• 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!

Conservative Group Bars Log Cabin Republicans From Event

Greetings, tres borrachos. :2wave:

:thumbs: I wonder why that is? :mrgreen:

Hi Pol, I don't know. But for some reason there are quite a few people who are absolutely determined to make this a Republican event. Maybe it's a subconscious thing.
 
This is not a problem for Repubs in the slightest.

Electoral wise, not yet. Though with the dynamic that's rising, it could become a bit costly in the mid-term (say, the next decade). Most people are self-interested, but they tend to align with parties that at least appear to be where de facto public dialogue is.
 
Electoral wise, not yet. Though with the dynamic that's rising, it could become a bit costly in the mid-term (say, the next decade). Most people are self-interested, but they tend to align with parties that at least appear to be where de facto public dialogue is.

Repubs will adjust appropriately.
 
Not for the Repubs. They're not involved in this event.

The candidates and advisement from the RNC would be most assuredly affected.
 
Candidates are candidates. They are not the party.

The candidates are the public profile for the Party and once selected are essentially heir apparent for the Party. The RNC knows this well, which is why they had tried 3 years ago to dramatically alter their image and informational infrastructure, in hopes that it would reverberate throughout the entire Party and their future candidates.

They are, in effect, the Party.
 
The candidates and advisement from the RNC would be most assuredly affected.

Greetings, Fiddytree. :2wave:

Sorry, but I don't understand your post. Why would the RNC be affected?
 
The candidates are the public profile for the Party and once selected are essentially heir apparent for the Party. The RNC knows this well, which is why they had tried 3 years ago to dramatically alter their image and informational infrastructure, in hopes that it would reverberate throughout the entire Party and their future candidates.

They are, in effect, the Party.

An event as described here is a pre-nomination affair, and not a party event. Candidates go where the votes are; there's nothing to talk about.
 
An event as described here is a pre-nomination affair, and not a party event. Candidates go where the votes are; there's nothing to talk about.

It's all connected even though the particulars are not. The national committee has a vested interest in promoting a platform that resonates, finding candidates that fit that profile, and being able to control the public image of its party and its candidates, wherever they are. It's a pr issue even though the event is private.
 
It's all connected even though the particulars are not. The national committee has a vested interest in promoting a platform that resonates, finding candidates that fit that profile, and being able to control the public image of its party and its candidates, wherever they are. It's a pr issue even though the event is private.

I disagree. They simply point to this group as one constituent in their big tent.
 
boasting about ones credential on an anonymous internet forum is only worth the as much as a failed argument.

I would be the last one to boast about his knowledge of constitutional law. I know just how difficult the issues in that field are, and I know how much more the experts in it understand than I do.

It seems to me it is you who are pretending to know far more than you really do about these issues. You hope that if you throw in enough overheated, emotional assertions, you can hide how poorly you understand the subject. But like most of the people who share your views, you really don't want to understand it.

Right, because the freedom of some and their pursuit of happiness should be subject to mob rule.

Your heart-rending verbiage means absolutely nothing. I could just as easily hold out the crying towel for the poor, beleaguered women in this country who are cruelly being denied the freedom to marry their daughters. No one has a constitutional right to the "pursuit of happiness"--that is a phrase from the Declaration of Independence. In any case, Jefferson used the word "happiness" in the sense of "good fortune," not as a synonym for joy. And the real advocates of mob rule are the statist bullies who share their president's contempt for the Constitution and taste for lawlessness.
 
It was not a Republican event.

Are you saying that the GOP isn't sponsoring it? That is correct. However, have you seen the list of speakers and invited speakers (those who have not yet confirmed)? :roll: It's Republican, Jack.

If it walks like a duck.
 
Are you saying that the GOP isn't sponsoring it? That is correct. However, have you seen the list of speakers and invited speakers (those who have not yet confirmed)? :roll: It's Republican, Jack.

If it walks like a duck.

And yet, not a Repub event.
 
Semantics win. These people are clearly a cross section of political persuasions who are only interested in the far right Republican agenda.

They are one constituency in the Repub spectrum. About one third of evangelicals vote Dem.
 
This isn't a Republican event.

No, not remarkable at all that there is a Log Cabin group in Colorado. The Log Cabins have been around since the 1970s.

Being a gay Republican is like being a black member of the KKK, so it is noteworthy.
 
That only left 2/3rds to vote for the GOP, eh?

:lamo

Your original question:

How many conservative Christians support the Democratic Party? :roll:

Fill us in.


Asked and answered. Not sure why you find that funny.:roll:
 
Duh...um...uh the left likes gays, and...um..we..ummm are the other one...um so we don't like...um what they...um...like.



After the GOP gets its butt handed to it next year maybe you can come back and tell us why you think that happened.
 
I don't think you are following the context.



Believe whatever you want to believe, but don't be surprised when things don't follow your scenario.

Very few of the people who are hated, feared and despised by the GOP will be voting for the GOP next year.
 
Believe whatever you want to believe, but don't be surprised when things don't follow your scenario.
What scenario? What are you talking about. The op was about something that already occurred in Colorado. no scenario is relevant.

Very few of the people who are hated, feared and despised by the GOP will be voting for the GOP next year.
So?
 
Back
Top Bottom