissent and imposing conformity. Such tactics are exactly what is polarizing this country.

 

[Mac1958]

Correct. Liberalism is destroying the nation.
The kind of far left liberalism we see from Obama and his followers is pushing the nation too far to the left. It's all about "what will government do for me".
The Obama admin has divided this country so deeply, it may take years to correct this.
This is what liberalism stand for. Place people into groups and pit them against each other.
The other day, Obama made a speech. In that speech he said "no one will get everything they want." That was a lie.
Obama's enormous ego will not allow for anything but his way.

Yes, that's a description of why you think the GOP should take control away from the Democrats, but it does nothing to describe how you're going to get enough votes without appealing to "RINOs" and moderates.

.

Rephrase.....Conservatives. There is a dire need to purge the GOP of go along to get along big tent center left leaning RINO's

Okay, great, there it is: The GOP needs to purge itself of "go along to get along big tent center left leaning RINO's".

So, I guess I'll try this one more time: How is the GOP supposed to win elections if the party does not include any moderates, if all the moderates are chased out and vote Democrat?

Where are the votes?

.

 

[Toro]

We'll have to disagree on who the hardcore absolutists are. Right now, all I see (and all voters see) is a small group from one party in one of the three branches of government holding everything up because they absolutely refuse to budge on anything.

But anyway, I'm trying to get to the bottom line here, and it's been tough as hell for me to get a straight answer from the others.

You're saying that, if the GOP gets rid of those they feel are RINO's and moderates, they'll be able to win more elections?

.

Yup.

We've been clobbered twice in a row now running moderates. GOP will not take another chance on a moderate.

I don't understand this logic. Why would the majority of voters support a highly conservative candidate when only a minority of Americans describe themselves as conservatives? The Republican party is already losing the majority of voters who aren't conservative, particularly moderates, whom they've lost in 5 of the past 6 Presidential elections. Republicans have lost four of the last six Presidential elections and 5 of the last 6 Presidential popular votes. Conservatives like to point to Reagan but conveniently forget that Goldwater was crushed.

To me, conservatives saying we need a more conservative candidate sounds an awful lot like a football team running the ball 40 times a game but getting 3.0 yards per carry saying the team needs to run the ball 60 times because "running the ball is how you win football games" in a pass-happy league. The Republican party doesn't need more conservative candidates. They need better candidates, period. The Republican party has all sorts of conservatives throwing themselves at the nomination but the party keeps refusing them. It's hard to believe that all these conservatives trying to take up the mantle of Reagan who can't get nominated by the Republican party would win the general election if they can't convince a group of like-minded people to vote for them in the first place.

 

[ecinicola]

The way i see it, is people in this country are changing and their thinking is being controlled and manipulated toward socialism and communism. They obviously like that way of life. There is no one to blame but the majority of the people who voted for this obama a second time around knowing he was a failure on all of us for the last 4 yrs. That should tell you right there, that peoples thinking has swayed.
I don't think either party is doing us any favors. They are all politicians trying to gain somethingi for themselves at our expense. We had our chance to change things, but the voters put us back in the same horrible situation. Now all we can do is try to survive what is about to come. They are changing laws that will affect all of our livelyhoods, and nothing is going to be the same. Get prepared because all of us are in for some really hard times ahead............thanks to the voters and this bunch in washington.
We have the same old people in office constantly and nothing will change.

 

[Mac1958]

Yup.

We've been clobbered twice in a row now running moderates. GOP will not take another chance on a moderate.

I don't understand this logic. Why would the majority of voters support a highly conservative candidate when only a minority of Americans describe themselves as conservatives? The Republican party is already losing the majority of voters who aren't conservative, particularly moderates, whom they've lost in 5 of the past 6 Presidential elections. Republicans have lost four of the last six Presidential elections and 5 of the last 6 Presidential popular votes. Conservatives like to point to Reagan but conveniently forget that Goldwater was crushed.

To me, conservatives saying we need a more conservative candidate sounds an awful lot like a football team running the ball 40 times a game but getting 3.0 yards per carry saying the team needs to run the ball 60 times because "running the ball is how you win football games" in a pass-happy league. The Republican party doesn't need more conservative candidates. They need better candidates, period. The Republican party has all sorts of conservatives throwing themselves at the nomination but the party keeps refusing them. It's hard to believe that all these conservatives trying to take up the mantle of Reagan who can't get nominated by the Republican party would win the general election if they can't convince a group of like-minded people to vote for them in the first place.

I'm trying to piece this together and I can't make sense of it.

First, they're saying that they need to get rid of anyone who isn't conservative enough. Of course, those people will have to go elsewhere. Evidently, their votes aren't needed, so it won't matter if these people vote Democrat.

Next, they're saying that they're not going to budge one inch on any of the issues. Okay, that's their call, but all I see them doing is appealing to an ever-dwindling amount of voters, even after they just lost to an incredibly vulnerable President.

My best guess is that they really don't have a plan here. They listen to the radio and are told that the party must be as pure as possible, that they cannot waiver on their issues, yet they can't describe how they're going to win elections.

If they're willing to be a permanent minority party to remain pure on the issues, that's their call of course, but I don't like the idea of one party (doesn't matter which) having so much control, as the Democrats may.

So, is there a plan here?

.

 

[Toro]

We've been clobbered twice in a row now running moderates. GOP will not take another chance on a moderate.

I don't understand this logic. Why would the majority of voters support a highly conservative candidate when only a minority of Americans describe themselves as conservatives? The Republican party is already losing the majority of voters who aren't conservative, particularly moderates, whom they've lost in 5 of the past 6 Presidential elections. Republicans have lost four of the last six Presidential elections and 5 of the last 6 Presidential popular votes. Conservatives like to point to Reagan but conveniently forget that Goldwater was crushed.

To me, conservatives saying we need a more conservative candidate sounds an awful lot like a football team running the ball 40 times a game but getting 3.0 yards per carry saying the team needs to run the ball 60 times because "running the ball is how you win football games" in a pass-happy league. The Republican party doesn't need more conservative candidates. They need better candidates, period. The Republican party has all sorts of conservatives throwing themselves at the nomination but the party keeps refusing them. It's hard to believe that all these conservatives trying to take up the mantle of Reagan who can't get nominated by the Republican party would win the general election if they can't convince a group of like-minded people to vote for them in the first place.

I'm trying to piece this together and I can't make sense of it.

First, they're saying that they need to get rid of anyone who isn't conservative enough. Of course, those people will have to go elsewhere. Evidently, their votes aren't needed, so it won't matter if these people vote Democrat.

Next, they're saying that they're not going to budge one inch on any of the issues. Okay, that's their call, but all I see them doing is appealing to an ever-dwindling amount of voters, even after they just lost to an incredibly vulnerable President.

My best guess is that they really don't have a plan here. They listen to the radio and are told that the party must be as pure as possible, that they cannot waiver on their issues, yet they can't describe how they're going to win elections.

If they're willing to be a permanent minority party to remain pure on the issues, that's their call of course, but I don't like the idea of one party (doesn't matter which) having so much control, as the Democrats may.

So, is there a plan here?

.

It appears that the national Republican party's strategy is to emulate the strategy of the California Republican party.

And that's not good for the nation.

 

[jillian]

We'll have to disagree on who the hardcore absolutists are. Right now, all I see (and all voters see) is a small group from one party in one of the three branches of government holding everything up because they absolutely refuse to budge on anything.

But anyway, I'm trying to get to the bottom line here, and it's been tough as hell for me to get a straight answer from the others.

You're saying that, if the GOP gets rid of those they feel are RINO's and moderates, they'll be able to win more elections?

.

Yup.

We've been clobbered twice in a row now running moderates. GOP will not take another chance on a moderate.

someone who supports 'personhood laws' and doesn't support equal pay for women; and doesn't withdraw his support from a senate candidate who says absurd and stupid things about rape victims, ISN'T a moderate. Someone who thinks if you vote democratic, that you're a moocher, isn't a moderate.

Your problem this time was your candidate... but not his moderation. it's that the 'base' forces your people so far to the right they can't move center during the general election. contrary to romney's campaign strategy, we have memories and you can't be an etch-a-sketch. And while McCain may have been a moderate in 2000, he wasn't in 2004. And both men picked far right VP candidates.

So i think you might want to reconsider.

 

[Mac1958]

Yup.

We've been clobbered twice in a row now running moderates. GOP will not take another chance on a moderate.

someone who supports 'personhood laws' and doesn't support equal pay for women; and doesn't withdraw his support from a senate candidate who says absurd and stupid things about rape victims, ISN'T a moderate. Someone who thinks if you vote democratic, that you're a moocher, isn't a moderate.

Your problem this time was your candidate... but not his moderation. it's that the 'base' forces your people so far to the right they can't move center during the general election. contrary to romney's campaign strategy, we have memories and you can't be an etch-a-sketch. And while McCain may have been a moderate in 2000, he wasn't in 2004. And both men picked far right VP candidates.

So i think you might want to reconsider.

Yup. The question will be which end of the party wins its current tug-of-war. The hardliners appear to be willing to sink the ship to keep it pure, the pragmatists see that that's a losing strategy.

I don't think they're going to have a plan until the fight is won, one way or the other.

.

 

[Two Thumbs]

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2012/images/12/20/rel18c-1.pdf

Wide sampling error though.

Republicans are extreme?

Were all the samples taken from people that live in or near coastal cities?

reps are as mild as milktoast.

 

[jillian]

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2012/images/12/20/rel18c-1.pdf

Wide sampling error though.

Republicans are extreme?

Were all the samples taken from people that live in or near coastal cities?

reps are as mild as milktoast.

see my post above