The Republican Party is the party of the 1%

bananaclubcock

Experimental Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2010
Posts
191
Media
2
Likes
22
Points
53
Location
Eastern U.S.
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male
I thought the elephant in the room (pun intended) about the GOP is that it's not so much the party of the 1%, rather it's the party of disgruntled and non-progressive white people (and not just the Tea Party) who want to maintain a status quo. Why else would people vote against their own self-interests? It's a short term game though. The GOP is alienating every non-white or open-minded group in the country. There is a demographic tsumani coming, and they won't know what hit them.

This. And from someone in the UK. It is true that the wealthy have become steadily more likely to vote Democratic for the past few decades. But a lot of that is that the costal, cosmopolitan wealth has been repulsed by what the relative decline in the Republican's sanity. While the Republicans have doubled down protecting the status quo, even in the face of overwhelming evidence of failure.

David Frum, who used to work for George W. Bush, wrote a scathing description of Republican decline in New York Magazine. Get his take on Republicans and the economic system:

"The reality is, however, that the big winners in the American fiscal system are the rich, the old, the rural, and veterans—typically conservative constituencies."

Translation: the biggest recipient of handouts are Republicans, hence their resistance to change.
 

JTalbain

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2005
Posts
1,786
Media
0
Likes
14
Points
258
Age
34
Republican or Democrat. Does not matter. Same shit will happen. The party allegiance is more about which set of individuals you want to align with for access to power and perks.
You know, I've heard this before but it has seemed to ring false during the past 3 years. The Democrats in Congress were voting for their own interests and constituents interests. Meanwhile, the Republicans, who are supposedly gifted with individual minds as well, somehow managed to unanimously band together to filibuster and block... damn near everything. If the Democrats had had anywhere near that level of cohesion, they would have rammed everything they wanted down the Republican Party's throat while they still had a supermajority.
 

Mensch1351

Cherished Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2006
Posts
1,166
Media
0
Likes
343
Points
303
Location
In the only other State that begins with "K"!
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
You know, I've heard this before but it has seemed to ring false during the past 3 years. The Democrats in Congress were voting for their own interests and constituents interests. Meanwhile, the Republicans, who are supposedly gifted with individual minds as well, somehow managed to unanimously band together to filibuster and block... damn near everything. If the Democrats had had anywhere near that level of cohesion, they would have rammed everything they wanted down the Republican Party's throat while they still had a supermajority.

and..........if we happen to get the majority back and our President in his 2nd term regains his spine...............we WILL ram it all down the Republican's throats...........and 5 years from now, if any are successful --- the Republicans will say it was their idea all along!!
 

SR_Dee_Zasther

1st Like
Joined
Jan 19, 2011
Posts
145
Media
0
Likes
1
Points
53
Sexuality
No Response
There won't be a nation in 5 years if Obama gets his way.

Yes, clearly his goal as president is to do as shitty a job as possible and destroy this country, because that is a totally rational viewpoint to have. That being the case, he's doing a shitty job at it, by this point his predecessor had already started two unpaid for wars and taken a "walk it off" approach to one of the biggest natural disasters in recent history hitting the South, as well as immediately transforming a budget surplus into a record setting deficit with multiple tax break giveaways that predominantly favored the upper crust of our society.
 

dandelion

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Posts
13,297
Media
21
Likes
2,705
Points
358
Location
UK
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
There won't be a nation in 5 years if Obama gets his way.
right. Hurricanes couldnt do it. The south rebelling couldnt do it. The German wars couldnt do it. The russian wars couldnt do it. World financial collapses couldnt do. But Obama single handedly could destroy the US. Good to see a well reasoned argument.
 

travis1985

Expert Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Jun 22, 2011
Posts
835
Media
1
Likes
104
Points
288
Location
Coeur d'Alene (Idaho, United States)
Verification
View
Sexuality
50% Straight, 50% Gay
Gender
Male
and..........if we happen to get the majority back and our President in his 2nd term regains his spine...............we WILL ram it all down the Republican's throats...........and 5 years from now, if any are successful --- the Republicans will say it was their idea all along!!
Politics swing back and forth, in no small part because most generations enjoy rebelling against the ways of the one preceding it. Conservatism will be popular a generation from now and re-establish all its agendas, and liberalism will take it turn again after that. So don't ram anything too hard down anyone's throat. You'll be pissed when the Republicans are returning the favor 30 years from now.
 

dandelion

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Posts
13,297
Media
21
Likes
2,705
Points
358
Location
UK
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
I dont think its so simple as that. The trend to a more liberal/socialist society in the Uk has been steady through the last 100 years. Swings back and forth, but the trend has always gone towards greater personal freedom. The parties do not not maintain the same positions but also shift with the times.
 

3664shaken

Sexy Member
Joined
May 17, 2007
Posts
601
Media
0
Likes
32
Points
173
Location
Teenie Weenie Hell
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Female
You know, I've heard this before but it has seemed to ring false during the past 3 years. The Democrats in Congress were voting for their own interests and constituents interests. Meanwhile, the Republicans, who are supposedly gifted with individual minds as well, somehow managed to unanimously band together to filibuster and block... damn near everything. If the Democrats had had anywhere near that level of cohesion, they would have rammed everything they wanted down the Republican Party's throat while they still had a supermajority.

Actually the exact opposite is true - Democrats generally vote party line like sheep and it's the republicans that show more diversity.



The fact is we have their voting record and you can research it here if you like. And btw my source is the liberal Washington Post who also parrots this story, but on the following link they show votes by party line for each member of congress.

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/112/senate/members/


The four congress's under Bush voted this way

90% of Democratic votes went strictly by party line
88% of Republican votes went strictly by party line

Democrat's were more likely to vote party line under Bush than Republicans.


The two congress under Obama voted this way

94% of Democratic votes went strictly by party line
86% of Republican votes went strictly by party line

The Democrats became MORE partisan under Obama while the Republicans became LESS Partisan.


Here are the facts broken down by individual congress

During Bush's terms in office

107th Congress 2001-2003

89% of Democrats Voted party line
84% of Republicans Voted party line

108th Congress 2003-2005

91% of Democrats Voted party line
94% of Republicans Voted party line

109th Congress 2005-2007

89% of Democrats Voted party line
89% of Republicans Voted party line

110th Congress 2007-2009

93% of Democrats Voted party line
83% of Republicans Voted party line

During Obama's term

111th Congress 2009-2001

94% of Democrats Voted party line
85% of Republicans Voted party line

112th Congress 2007-2009

94% of Democrats Voted party line
86% of Republicans Voted party line

As far as blocking and filerbusting goes, once again the facts are the exact opposite. I know it's not what the liberal media tell you, but facts are facts.
 

3664shaken

Sexy Member
Joined
May 17, 2007
Posts
601
Media
0
Likes
32
Points
173
Location
Teenie Weenie Hell
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Female
Ohh the WashingtonPost is liberal now? What decade was that?


This decade, perhaps if you didn't use Media Matters as your one and only source :eek: you might be better educated.

The fact is in a well-known peer-reviewed study (http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/polisci/faculty/groseclose/pdfs/MediaBias.pdf) the Washington Post had a slant range score of 66.6 (50 being centrist and 100 being far left and 1 being far right). Using empirical facts, data and evidence and not some extreme left-wing blog funded by partially by George Soros we find that the Washington Post does indeed have a liberal bias.

Facts trump talking points
Data destroys bloggers opinions
Evidence shows us reality

Let's try to stay in the realm of reality, shall we.

BTW - Nice deflection of the real issue, guess you didn't want to many people to see the reality there either.
 
Last edited: