• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is the Republican Party in danger of dying out?

since you feel you can analyze the GOP and their problems, then you must have formulated the problems with the DNC, please share them with us.

after all, we don't want a one-sided partisan presentation do we?

We get plenty from both sides. So your fears have no chance of becoming reality on this site.

My problems with Obama and the Democratic party are that Obama sided far too much with the same Wall Street crowd that helped cause so many of the problems in the first place. If yiu want to know more Rolling Stone Magazine had an excellent article on this about two or three years into the first term. The author (Taibi?) looked at the two factions who ran the campaign and then went through positions of power that were handed out in jobs when Obama took office. Almost always the more populist grass roots people were ignored and the Wall Street type like Geitner were rewarded. That was a great mistake and a betrayal of what I am others worked for in the Obama campaign. I will try to locate the article and link it for you to read.

Many of us who worked hard to get Obama elected thought we were promised the second coming of Franklin Roosevelt and the New Deal and that is what we worked for. Instead, we got the second coming of Jimmy Carter.


http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/how-wall-street-killed-financial-reform-20120510

http://www.rollingstone.com/politic...a-goes-all-out-for-dirty-banker-deal-20110824
 
Last edited:
We get plenty from both sides. So your fears have no chance of becoming reality on this site.

My problems with Obama and the Democratic party are that Obama sided far too much with the same Wall Street crowd that helped cause so many of the problems in the first place. If yiu want to know more Rolling Stone Magazine had an excellent article on this about two or three years into the first term. The author (Taibi?) looked at the two factions who ran the campaign and then went through positions of power that were handed out in jobs when Obama took office. Almost always the more populist grass roots people were ignored and the Wall Street type like Geitner were rewarded. That was a great mistake and a betrayal of what I am others worked for in the Obama campaign. I will try to locate the article and link it for you to read.

well to mention it, rolling stone magazine, recently put out an issue, calling for many things that are in the communist manifesto......so i cant say i want to listen to what they say.

i do agree both sides listen to wallstreet......wallstreet is faction/special interest........democracy breeds faction.........which is why power should always be divided...IE ...mixed government.
 
Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

This is remarkably ignorant. Even animals understand the right to self defense, for example.

That's not a "right". That's something animals -including people - tend to do. If animals have a right to self-defense, then do they have a right to kill hunters?

NATURE DOESN'T CARE ABOUT RIGHTS. Nature doesn't grant rights or correct wrongs. Nature just is.

The concept of "rights" cannot exist without some kind of organized society. "Stand your ground" laws are because of an organized society; in nature, they are meaningless. If you kill someone because you think they are threatening you ... nature doesn't care. If you kill a woman's kids because you want to have kids with her and you don't want competition from another man's kids... nature doesn't care.
 
Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

That's not a "right". That's something animals -including people - tend to do. If animals have a right to self-defense, then do they have a right to kill hunters?

you are lost when it comes to what he said.

he is saying even an animal understands the right to defense........meaning any animal, will fight if backed into a corner.... its in there nature.
 
It seems to me that it would be better to at the very least pretend that a right to free speech exists, rather than not.

That's the great thing about social or cultural constructs. It is literally like the wishing fairy. If we believe hard enough and act on those beliefs the right exists.

It's kind of beautiful when you think about it. What power we have to create.
 
Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

you asked be if rights are not secure, then no rights are secure, no structure of a government..its anarchy.

when dictatorship, is in power there is a structure, order, rights of the general population may not be secure from government, but they are from other people.
You missed the point, which is that rights only exist to the extent that they are secured. Nature does not bestow anything on anyone, it is us through our social contract that makes our rights reality.
 
Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

You missed the point, which is that rights only exist to the extent that they are secured. Nature does not bestow anything on anyone, it is us through our social contract that makes our rights reality.

Totally agree.

One viewpoint is that the hypothetical person alone has al the rights while the other view is he has none except what he can build for himself.

If one wants to look at it philosophical then both ideas are self evident and it's up to the reader to decide where to land.
 
Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

you are lost when it comes to what he said.

he is saying even an animal understands the right to defense........meaning any animal, will fight if backed into a corner.... its in there nature.

You are confusing a physical ability with a right. They are not the same.
 
Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

You missed the point, which is that rights only exist to the extent that they are secured. Nature does not bestow anything on anyone, it is us through our social contract that makes our rights reality.


rights are always exist, rights are being suppressed in many areas of the world.
 
Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

self preservation, defense is a natural function for man or beast.

That is what I and others here have been saying. Its not a right at all but merely a physical function or ability.
 
Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

That is what I and others here have been saying. Its not a right at all but merely a physical function or ability.


no its in human nature to protect one's self.

a 100 lb girl, being rapped by the 300lb man, is not going to have the ability to stop him [she knows that], however she was going to use her natural defense to kick, scream scratch, and bite, to try to stop the attacker any way.

natural rights come from nature.
 
Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

no its in human nature to protect one's self.

a 100 lb girl, being rapped by the 300lb man, is not going to have the ability to stop him [she knows that], however she was going to use her natural defense to kick, scream scratch, and bite, to try to stop the attacker any way.

natural rights come from nature.

You just said that animals feel the same thing so how is this now human nature?

and what does that have to do with the concept of natural rights?
 
Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

You just said that animals feel the same thing so how is this now human nature?

and what does that have to do with the concept of natural rights?

i pointed out rights come from nature.....clvi rights / civil privileges come from government

does speech, movement, defense, assembly with others [natural to the body], .........require the existence of government for those things to take place?..no.. they existed before the first government was ever formed.

we only formed government to secure these natural rights, from those who would seek to suppress them.
 
Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

i pointed out rights come from nature.....clvi rights / civil privileges come from government

does speech, movement, defense, assembly with others [natural to the body], .........require the existence of government for those things to take place?..no.. they existed before the first government was ever formed.

we only formed government to secure these natural rights, from those who would seek to suppress them.

NO. You cite physical abilities that beings have - be they humans or animals - and then you extrapolate rights from the existence of those abilities.
 
Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

rights are always exist, rights are being suppressed in many areas of the world.
Rights are a human construct and only exist to the extent they are recognized and protected.
 
Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

Rights are a human construct and only exist to the extent they are recognized and protected.

no...... rights exist without government

we only institute government to secure rights.

we would not need government if everyone respected the natural rights the rights of each other

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men.
 
Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

NO. You cite physical abilities that beings have - be they humans or animals - and then you extrapolate rights from the existence of those abilities.

is their a human need [nature] to be with other people?.......or it is just an ability.

i have the ability to be with other people, however is in the nature of man to be among other people thru association.....man is not a solitary creature.
 
Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

is their a human need [nature] to be with other people?.......or it is just an ability.

i have the ability to be with other people, however is in the nature of man to be among other people thru association.....man is not a solitary creature.

what does that have to do with the concept of natural rights?
 
Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

what does that have to do with the concept of natural rights?

because it is the nature of man to need man....an association......its not an ability

right to association
 
Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

because it is the nature of man to need man....an association......its not an ability

right to association

I do not follow you. So people want to be with other people.... at least many do. People have done that all throughout history all over the world regardless of any right they may have held or not held. What does that have to do with the idea of natural rights?
 
Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

no...... rights exist without government
Yes, they come out of thin air when wished.

we only institute government to secure rights.
Because unsecured rights are meaningless or put another way they do not exist.

we would not need government if everyone respected the natural rights the rights of each other
Reality check, 1 2 3

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
Unless you are a woman, black, a child or poor. I also have some ocean view land for sale in Arkansas.
 
Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

no its in human nature to protect one's self.

a 100 lb girl, being rapped by the 300lb man, is not going to have the ability to stop him [she knows that], however she was going to use her natural defense to kick, scream scratch, and bite, to try to stop the attacker any way.

natural rights come from nature.

It is a natural thing for a human or animal to do. It's not a right

People, coming together in an organized way, can then say if the girl kills the man, she had the right to do that out of self-defense; but nature doesn't grant rights. There is no "natural" right. They could just as easily put a law in that you can't kill someone even in self-defense.
 
Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

because it is the nature of man to need man....an association......its not an ability

right to association

so you are totally ok with same sex marriage? It's natural for people to associate - sometimes those people are same sex - and therefore they have a natural right to marry, correct?

I had the impression you weren't for it... I could be wrong.
 
Surely you must realize that your request is impossible to fulfill. For better or worse, for right or wrong, there is a faction of people in the GOP who simply are very racially conservative and they see the party as representing those conservative racial interests.

Whoa, whoa, whoa there.

Are a rainfilled pothole and a filled swimming pool of the same nature? There is no design to a pothole, the water that filled it found it's way into the pothole by chance. A swimming pool was filled by conscious choice.

Similarly, the Democratic Party has made a conscious choice to implement racist policies designed to appeal to blacks and to Hispanics. The Republican Party has NO POLICIES designed to appeal strictly to white people. The fact that whites are, more and more, congregating within the Republican Party is not due to any conscious decision in the Party's platform. This being the case there are NO conservative racial interests OTHER THAN opposing the racial interests which are furthered by the Democratic Party. A race-neutral Republican Party is opposed to a racist Democratic Party.

Your scenario is a complete inversion of reality. You posit that being race neutral is a sign of racism and that actual race-based policies which exclude people of the wrong race are not racist.

And if that results in basically a white persons party - with a large share of that being a white males party - that is simply the result of both the constituency of the party as well as the policies they will support and back which in turn attract more of those same people. Its a cycle with no ind or change in sight.

That's a pretty good assessment. The process will continue to unfold. Back before we embarked on this cancerous multiculturalist experiment, the white vote was split pretty evenly between Democrats and Republicans. As Democrats sought to extract more wealth from white people and redistribute it to minorities, that set in motion a slow trickle of whites away from the Democrats and towards the Republicans. In 2012, Republicans won the white male vote, the white female vote, the white youth vote. We're heading towards a very dangerous future - the mixing of racial groups and political blocs can very explosive.

It seems foolish for GOP spokespersons to say that they have to attract decent numbers of minorities while at the same time having no policies which would attract minorities in any number beyond the mere token or two. It simply does not work that way.

You're right, it is foolish. The party leadership has been infected by liberal values. Somehow they believe that legitimacy arises from having a multiracial constituency. Do the Democrats feel the same? Not likely, they're not dismantling their race-based policies in order to win back the votes of white males.

Secondly, the GOP spokesmen that you're referring to really are in a bind. There's no way that they can out-racist the Democrats in terms of offering up a racial spoils system and any effort to introduce race-based policies which would appeal to minorities is going to seriously piss-off the race-neutral core constituency of the GOP, both on a values level and on a "Whose hide is the benefit going to be cut from?" level.

Republicans cannot make their party more attractive to minorities without making it less attractive to many of the people who already see it as their party of choice. Its a catch 22 for them and with demographic projections it only spells disaster for them unless they can find a way out.

You do realize that every coin has two sides, don't you? As more whites flee from the Democrats, the Republicans become a whiter party and the Democrats become a browner party. The issue in play here is the slope of the lines, which party gains voters more quickly. At the moment it looks like Democrats have an upper hand. That can change in the blink of an eye if the Democrats overplay their racist policies and alienate their white supporters.

And of course they have found a way out...... its called voter suppression of those who will not vote for you.

Disallowing Democrats to cart dead people to polling booths is not voter suppression. Give me a break. Even freaking UN election monitors are befuddled by the Democrats insistence on enabling voter fraud. Every other Western democratic nation has very rigid ID and voter qualification criteria. Showing up to vote without ID is unheard of. Silly foreigners, expecting honest elections in the US is simply them imposing their values on us.
 
Back
Top Bottom