View Poll Results: How would it affect your vote if the republican party did not oppose SSM?

Voters
36. You may not vote on this poll
  • I would not vote republican if they did not support a ban on SSM

    3 8.33%
  • I would be less likely to vote republican

    3 8.33%
  • I would be more likely to vote republican

    8 22.22%
  • It would have no effect on my vote

    15 41.67%
  • Other, don't know

    7 19.44%
Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 78

Thread: For Republicans/Conservatives: Party Support and SSM

  1. #11
    Struggler
    JayDubya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Last Seen
    11-09-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    17,181

    Re: For Republicans/Conservatives: Party Support and SSM

    As a paleocon libertarian who looks at each libertarian and each GOP candidates' specific views on several key issues before casting a ballot, I can safely say that ones' statements on this matter does not alter my opinion one way or the other.


    What is likely to get my attention in a positive way is a federal politician who states simply that he's going for a federal office, therefore his opinion on marriage is irrelevant. Otherwise, any sort of advocacy for any sort of legislation is a negative, but it's a fairly minor and extremely widespread negative that doesn't factor into voting calculus very heavily.

  2. #12
    Guru
    Cyrylek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Boston
    Last Seen
    02-05-17 @ 01:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    3,467

    Re: For Republicans/Conservatives: Party Support and SSM

    Quote Originally Posted by Einzige View Post
    Prohibition was a progressive issue, but neither the Scopes Trial nor anti-immigration were. (Latin American exclusion was the province of both industrial unionists in the West and that great libertarian Calvin Coolidge.
    What "Latin American exclusion?" Latin Americans were not blocked from immigration by the 1924 Act - Eastern and Southern Europeans and Asians were "the enemy". And yes, it was a "progressive issue", most definitely: it was entirely in the spirit of eugenic amelioration of society by the actions of wise, 'scientifically' guided Lippmannian government - and had massive support both from the Republicans Progressives and Democrats on the left - Samuel Gompers, the founder of AFL being easily the most influential figure.

    (Coolidge did sign the Act, after it was passed by overwhelming margin, but called for removal of restrictions on the Japanese - predicting - what a wild thought! - a deterioration of relationships between the two countries).

    As the Scopes Trial - I dunno, does William Jennings Bryan qualify as a Progressive? A Democratic presidential candidate (three times), Secretary of State under Wilson, trust-buster, prohibitionist (and promoter of the Harrison Act against opiates) - and the prosecutor in Tennessee v. Scopes...

    Progressivism was not uniform, and Wilson, for example, was skeptical of aggressive nativism - and had vetoed, just like Taft, early attempts to curtail immigration, while Bryan denounced eugenics popular with fellow Progressives like Davenport or Sanger - or President Wilson.

    But the potency of the left-right statist fusion was on display in most every Progressive cause beyond women's suffrage.

  3. #13
    Guru
    Cyrylek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Boston
    Last Seen
    02-05-17 @ 01:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    3,467

    Re: For Republicans/Conservatives: Party Support and SSM

    Quote Originally Posted by ChezC3 View Post
    I really can't see that being the case this go round. Turn on a SSM GOPer and run to the open arms of the LGBT abortionists?
    We have a substantial number of the anti-outsider, socially conservative, ultra-protectionist Democrats who stick with the party only because they are convinced that Republicans will always favor "the fat cats".

    Likewise, we have plenty of "religious conservatives" who have nothing in common with the pro-business faction of the GOP, not to mention libertarians. They just cannot be seen in the same room with Tammy Baldwin.

    These two sizeable forces are made for each other. All they need is a charismatic leader capable of "rising above the party labels". In France, it was Le Pen. I am not saying our left- and right-wing extremists are in the same state of desperation and confusion as the French ex-Stalinists, but...I am mildly apprehensive about the possibility.

  4. #14
    Elitist as Hell.
    Einzige's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Last Seen
    10-29-16 @ 02:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    2,655

    Re: For Republicans/Conservatives: Party Support and SSM

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyrylek View Post
    And yes, it was a "progressive issue", most definitely: it was entirely in the spirit of eugenic amelioration of society by the actions of wise, 'scientifically' guided Lippmannian government - and had massive support both from the Republicans Progressives and Democrats on the left - Samuel Gompers, the founder of AFL being easily the most influential figure.
    You do realize that eugenics had the full support of conservative southern Democrats who were neither progressive nor thought of themselves as being progressive in any way, right? And that there were full-blown Progressives opposed to it, including William Jennings Bryan?

    I loathe historical whitewashers like yourself who want to place the full blame of the excesses of that era on the Progressive movement because you mistakenly think it helps your own cause look better in this time.

    (Coolidge did sign the Act, after it was passed by overwhelming margin, but called for removal of restrictions on the Japanese - predicting - what a wild thought! - a deterioration of relationships between the two countries).
    Coolidge signed it regardless, and his concerns with the Japanese were purely practical: he had no opposition to the spirit of the reform (because he wasn't a modern libertarian, as modern libertarians have had to twist him out of shape to make him resemble them.)

    As the Scopes Trial - I dunno, does William Jennings Bryan qualify as a Progressive A Democratic presidential candidate (three times), Secretary of State under Wilson, trust-buster, prohibitionist (and promoter of the Harrison Act against opiates) - and the prosecutor in Tennessee v. Scopes...
    By 1925? Absolutely not. His opponent, Clarence Darrow, certainly was. But you'll not mention him, because he wasn't borderline-tyrannical in his disposition and therefore it's not helpful to single him out.
    I dip my forefinger in the watery blood of your impotent mad-redeemer (your Divine Democrat — your Hebrew Madman) and write over his thorn-torn brow, “The true prince of Evil — the king of the Slaves!”
    - Ragnar Redbeard, Might Is Right, 1890

  5. #15
    Relentless Thinking Fury
    ChezC3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    9,123

    Re: For Republicans/Conservatives: Party Support and SSM

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyrylek View Post
    We have a substantial number of the anti-outsider, socially conservative, ultra-protectionist Democrats who stick with the party only because they are convinced that Republicans will always favor "the fat cats".

    Likewise, we have plenty of "religious conservatives" who have nothing in common with the pro-business faction of the GOP, not to mention libertarians. They just cannot be seen in the same room with Tammy Baldwin.

    These two sizeable forces are made for each other. All they need is a charismatic leader capable of "rising above the party labels". In France, it was Le Pen. I am not saying our left- and right-wing extremists are in the same state of desperation and confusion as the French ex-Stalinists, but...I am mildly apprehensive about the possibility.
    Yes, you are right, anything can happen. We see that now. I suppose I'm letting my cynicism get the better of me, I'm sure there is still an electoral appetite for a Cotton Mather type...

  6. #16
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,751

    Re: For Republicans/Conservatives: Party Support and SSM

    As a lifelong registered Republican who votes, not based on party affiliation, but on actual platform, it probably doesn't matter overall. However, just on that one particular point, if the RNC would reject it's opposition to gay marriage, I'd probably be more apt to vote for a Republican candidate more often, all other things being equal. Right after the election, the GOP sent out a questionnaire to all registered Republicans, asking what direction they ought to take. As I predicted, and I even told them so, they entirely ignored the position of anyone who didn't fall into the old-time-religious-retard brigade. They're not really interested in victory, they just want ideological purity.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! YouTube me! VidMe me!

  7. #17
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    36,872

    Re: For Republicans/Conservatives: Party Support and SSM

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Social conservatives warn Priebus they could abandon GOP - First Read



    In the week since this report came out, the RNC resolution committee passed a resolution reaffirming support for a constitutional amendment banning SSM. I should also mention for clarity that part of the letter dealt with abortion, but by reports the primary focus was on same sex marriage. I am not trying to misrepresent the letter, but focusing on the part that actually interests me.

    Now, my question, for those who vote republican all or much of the time: would you withdraw your support from the republican party, voting for another party or not at all, if the republican party did not oppose same sex marriage? Please only vote in the poll if you vote republican at least regularly, say 1/3 of the time or more. Not getting votes from those who rarely vote republican is not a big thing.
    I am an independent who largely swings conservative, but I vote for individuals, and this has often mean that I have voted for a Democrat and also that I have been a co-campaign manager for a Libertarian. I can't withdraw support to the GOP because I don't support any party.

    There are many who regard the guarantee that all Americans have equal rights under the law is essential. And the ability to make medical decisions or to inherit or to retain custody of children is very important. The SSM is one factor I would consider, but it's not my litmus test.

  8. #18
    Guru
    Cyrylek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Boston
    Last Seen
    02-05-17 @ 01:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    3,467

    Re: For Republicans/Conservatives: Party Support and SSM

    Quote Originally Posted by Einzige View Post
    You do realize that eugenics had the full support of conservative southern Democrats ?
    That was kind of my point, no?

    Still: I doubt your average Klansman was versed in Galton and Madison Grant, but Margaret Sanger certainly was.

    Not that "Southern conservatives" and Progressives were all that incompatible: the same Woodraw Wilson was a Dixiecrat through-and-through - and had introduced segregation in federal government. (http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.230...21102026945151)


    Quote Originally Posted by Einzige View Post
    I loathe historical whitewashers like yourself
    Loathing must be a lot of fun, but who or what do I whitewash, exactly?

    Quote Originally Posted by Einzige View Post
    Coolidge [...] wasn't a modern libertarian.
    Who says that he was? Coolidge and Mellon were at odds with a whole number of Progressive attitudes and ideas, which made them remarkable, and - from the libertarian point of view - "not bad, considering". That's all.

    Quote Originally Posted by Einzige View Post
    By 1925? Absolutely not.
    What makes you say so? Whatever his other flaws, Bryan did not, er, evolve much, in his political philosophy.

    Quote Originally Posted by Einzige View Post
    His opponent, Clarence Darrow, certainly was.
    Certainly was a superb professional defense lawyer - and perhaps a Progressive as well in his personal politics. Bryan, on the other hand, was the face and the heart of Democratic progressivism for decades.

    I repeat again: Progressives were not all alike - just like modern socialists, libertarians or "conservatives" are not all alike. But they did share the blind faith in ability and right of the State to define and implement broad coercive reforms, to fit their ideas of "societal betterment" (that's what made them "progressives") - social conservatives and secular socialists being united in this belief, just as they are now.
    Last edited by Cyrylek; 04-12-13 at 08:44 PM.

  9. #19
    Sage
    Perotista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    17,916
    Blog Entries
    24

    Re: For Republicans/Conservatives: Party Support and SSM

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Social conservatives warn Priebus they could abandon GOP - First Read



    In the week since this report came out, the RNC resolution committee passed a resolution reaffirming support for a constitutional amendment banning SSM. I should also mention for clarity that part of the letter dealt with abortion, but by reports the primary focus was on same sex marriage. I am not trying to misrepresent the letter, but focusing on the part that actually interests me.

    Now, my question, for those who vote republican all or much of the time: would you withdraw your support from the republican party, voting for another party or not at all, if the republican party did not oppose same sex marriage? Please only vote in the poll if you vote republican at least regularly, say 1/3 of the time or more. Not getting votes from those who rarely vote republican is not a big thing.
    I consider myself a member of the Reform Party, which I guess swing voter would apply. I do vote for the candidates and abhor the two major parties. I have voted third party in 5 of the last 6 presidential elections with the exception being John McCain in 2008. But I constantly vote Republican in Georgia's senatorial elections and for the House of representatives and did vote for Purdue twice and Nathan Deal.

    Now the constitutional amendment on SSM is not going anywhere and has zero chance of succeeding. I look at it as a bone thrown to the religious right which I really don't care much for. The stance means nothing. There is reality and there is playing to one's base which in this case is the religious right. SSM although I am for it, has no bearing on how I will vote. It is a very minor issue to me if it is even an issue. I like the status quo, let each state decide what they will do with SSM and keep the feds out of the marriage business.
    This Reform Party member thinks it is high past time that we start electing Americans to congress and the presidency who put America first and their political party further down the line. But for way too long we have been electing Republicans and Democrats who happen to be Americans instead of Americans who happen to be Republicans and Democrats.

  10. #20
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,076

    Re: For Republicans/Conservatives: Party Support and SSM

    Quote Originally Posted by ChezC3 View Post
    Who are these social conservatives going to vote for if not the GOP?
    Probably nobody. Election volunteers will turn into voters and voters will turn into fishermen.

Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •