Why Do Republicans Consider Themselves Conservatives

[MrWonka]

In the modern era, if someone sees themselves as Republicans, they instantly associate themselves with Ronald Reagan because Reagan WAS a real conservative. He actually popularized the ideology, which is simply following the US Constitution and common sense.

You do realize that Ronald Reagan's own children...all of them... even the Republican one came forward before the election and stated that he believed his parents would not vote for Trump, and that Trump did not represent the party of his father.

You have/had figures like Bill Krystle, John McCain, George Will, John Boehner, Karl Rove, the Bush Family (George Sr, George Jr, and Jeb), John Kasich

You seriously believe all these people, many of which were literally a part of the Reagan administration itself are nothing like Reagan, but Trump somehow is?

You sound like you've invented an imaginary version of Ronald Reagan that never existed. Ronald Reagan tripled the national debt during his time in office. Reagan didn't cut spending he increased it to fight the cold war among other things. He also passed a law preventing Emergency Rooms from denying treatment to anybody regardless of whether or not they could afford it. That includes undocumented immigrants.



Government spending didn't decrease or even stay flat under Reagan. It went up almost every single year. If anything it was flatter under Clinton than Reagan. Under Obama it went down.

You don't seem to know a whole lot about your hero Reagan.

 

[MrWonka]

In other words, getting the government out of the way and letting people making up their own minds.

Have you ever heard of a Nash Equilibrium? I suggest you educate yourself on the subject and think a bit more on whether or not this is a great idea.

Nash equilibrium - Wikipedia

In short, this is one of the most fundamental concepts in all of Economics. It proves that individuals in competition can't always make the optimal choice for themselves without some type of third party agreement to help them.

Capitalism is about competition, and in any competition you need rules for fair play and referees to enforce those rules. Without those rules it becomes chaos.

Take steroids in baseball... if one or a handful of players start using them and get a competitive advantage over everyone else it can force other players to use steroids too. They might not want to, but so long as their competition is using them their choices may be between using steroids or getting cut. If the league overall doesn't step in and ban their usage and put in place testing to enforce that ban before you know it everyone is using them like we saw in the 90's.

Now of course with everyone using steroids the playing field is still as equal as it would be with nobody using steroids so the best players are still the best, but steroids come with all kinds of negative physical side effects. Before you know it the entire league is damaging their bodies just to remain competitive all because a handful of assholes decided to cheat.

This exact type of scenario shows up in the economy all the time. Without government regulation of the economy things turn out just like they did when baseball wasn't testing for steroids.

 

[AlphaOmega]

Are you being ****ing serious right now? Who exactly in your brilliant mind is an accurate representation of a "Conservative?"

If Trump is a centrist why would more than half the country despise him with such passion? Why is it that in a recent poll only 6% of Republicans said they'd support Biden over Trump? It sure seems like almost no Republicans in this country are in fact "Conservatives."

Tell me...who did "conservatives" vote for in 2016?

whoa there....drop the expletives...calm down then repost your thoughts and I will answer. If not have a nice day.

 

[LouC]

I have always wondered why they claimed that title while running up trillions of dollars in debt.

Do Republicans just ignore the fiscal side of conservatism and focus on church, abortion, hating gays and other issues. Is that what conservatism means to republicans?

Excellent question(s).

Look foward to seeing some of the answers.

 

[rocket88]

because the other option is democrat, and watching SJW's on twitter jeer conservatives for losing. I'd vote republican on that alone to be honest, no regret.

So you don't vote on policy but on personality?

 

[bearpoker]

Are you being ****ing serious right now? Who exactly in your brilliant mind is an accurate representation of a "Conservative?"

If Trump is a centrist why would more than half the country despise him with such passion? Why is it that in a recent poll only 6% of Republicans said they'd support Biden over Trump? It sure seems like almost no Republicans in this country are in fact "Conservatives."

Tell me...who did "conservatives" vote for in 2016?

To be fair, Trump is not a conservative and many actual conservatives despise him. Others despise him, not because he is a conservative, but because he is despicable.

 

[The Mark]

I have always wondered why they claimed that title while running up trillions of dollars in debt.

Do Republicans just ignore the fiscal side of conservatism and focus on church, abortion, hating gays and other issues. Is that what conservatism means to republicans?

A large part of both Republicans and Democrats are controlled by big money, which currently resides mainly in the metaphorical hands of various corporations.

This is why corporations got bailed out in 2008 and the people didn't.
This is why corporations get subsidized, even when they don't need it.

When corporations take control, capitalism fails.

And in this case, as capitalism is in control of our "democracy", both are failing together.

It's why that same large part of republicans and democrats are center-right, and will remain so, along with the major media organizations who support that position because those same corporations own them too.

Because they know where their money comes from, and they want more of it.

 

[Waddy]

I wish Republicans were more old school fiscally conservative. But they learned from Democrats that promising all kinds of stuff that doesn't have to be paid for by tax increases, or that the increase will be on somebody else, is a great marketing tool for getting votes. BOTH party's now spend and spend, they just have different ideas of how to spend.

We need conservatives, both fiscal and social. We need liberals (Democrats). In a functioning system the balance each other out. Of course, we don't have a functioning system. What we have is winner take all, and to hell with the other side.

Most of the social progress we've made in the past 60 years has been through Democrat movements. Unions, civil rights, cleaning up the environment, etc. All good things. But like all good things, the Democrats take it to the extreme, and conservatives are there to put the brakes on.

Unions have been great for this country. Great for working people. But then unions grow powerful enough, especially public unions, to coerce huge unfair (to the taxpayer) benefit and retirement packages. Then you are left with the California or Illinois nightmare.

My friend Ernie worked for years at the big TWA overhaul base in Kansas City. He was a sheet metal mechanic. If his work was slack he wasn't allowed to pick up a broom and sweep up the shop. He couldn't help out in any other department. Against the contract rules. TWA didn't care if the flight attendants went on strike. But they had to cave to the skilled trades unions or the planes wouldn't fly. The skilled workers were just too hard to replace. So they got work rules that were extremely restrictive. TWA eventually moved the overhaul base out of the country. Most airline maintenance is now done somewhere else.

Unions are a good thing but not to extremes.

The fight over immigration is also an example. Immigration is a good thing. But Democrats are locked into open borders because they have to pander to their base. A country can only assimilate a reasonable number of immigrants per year, and we are in danger of being over run. Immigrant caravans are not a good thing. Too many immigrants puts tremendous pressure on social services, the education system, law enforcement and health services.

In short, Democrats have good ideas, and should get a lot of credit, but we need conservatives to keep them grounded, and fiscally responsible. Of course, that would require both sides to quit calling each other names and act like grown-ups. That ain't gonna happen.

 

[DarkWizard12]

So you don't vote on policy but on personality?

I vote on both. Anyone who lacks personality will be ineffective at implementing policy. When you're dealing with bureacrats, lobbyists, and special interest groups of all kinds, they will take advantage of you and your policies if you don't have the right personality.

At the same time, You could have a good personality, and ****ty policies. Obama fits this. Obviously I wouldn't vote for such a person.

The left, however, lacks any merit in policy and personality.

 

[rocket88]

No, they are not. You just want it to be that way. Conservatives vote for conservatives, which means they are not voting for Republicans or Democrats any longer unless they have a very long track record. It is the anti-American leftists who are electing Republicans and Democrats these days, not conservatives. Regardless of the size of the text you immaturely decide to use.

Now all the Republicans are leftists too. I love these threads where conservatives eat their own.

 

[rocket88]

I vote on both. Anyone who lacks personality will be ineffective at implementing policy. When you're dealing with bureacrats, lobbyists, and special interest groups of all kinds, they will take advantage of you and your policies if you don't have the right personality.

At the same time, You could have a good personality, and ****ty policies. Obama fits this. Obviously I wouldn't vote for such a person.

The left, however, lacks any merit in policy and personality.

This thread is about the right tossing their principles overboard once they get into office.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

I have always wondered why they claimed that title while running up trillions of dollars in debt.

Do Republicans just ignore the fiscal side of conservatism and focus on church, abortion, hating gays and other issues. Is that what conservatism means to republicans?

Conservatism is not some divine unmovable principle handed down from the heavens. The vast majority of those that consider themselves conservative vote for Republicans. The vast majority of Republicans call themselves conservative, thus for all intents and purposes, the Republican Party is the conservative party in the United States.

Thus the standard bearer of American conservatism right now is Donald Trump.

 

[antiquity]

I know that you don't let pesky trivialities like facts get in the way of your grand statements, but isn't it odd that the party of diversity is almost all white, while the party that demands total uniformity is white, black Hispanic, Asian etc?

Pesky facts....75.572% of US citizens are white.
And isn't it strange that the democratic party is the founding party of the KKK and Jim Crow laws and a democrat shot Lincoln.
Oh... and don't forget the party that thinks old white men run the country that the two leading democratic presidential candidates are old white men? How is that working out for you.

 

[Tanngrisnir]

Pesky facts....75.572% of US citizens are white.
And isn't it strange that the democratic party is the founding party of the KKK and Jim Crow laws and a democrat shot Lincoln.
Oh... and don't forget the party that thinks old white men run the country that the two leading democratic presidential candidates are old white men? How is that working out for you.

Isn't it strange that someone would try and pass off the pathetically historically illiterate lie that the KKK was 'founded by' the Democratic Party?

Sounds like a cry for help to me.

 

[antiquity]

You do realize that Ronald Reagan's own children...all of them... even the Republican one came forward before the election and stated that he believed his parents would not vote for Trump, and that Trump did not represent the party of his father.

Do you seriously believe that today's liberals/progressives movement would vote for Bill Clinton or even Obama if the election was held today?

 

[antiquity]

Isn't it strange that someone would try and pass off the pathetically historically illiterate lie that the KKK was 'founded by' the Democratic Party?

Sounds like a cry for help to me.

Sound like to me you are trying to revise history...

 

[Tanngrisnir]

Sound like to me you are trying to revise history...

Nah, bruh. The Democratic Party didn't found the KKK.

Sounds like you've never taken a history class.

 

[joko104]

I know that you don't let pesky trivialities like facts get in the way of your grand statements, but isn't it odd that the party of diversity is almost all white, while the party that demands total uniformity is white, black Hispanic, Asian etc?

That is only because the Democratic Party's slavery rule of "one drop of non-white blood forever bans a person from being white." To the Democratic Party - from slavery thru now - their WHITE PURITY rule demands that only PURE white people can be counted a white. Everyone else is a non-white. So by the purely racist standards of the Democratic Party you are accurate. Otherwise you are not.

 

[Media_Truth]

Do you seriously believe that today's liberals/progressives movement would vote for Bill Clinton or even Obama if the election was held today?

That's funny. The founder of modern-day Conservatism wouldn't even make it through the Primary, with his soft view on guns.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

I have always wondered why they claimed that title while running up trillions of dollars in debt.

Do Republicans just ignore the fiscal side of conservatism and focus on church, abortion, hating gays and other issues. Is that what conservatism means to republicans?

Republicans today are Trumpers. PERIOD. FULL STOP.
Has zero to do with conservatism. It is whatever Trump says it is.

 

[gdgyva]

Are you being ****ing serious right now? Who exactly in your brilliant mind is an accurate representation of a "Conservative?"

If Trump is a centrist why would more than half the country despise him with such passion? Why is it that in a recent poll only 6% of Republicans said they'd support Biden over Trump? It sure seems like almost no Republicans in this country are in fact "Conservatives."

Tell me...who did "conservatives" vote for in 2016?

i didnt vote for either in 2016

and i probably wont vote top of ticket in 2020 if trump is on ticket

when you have a choice of a **** sandwich and a turd sandwich, i chose not to eat

 

[bearpoker]

That is only because the Democratic Party's slavery rule of "one drop of non-white blood forever bans a person from being white." To the Democratic Party - from slavery thru now - their WHITE PURITY rule demands that only PURE white people can be counted a white. Everyone else is a non-white. So by the purely racist standards of the Democratic Party you are accurate. Otherwise you are not.

:lamo Thanks for the laugh, but too funny for effective trolling.

 

[Glitch]

i didnt vote for either in 2016

and i probably wont vote top of ticket in 2020 if trump is on ticket

when you have a choice of a **** sandwich and a turd sandwich, i chose not to eat

You should vote. It is your civic duty in a participatory government after all. Just vote for the candidate you think will be the best choice, regardless of what everyone else says. Never settle or compromise. Voting for the "lesser or two evils" only ensures that "evil" will be elected. So don't fall into that trap. Pick the candidate that fits your train of thought the best, and vote for them - even if you have to write them in. And yes, I have seen write-ins win elections, including a write-in election for US Senator.

Voting is not a competition, so it is not about "winning an election." It is about electing someone who best represents your interests.

From 1972 until 1992 I voted for strictly Republican presidential candidates. Since 1996 however, I have not voted for a single Republican presidential candidate. It has absolutely nothing to do with the political party and everything to do with what the presidential candidate represents. I only vote for conservatives, so when the Republican Party do not nominate conservative candidates, then I do not vote for Republicans. I've voted for Independent, Libertarian Party, Constitution Party, and the Veteran's Party of America presidential candidates. It is all about the qualifications of the candidate, not the political party endorsement. I may not vote Republican any longer, but I always vote.

 

[gdgyva]

You should vote. It is your civic duty in a participatory government after all. Just vote for the candidate you think will be the best choice, regardless of what everyone else says. Never settle or compromise. Voting for the "lesser or two evils" only ensures that "evil" will be elected. So don't fall into that trap. Pick the candidate that fits your train of thought the best, and vote for them - even if you have to write them in. And yes, I have seen write-ins win elections, including a write-in election for US Senator.

Voting is not a competition, so it is not about "winning an election." It is about electing someone who best represents your interests.

From 1972 until 1992 I voted for strictly Republican presidential candidates. Since 1996 however, I have not voted for a single Republican presidential candidate. It has absolutely nothing to do with the political party and everything to do with what the presidential candidate represents. I only vote for conservatives, so when the Republican Party do not nominate conservative candidates, then I do not vote for Republicans. I've voted for Independent, Libertarian Party, Constitution Party, and the Veteran's Party of America presidential candidates. It is all about the qualifications of the candidate, not the political party endorsement. I may not vote Republican any longer, but I always vote.

havent missed an election since my first in 1980

just didnt vote for a selection for president last time around

voted all the other items....

writing in a candidate that will garner 1/2 of 1% of the vote is a waste of my time and energy

i dont have the patience or attitude to do that anymore.....

so when i cant vote for either selection, i leave it blank

 

[MrWonka]

i didnt vote for either in 2016

and i probably wont vote top of ticket in 2020 if trump is on ticket

when you have a choice of a **** sandwich and a turd sandwich, i chose not to eat

Then why should a candidate even try and win your vote? If they don't have to worry about you voting for their opponent then you're kind of irrelevant.