# I'm trying to understand Republicans, but I just can't **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 11, 2011, 4:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-trying-to-understand-republicans-but-i-just-cant/585079 "2011-06-11T04:38:11Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2011, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-trying-to-understand-republicans-but-i-just-cant/585079/21 "2011-06-11T16:40:52Z")
> [@MattProle](#): > > Fox is playing quite a bit in my home, thanks to my Christian mom, and it really irks me to see that people actually take this station seriously. It seems like such an obvious slant; the bias in and of itself would almost be forgivable, but the arguments presented are just awful. Emotional appeals followed by strawmans, etc. It doesn’t help that I take the non-existence of God for granted, and Beck likes to harp on that issue quite a bit (my mom’s favorite Fox show). > > I know Fox shouldn’t be representative of the whole Republican party, but other conservative sources appear just as bad. There’s the whole debacle of [Conservapedia](http://www.conservapedia.com/Main_Page). > > Where can I go to listen to some rational repubs who are a little less socially conservative and, I don’t know … willing to compromise on some social issues / not appeal to a base of religious fundamentalist? Their BS is pushing me away really hard. Still, I’m a kid interested in being all scientific-like, so I’m willing to listen to the credible supporters of the Republican viewpoint. > > On the other hand, it is even worth pursuing? Listen to William F Buckley or George Will or read the National Review or Wall Street Journal. And Conservapedia are basically a right-wing Ministry of Truth who don’t mind rewriting the Bible to suit their views which of course rightly angers most Christians. Ignore them. As for me I’m a pragmatic neoconservative. Ultra-hawk/interventionist/internationalist in foreign policy (though not of “Bomb Iran” type), economically pro free-trade and generally few regulations as possible (although some are necessary), ideally wishes for elimination of most taxes on business, and on social issues all over the place (I support the immediate nation-wide ban on abortion for all reasons except to save the mother’s life but I am willing to let gay marriage be decided by the states and legalize marijuana). ---
**Author:** ![yorick73](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/b5a626/32.png) [@yorick73](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yorick73)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2011, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-trying-to-understand-republicans-but-i-just-cant/585079/22 "2011-06-11T16:46:11Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > Are we looking at different parts of the paper? In Table 3, I see most of the entries more or less in a single clump, with two severe outliers on the right (FoxNews with Brit Hume and Washington Times) and one severe outlier on the left (Wall St. Journal … pre-Fox! 🆒 ). > > Perhaps the most amusing result in this paper is that NPR, which rationalists admire for objectivity but which right-wingers condemn as highly partisan, shows as centrist, indeed _Newshour with Jim Lehrer_ is most centrist of all (Table 4). I think you missed the point of Table 3. A lot of those entries in that single clump you refer to are further away from center than either Special Report or Washington Times. Both of these just appear to be a severe outlier to you because they are the only two on the right. Here…from the study: > [@the study](#): > > Special Report is approximately thirteen points more centrist than CBS Evening News (with Dan Rather). > > Fox News’ Special Report is approximately one point more centrist than ABC’s World News Tonight (with Peter Jennings) or NBC’s Nightly News (with Tom Brokaw). > > The most centrist newspaper in our sample is USA Today. However, its distance from the center is not significantly different from the distances of the Washington Times or the Washington Post. ---
**Author:** ![hansel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/6bbea6/32.png) [@hansel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hansel)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2011, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-trying-to-understand-republicans-but-i-just-cant/585079/23 "2011-06-11T17:58:30Z")
> [@Recovering\_Republican](#): > > That is kind of nitpicky… > > I think a lot of Democratic politicians SAY they believe in Christ, but do you think they really believe in talking snakes? > > But either you believe in talking snakes or you believe we evolved from Monkeys. there’s really not an either-or choice in the matter on a subject like teaching Evolution in the schools. > > What you call “influence” they call moral choices- Abortion, Gay rights, Evolution. I don’t think you can call yourself religious and really be neutral on these issues. It’s not nitpicky so much as a No True Scotsman. There are lots of Christians who are neutral or conflicted on these issues, and yet proudly identify as Christian. The either-or dichotomy you’re proposing tends to be a feature (or bug) of the evangelical community. You could likely demonstrate a lack of overlap between evangelicals and Democrats, but you’re unfairly dismissing a much larger and quieter proportion of Christians who are simply more moderate on issues of faith and its role in the public sphere. ---
**Author:** ![Docta\_G](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/2bfe46/32.png) [@Docta\_G](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Docta_G)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2011, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-trying-to-understand-republicans-but-i-just-cant/585079/24 "2011-06-11T18:53:46Z")
Where does this idea come from that William F. Buckley Jr. and George Will are intellectuals? Adding a preening pretentiousness to the same old moronic arguments and running it all up a flag pole does not an intellectual make. ---
**Author:** ![New\_Deal\_Democrat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/9d8465/32.png) [@New\_Deal\_Democrat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/New_Deal_Democrat)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2011, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-trying-to-understand-republicans-but-i-just-cant/585079/25 "2011-06-11T19:12:43Z")
> [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](#): > > So you’d vote for snobs just because they’re snobs? I mean someone who looks down on an equally successful man just because he made the money and not because your great-great-great-grandfather was granted a holding by Governor Stuyvesant is a good trait? And Democrats have run successful candidates who wern’t ultra-rich and from an elite family-Harry Truman for example I do not like the business class. I do not want politicians who feel intimidated by businessmen, as President Obama seems to feel. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2011, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-trying-to-understand-republicans-but-i-just-cant/585079/26 "2011-06-11T19:21:21Z")
Quoth **Recovering Republican** : > [@](#): > > That is kind of nitpicky… > > I think a lot of Democratic politicians SAY they believe in Christ, but do you think they really believe in talking snakes? Wait, Jesus was a talking snake? I’ve got to re-read my copy of the Bible; I missed that part. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2011, 7:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-trying-to-understand-republicans-but-i-just-cant/585079/27 "2011-06-11T19:25:58Z")
> [@Docta\_G](#): > > Where does this idea come from that William F. Buckley Jr. and George Will are intellectuals? Adding a preening pretentiousness to the same old moronic arguments and running it all up a flag pole does not an intellectual make. Yeah, I don’t think anyone who disagrees with me can be an intellectual either! ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2011, 7:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-trying-to-understand-republicans-but-i-just-cant/585079/28 "2011-06-11T19:43:20Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Yeah, I don’t think anyone who disagrees with me can be an intellectual either! I don’t know if I agree with that. ---
**Author:** ![Recovering\_Republican](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/d2c977/32.png) [@Recovering\_Republican](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Recovering_Republican)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2011, 8:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-trying-to-understand-republicans-but-i-just-cant/585079/29 "2011-06-11T20:17:51Z")
> [@hansel](#): > > It’s not nitpicky so much as a No True Scotsman. There are lots of Christians who are neutral or conflicted on these issues, and yet proudly identify as Christian. The either-or dichotomy you’re proposing tends to be a feature (or bug) of the evangelical community. > > You could likely demonstrate a lack of overlap between evangelicals and Democrats, but you’re unfairly dismissing a much larger and quieter proportion of Christians who are simply more moderate on issues of faith and its role in the public sphere. Actually, I was brought up Catholic, and their position on gays and abortion are pretty much in lockstep with the Evangelicals. (The Church is kind of wishy-washy on the evolution thing). Now, don’t get me wrong, I have no sympathy for they hypocrites on the right who go on all day about abortions or gays, but have no problem voting for guys who’ve gotten multiple divorces (which Jesus was a lot clearer on than the other two issues). My point was to try to explain why so many working class Christian types vote for guys whose first order of business is to usually give tax breaks to guys who want to move their jobs to China. I would never presume to say who is a “True” Christian. ---
**Author:** ![Recovering\_Republican](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/d2c977/32.png) [@Recovering\_Republican](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Recovering_Republican)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2011, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-trying-to-understand-republicans-but-i-just-cant/585079/30 "2011-06-11T20:22:04Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > Quoth **Recovering Republican** :Wait, Jesus was a talking snake? I’ve got to re-read my copy of the Bible; I missed that part. My point is that they say that they believe in the Bible, but the fact is, there is a lot of stuff in the Bible that is just silly nonsense that a lot of people who call themselves Christians don’t really believe in. I also think a lot of them are closet atheists, because an atheist could never get elected to office in this country. Personally, I agree with the philosophy of Jesus, that we should love our neighbor, treat people the way we’d want to be treated, forgive our enemies, etc. I don’t think for a minute he rose from the dead, his mother was a virgin, etc. I think there is even an argument to be made that he’s a composite of several people. ---
**Author:** ![hansel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/6bbea6/32.png) [@hansel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hansel)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2011, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-trying-to-understand-republicans-but-i-just-cant/585079/31 "2011-06-11T20:32:19Z")
> [@Recovering\_Republican](#): > > My point was to try to explain why so many working class Christian types vote for guys whose first order of business is to usually give tax breaks to guys who want to move their jobs to China. I would never presume to say who is a “True” Christian. I understand that you’re not pointing to “them” and saying “you’re not one of us”. Nonetheless, you’re ignoring the fact that many Christians (and Catholics specifically) are not 100% in lockstep with their church or their pastor’s pronunciations on doctrine. Catholics in the U.S., for example, are by majority in favour of gay marriage and birth control despite church doctrine, and it would be incorrect to describe them as “closet atheists”. They’re Catholics who disagree with the Pope. ---
**Author:** ![Recovering\_Republican](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/d2c977/32.png) [@Recovering\_Republican](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Recovering_Republican)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2011, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-trying-to-understand-republicans-but-i-just-cant/585079/32 "2011-06-11T20:37:15Z")
But can you call yourself a Catholic and disagree with the pope. Let’s be honest, Catholic Dogma says the Pope is Infalliable, and he’s on “God’s Fave Five”. When he speaks on a matter of faith, you’d all better listen… But yeah, most Catholics in the US live in the real world where you can’t have five kids like my parents did because you can’t afford five kids after they moved all the good jobs to China. ---
**Author:** ![Docta\_G](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/2bfe46/32.png) [@Docta\_G](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Docta_G)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2011, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-trying-to-understand-republicans-but-i-just-cant/585079/33 "2011-06-11T20:37:59Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Yeah, I don’t think anyone who disagrees with me can be an intellectual either! Does your strawman part his hair on the side too? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2011, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-trying-to-understand-republicans-but-i-just-cant/585079/34 "2011-06-11T20:50:39Z")
> [@Docta\_G](#): > > Does your strawman part his hair on the side too? I think it was fair summary of your argument, such as it was. If you don’t think WFB qualifies as an intellectual, you’re saying it’s impossible to be a conservative intellectual. Their political positions are “moronic”. You’re free to let us know who you do think the conservative intellectuals are… ---
**Author:** ![xenophon41](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xenophon41/32/253_2.png) [@xenophon41](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xenophon41)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2011, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-trying-to-understand-republicans-but-i-just-cant/585079/35 "2011-06-11T21:20:05Z")
**John** , have you read/listened to George Will lately? The man hasn’t had an original thought since Reagan was in office. I think the description of Will smearing old arguments with a veneer of “preening pretentiousness” is fairly apt. I do agree though that William F. Buckley was indeed the real deal, but Buckley’s problem nowadays is that he’s pretty fucking dead. His son’s pretty smart, and conservative, but considered an apostate. (Bad habits of independent thinking.) ---
**Author:** ![hansel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/6bbea6/32.png) [@hansel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hansel)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2011, 9:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-trying-to-understand-republicans-but-i-just-cant/585079/36 "2011-06-11T21:52:00Z")
> [@Recovering\_Republican](#): > > But can you call yourself a Catholic and disagree with the pope. That’s a matter for theologians to decide. > [@Recovering\_Republican](#): > > But yeah, most Catholics in the US live in the real world where you can’t have five kids like my parents did because you can’t afford five kids after they moved all the good jobs to China. This is the crux of it. Whatever the theologians decide, huge parts of the Catholic family don’t see an issue with identifying as Catholic while disagreeing with the Pope on particular matters. Similarly, during the worst of the child abuse scandals for the Catholic Church, large numbers of Catholic were very openly disgusted and in disagreement with the Holy See, and saw no contradiction between that and still sincerely calling themselves Catholic. My mother still goes to weekly mass, and is still extremely vocal about the stupidity and mendacity of the Catholic hierarchy, right up to the Pope. For purposes of politics, it’s the latter that is relevant, not the theological arguments. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2011, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-trying-to-understand-republicans-but-i-just-cant/585079/37 "2011-06-11T21:53:47Z")
Buckley could dress up a bad argument in good rhetoric, but he was still, just as he remarked, standing athwart history and shouting “Stop!”. If that is an “intellectual”, you are welcome to it. But I say its spinach, and I say to hell with it. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2011, 9:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-trying-to-understand-republicans-but-i-just-cant/585079/38 "2011-06-11T21:57:40Z")
> [@Recovering\_Republican](#): > > But can you call yourself a Catholic and disagree with the pope… Three things there are not: ex-Jews, ex-Catholics, ex-Texans. Each life experience stains right to the bone. I know several Catholic atheists. I see no reason someone cannot love a church they no longer obey. ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2011, 9:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-trying-to-understand-republicans-but-i-just-cant/585079/39 "2011-06-11T21:58:09Z")
Goldwater was considered a fairly reasonable conservative, but he wouldn’t be caught dead with GIngrich and the 90s republicans who looking back were reasonable compared to people like Palin and Angle. I know I’m biased, but not even Reagan would cut it in todays GOP. He did a dozen things that would disqualify him in the increasingly puritanical GOP. Maybe a movement that is becoming more and more doctrinarian and ideological can’t offer mainstream pragmatic solutions to real problems. Just talking points. There are intelligent conservatives, but they don’t get to be on TV. ie, maybe you can’t find rational, pragmatic, solutions oriented conservatives willing to compromise in the mainstream media or leadership positions because they’ve been purged. They still exist, but the ones I know in person hate Sarah Palin while the base of the GOP (who all the candidates are trying to appeal to) love her. The ones I know in person who are fairly reasonable also know our health care system is a mess that needs reform, the mainstream conservatives just repeat the talking point that since we are americans, our american health care system must be the best in the world since it was designed and funded by americans. I think that is a good litmus test on what kind of conservative you are dealing with. Do they like or dislike Palin. If they dislike her, maybe they are what you are looking for. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2011, 9:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-trying-to-understand-republicans-but-i-just-cant/585079/40 "2011-06-11T21:58:37Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > This is a new one. Since liberals are correct any real news organization would have to be left-leaning because they are just reporting the objective, true facts. Wow. > > That sounds exactly like the rationale behind China and its censorship. Ah. I called them dishonest and compared them to a Communist propaganda tool, therefore I’m just like a Communist regime. The reasoning behind that must be…interesting. But yes, liberal or moderate people will tend to speak the truth more often since those positions are correct more often, therefore they don’t need to lie. You can pretend to a false equivalence, but pretending won’t make the American right any less extreme or any less detached from reality. They do lie more often because they have to lie more often, because their views are so far from the truth that honesty doesn’t work. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-trying-to-understand-republicans-but-i-just-cant/585079.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-trying-to-understand-republicans-but-i-just-cant/585079.md?page=3)