# Is the Republican Presidential field deeply unsatisfying for conservatives? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 27, 2007, 4:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-republican-presidential-field-deeply-unsatisfying-for-conservatives/389685 "2007-01-27T04:12:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Qadgop\_the\_Mercotan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/qadgop_the_mercotan/32/83_2.png) [@Qadgop\_the\_Mercotan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qadgop_the_Mercotan)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2007, 4:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-republican-presidential-field-deeply-unsatisfying-for-conservatives/389685/61 "2007-01-28T16:38:44Z")
[QUOTE=E-Sabbath] Mister, we could use a man like (Richard) Nixon again. [/QUOTE] oddly compelling musical thought… No! No!! Stifle! Stifle! [sub]gee, our old Lasalle ran great…[/sub] ---
**Author:** ![What\_Exit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/what_exit/32/10652_2.png) [@What\_Exit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_Exit)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2007, 11:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-republican-presidential-field-deeply-unsatisfying-for-conservatives/389685/62 "2007-01-28T23:07:34Z")
[QUOTE=Qadgop the Mercotan] oddly compelling musical thought… No! No!! Stifle! Stifle! [sub]gee, our old Lasalle ran great…[/sub] [/QUOTE] I had the same thought when I read it. I would love a president like Nixon if we could get one without the paranoia, non-existent ethics and the mean streak. Somehow in spite of these huge faults, he was a pretty good President overall. JIm ---
**Author:** ![E-Sabbath](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e19adc/32.png) [@E-Sabbath](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/E-Sabbath)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2007, 12:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-republican-presidential-field-deeply-unsatisfying-for-conservatives/389685/63 "2007-01-29T00:44:15Z")
It was a direct callback, guys. Herbert Hoover? Of “We’d like to thank you, Mr. Hoover” fame? Different generations have different perspectives on presidents. The seriously twisted thing is I see direct parallels with his presidency and Bush’s. From the fact that he was an Evangelical to the war and secret bombing, to his version of the Imperial Presidency… The difference is, he was _good_ at his job. China, we all know about, but from Wikipedia… > [@wikipedia](#): > > As President, Nixon imposed wage and price controls, indexed Social Security for inflation, and created Supplemental Security Income (SSI). The number of pages added to the Federal Register each year doubled under Nixon. He eradicated the last remnants of the gold standard. Nixon created the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), promoted the Legacy of parks program and implemented the Philadelphia Plan, the first significant federal affirmative action program, and dramatically improved salaries for U.S. federal employees worldwide. As a party leader, Nixon helped build the Republican Party (GOP), but he ran his 1972 campaign separately from the party, which perhaps helped the GOP escape some of the damage from Watergate. The Nixon White House was the first to organize a daily press event and daily message for the media, a practice that all subsequent staffs have performed. > > Nixon is credited with creating the modern day Imperial Presidency, in which the presidency retains a high level of control over government policy and decisions. In the early 1970s, Nixon impounded billions of dollars in federal spending and expanded the power of the Office of Management and Budget. These encroachments on the power of Congress led to the passage of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974. > > On January 2, 1974, Nixon signed a bill that lowered the maximum U.S. speed limit to 55 miles per hour (90 km/h) in order to conserve gasoline during the 1973 energy crisis. This law remained in effect until 1995, though states were allowed to raise the limit to 65 miles per hour in rural areas around 1987. > > Committed to wide-ranging bureaucratic reforms, in a last-minute bid to save his presidency, Nixon signed a significant reform of the federal budgeting process and granted wide authority to Congress in shaping the final budget. > > … > > The Nixon years saw the first large-scale integration of public schools in the South, after the region had stalled in compliance with the 1954 Supreme Court’s Brown ruling. Strategically Nixon sought a middle way between the segregationist George C. Wallace and liberal Democrats, whose support of integration was alienating some whites. Nixon concentrated on the principle that the law must be color-blind. “I am convinced that while legal segregation is totally wrong, forced integration of housing or education is just as wrong.” > > ``` > * Normalizing of diplomatic relations with the People's Republic of China and partially abandoning the Republic of China on Taiwan as part of Realpolitik, a foreign policy eschewing moral considerations. In the short term Nixon was successful in playing the "China card" against the Soviet Union and its client state North Vietnam. > * Détente, or the peaceful pause in the Cold War; détente ended in 1979, replaced by another phase of the Cold War. > * Establishment of the Environmental Protection Agency. > * Establishment of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. > * Establishment of the National Railroad Passenger Corporation. > * Establishment of the Drug Enforcement Administration. > * Establishment of the Supplemental Security Income program. > * Establishment of the Office of Minority Business Enterprise > * Post Office Department abolished as a cabinet department and reorganized as a government owned corporation, the U.S Postal Service. > * SALT I, or Strategic Arms Limitation Talks, led to the signing of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. > * "Vietnamization": the training and arming of South Vietnamese forces to allow the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Vietnam. > * Suspension of the convertibility of the US dollar into gold, a central point of the Bretton Woods system, allowing its value to float in world markets. > * Space Shuttle program started. > * Endorsed an enlightened self-determination policy for Native Americans that changed the direction of policy as continued from the New Deal through the Great Society. > > ``` Not all of them were rousing successes, and I am not pleased with the results of the DEA or the Space Shuttle program… but a lot of them were. ---
**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:** [January 29, 2007, 1:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-republican-presidential-field-deeply-unsatisfying-for-conservatives/389685/64 "2007-01-29T01:00:03Z")
[QUOTE=E-Sabbath] Nixon did a lot of good for this country. The EPA, 18 year olds voting… Before Bush, I wasn’t a fan. Now, I am. He may have been a paranoid son of a bitch, he may even have been evil, but he wasn’t stupid. Mister, we could use a man like Nixon again. [/QUOTE] What did Nixon have to do with 18-year-olds voting? Congress passed the 26th amendment during his term, but it was the Vietnam War that pushed Congress to do it. “\* You’re old enough to kill but not for votin’\*.” And Nixon was a Keynesian. Wage and price controls? No thanks. ---
**Author:** ![E-Sabbath](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e19adc/32.png) [@E-Sabbath](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/E-Sabbath)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2007, 2:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-republican-presidential-field-deeply-unsatisfying-for-conservatives/389685/65 "2007-01-29T02:31:25Z")
Well, it and integration are good analogues for gay marriage. And at least he didn’t come out against it. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2007, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-republican-presidential-field-deeply-unsatisfying-for-conservatives/389685/66 "2007-01-29T17:58:06Z")
[Romney was still strongly pro-choice while running for Mass. Gov. in 2002](http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/013/222htyos.asp), and it’s been less than two years since he publicly switched to being pro-life: > [@](#): > > In the spring of 2002 Romney completed a Planned Parenthood questionnaire. Signed by Romney and dated April 9, 2002, it contained these responses: > > > [@](#): > > > > Do you support the substance of the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade? YES > > > > ``` > > Do you support state funding of abortion services through Medicaid for low-income women? YES > > > > In 1998 the FDA approved the first packaging of emergency contraception, also known as the "morning after pill." Emergency contraception is a high dose combination of oral contraceptives that if taken within 72 hours of unprotected sex, can safely prevent a pregnancy from occurring. Do you support efforts to increase access to emergency contraception? YES > > > > ``` > > Romney also completed the questionnaire of the National Abortion Rights Action League, or NARAL (now called NARAL Pro-Choice America), with this statement: > > > [@](#): > > > > I respect and will protect a woman’s right to choose. This choice is a deeply personal one. Women should be free to choose based on their own beliefs, not mine and not the government’s. The truth is no candidate in the governor’s race in either party would deny women abortion rights. So let’s end an argument that does not exist and stop these cynical and divisive attacks that are made only for political gain. The linked Weekly Standard article then recounts a considerable number of for-instances where Romney reaffirmed his pro-choice beliefs during that campaign. But then: > [@](#): > > Two years into his governorship, in February 2005, Romney announced his opposition to stem cell research. Then, to the dismay of his pro-choice supporters, he vetoed a July 2005 bill making available Plan B or “morning after” contraception. Also that year, in an op-ed for the Boston Globe, he declared himself pro-life. > > Romney says he changed his mind in November 2004, when he met with a scientist from the Harvard Stem Cell Institute. How convenient. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2007, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-republican-presidential-field-deeply-unsatisfying-for-conservatives/389685/67 "2007-01-29T18:32:09Z")
[QUOTE=E-Sabbath] The seriously twisted thing is I see direct parallels with his presidency and Bush’s. From the fact that he was an Evangelical to the war and secret bombing, to his version of the Imperial Presidency… [/QUOTE] Nixon wasn’t an Evangelical. His parents were evangelical Quakers, but he had moved away from that in college and was, as an adult, a liberal Quaker, although not a very devout one. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2007, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-republican-presidential-field-deeply-unsatisfying-for-conservatives/389685/68 "2007-01-29T18:33:53Z")
[QUOTE=Captain Amazing] … a liberal Quaker, although not a very devout one. [/QUOTE] Are nominations for the 2007 SDMB Understatement of the Year still open? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2007, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-republican-presidential-field-deeply-unsatisfying-for-conservatives/389685/69 "2007-01-29T18:34:55Z")
You know, we can’t meaningfully discuss the OP without first pinning down the definition of “conservative” for purposes of this thread. E.g., does **fiscal** conservatism trump all other definitions/considerations? Can you not be a “conservative” if you accept the Bush Admin’s spending policies? Or is religious-social conservatism the defining factor? And do the neocons count as “conservatives” or not? ---
**Author:** ![What\_Exit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/what_exit/32/10652_2.png) [@What\_Exit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_Exit)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2007, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-republican-presidential-field-deeply-unsatisfying-for-conservatives/389685/70 "2007-01-29T18:57:58Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] You know, we can’t meaningfully discuss the OP without first pinning down the definition of “conservative” for purposes of this thread. E.g., does **fiscal** conservatism trump all other definitions/considerations? Can you not be a “conservative” if you accept the Bush Admin’s spending policies? Or is religious-social conservatism the defining factor? And do the neocons count as “conservatives” or not? [/QUOTE] I would say there are two types of conservatives: 1. The conservatives Fiscal who cannot agree with Bush’s spending policies 2. The religious-social conservatives. I am not sure what the definition of Neo-Con is, but being hawkish is not the hallmark or either type of conservative. Many old school conservatives were isolationist. Therefore, while Republicans are the more hawkish party, I do not believe that is tied directly to being conservative. Do we accept this definition of [Neo-Con from Wiki](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservative#Neoconservative:_Definition_and_views)? > [@](#): > > 1. Economics: Cutting tax rates in order to stimulate steady, wide-spread economic growth and acceptance of the necessity of the risks inherent in that growth, such as budget deficits, as well as the potential benefits, such as budget surpluses. > 2. Domestic Affairs: Preferring strong government but not intrusive government, slight acceptance of the welfare state, adherence to social conservatism, and disapproval of counterculture > 3. Foreign Policy: Patriotism is a necessity, world government is a terrible idea, the ability to distinguish friend from foe, protecting national interest both at home and abroad, and the necessity of a strong military. Jim ---
**Author:** ![Apos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/838e76/32.png) [@Apos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apos)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2007, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-republican-presidential-field-deeply-unsatisfying-for-conservatives/389685/71 "2007-01-30T16:23:00Z")
Here’s an article that came out just recently echoing my OP: > **[GOP Right Sees Lemons in White House Race](https://www.politico.com/story/2007/01/gop-right-sees-lemons-in-white-house-race-002509)** > > Contemplating the current field of Republican presidential candidates, Rush Limbaugh sounded like a man with malaise. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2007, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-republican-presidential-field-deeply-unsatisfying-for-conservatives/389685/72 "2007-01-30T18:21:06Z")
[QUOTE=What Exit?] Do we accept this definition of [Neo-Con from Wiki](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservative#Neoconservative:_Definition_and_views)? [/QUOTE] I don’t. On the evidence, the neocon foreign-policy agenda goes a **lot** further than “protecting national interest both at home and abroad.” ---
**Author:** ![What\_Exit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/what_exit/32/10652_2.png) [@What\_Exit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_Exit)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2007, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-republican-presidential-field-deeply-unsatisfying-for-conservatives/389685/73 "2007-01-30T19:15:11Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] I don’t. On the evidence, the neocon foreign-policy agenda goes a **lot** further than “protecting national interest both at home and abroad.” [/QUOTE] So please put up your definition of Neo-con. I have no clear idea, but from what I have seen they are not conservatives. Jim [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-republican-presidential-field-deeply-unsatisfying-for-conservatives/389685.md?page=3)