I would disagree, obviously. The 1980 election didn’t come from nowhere, and neither did the 1994 election. And it is clear too that these elections had consequences - they did in fact interrupt the liberal course on a number of programs. In particular, they produced important and lasting changes in foreign policy, tax policy, criminal justice and sentencing, and welfare reform. And these major changes are just the immediate ones that come to mind, and they cannot just be dismissed as “spurts of reactionary fervor.” Many of these changes moved the debate rightward - no Democrat would advocate tax levels that were federal law in the 1970s. They’d never get elected advocating that.
LOL, to liberals seeking to confirm their bias, certainly.
Of course they do. This is why social conservatives, America’s only true Scotsmen, will eventually form a permanent majority. We can see this starting to happen in the purge of so called “Republican moderates” these past last two election cycles. Once that purge is complete, the real right will come roaring back and engulf us all.*
Do I really need to put a winky here? I suppose some could be confused if I don’t.
But I don’t feel like it.
To heck with them, NO winky!
Others have said it better than me so:
“Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.” ~Mark Twain
“Dissent is the highest form of patriotism.” ~Howard Zinn
Conservatives seem to forget this. They assume America is right…period. They assume that everyone else should just fall in line with that notion. If they don’t then they will shove it down their throats because it is what is best for them whether they like it or not. What is in the US interests is good for everybody in their view.
Conservatism is much more black and white in its outlook. Right and wrong are clearly delineated. Liberals tend to have a much more nuanced view of the world and understand there are a lot of shades of gray. This of course sticks in the craw of conservatives because they KNOW what it right and anything else is nonsense. To be anywhere else but the “right” side (as they define it) is per force to be on the wrong side and thus despised.
It never occurs to them that this is the exact same form the likes of the Taliban and most any other brutal regime you can think of takes and that the best democracies are tolerant and flexible of many ideas/cultures/lifestyles/etc… Of course the Taliban and their ilk are wrong but not so with American conservatism! It is different because American conservatives have actually figured it all out and are right! :rolleyes:
Oh, and what were those tea-bag parties about?
Unless of course it can be labelled a bigot, in which case it’s quite black and white and no nuance is necessary.
Yeah, just like the Taliban. Thank you for your nuanced worldview whack-a-mole!
Funny, but you aren’t taking much of a nuanced view of American conservatism there, are you? For instance, the “Tea Party” movement had its share of conservative critics - but your “black and white” view of the conservative movement probably wouldn’t notice this.
I’m intolerant of intolerance too.
I am ok with this contradiction in my world view.
We are talking in broader measures here. Of course conservatism is not a monolithic beast with one outlook. There are all sorts of conservatives and they do not always agree amongst themselves. No surprise there.
So you can easily nitpick generalizations all you like but it does not change that conservatism can generally be characterized in this fashion. Not all cars have four wheels either but I can say that in general cars have four wheels and be ok with that generalization.
First of all, the focus of the debate is social issues. Most of what you are complaining about aren’t social issues.
However, having said that:
foreign policy: Wilson advocated for an internationalist foreign policy; conservatives fought against the League of Nations, they were extremely isolationist in regards to WWII. Today, we remain firmly part of the United Nations (despite continuing whining and game playing by conservatives) and nobody is arguing for an isolationist strategy in regard to foreign policy any longer.
Tax Policy: We still have an income tax and it is still a progressively structured income tax. Flat tax ideas have gotten zero traction. Changes in the absolute value of the top end have changed, but surely you mean to refer to something other than just the top rate.
Criminal Justice: Please elaborate on what you mean here, spelling out what you consider to be liberal versus conservative strategies. It’s hard to imagine that America has become meaningfully more conservative in regards to criminal justice over the course of the 20th century.
Welfare Reform: Again, tinkering with rates doesn’t, in my mind, really compare with the presence or absence of welfare. Please compare the beginning of the 20th century with the end and help me understand how this topic refutes my assertion.
This is the most convenient justification for bigotry I’ve ever heard. It’s funny how much traction it’s getting around here.
Conservatives and Liberals value different things and like to talk past each other. The thing is you don’t care about the things that conservatives care about, so it’s easy to just dismiss what they do care about.
In my view conservatives care about limiting my rights (although they oddly say they value individual rights).
They want to impose their religion on me in a variety of ways (in our court rooms, in our parks, etc).
They want to impose their religion on my kids (getting ID into classrooms).
They want to restrict the rights of my GF to decide what to do about a pregnancy, what to do about her own body.
They want to tell me I can’t smoke a joint if I want. They want to tell people who are sick and can be most helped by marijuana they cannot have that help.
They want to tell my gay brother that his lifestyle is in error.
They want to tell my gay brother that he cannot enjoy the benefits a married couple does (e.g. medical decisions on behalf of his partner to name one of many).
They want to tell me I do not have a right to die if I suffer from some intensely painful terminal illness and just have to stick it out.
Need I go on? Where are the gray areas here such as maybe allowing that medical marijuana usage makes sense and can help a lot of people rather than a “all marijuana is bad stance”? Note that for all the conservative talk of state rights and limiting the federal government they overrode state laws allowing medical marijuana usage.
We can do this all day.
This.
Stop telling my friends that they can’t get married and just mind your own damn business, and maybe I’ll start voting Republican.
I’m sure someone is frantically putting together a list of things that Liberals want to impose on society- like the smoking bans, bans on hate speech, gun control, that sort of thing- none of which is, in my mind, anywhere near as offensive as telling us what we can and can’t do in the bedroom.
No, to anyone paying attention. Conservatives tend to live in a fantasy world. They tend to be quite clueless about,well, everything.
Right, anyone paying attention agrees with you. I understand, it’s not self-serving it’s TRUE!!!
Glad we got that sorted.
In my view liberals care about limiting my rights. Just different rights.
They want to impose their ideology on me in a variety of ways (in our court rooms, in our parks, etc).
They want to impose their ideology on my kids (manipulating educational methods)
Eh, liberals support drug laws too. This is a terrible example.
They want to tell my Christian cousin that her lifestyle is in error.
In all fairness Neo-conservatives aren’t the states rights crowd among conservatives.
Likely, though I’ve probably not spent as much time thinking up bullet point lists of how liberals are worse than conservatives, so I might lag behind. You have more SP in hippy-liberal than I have in paleocon. 
So, where ARE those WMDs ? And where are all the black people and women who flunked college due to their innately lesser intelligence ? How often have the conservatives ever been right ?
It has nothing to do with me; it has to do with the ignorance, bigotry and delusion which are the core of conservatism.
Eh?
What the hell are you talking about?
On the other side of the coin the left is very interested in removing my right to decide whether or not to support people who are not able or who choose not to support themselves (“although they say they value individual rights”).
I think both sides are interested in restricting freedoms just that the right wants to restrict social freedoms and the left wants to restrict fiscal freedoms. This gets back to the cliche that liberals and conservatives will never agree on anything since most of the time they’re not talking about the same things.
I was pretty straight up about what I said.
BrainGlutton We could start with compulsory schooling, and compulsory standards. One of the most prominent aspects of socialism in our nation. The state-owned school system.
I’ll try just one more time because I am quite curious. 1) What is the mechanism that the OP might propose that would drive the hypothesis in the OP?
- Doesn’t 20th century America serve as a stark real-world counter-example of the outcome proposed in the OP? I am also curious to hear Mr. Moto’s response to my previous post.