# Republicans: America's Fundamentalists **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 12, 2010, 3:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-americas-fundamentalists/528648 "2010-02-12T03:07:26Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Oveja\_Slayer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/47e85d/32.png) [@Oveja\_Slayer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oveja_Slayer)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2010, 2:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-americas-fundamentalists/528648/41 "2010-02-23T02:04:25Z")
> [@Dick\_Dastardly](#): > > Do you honestly believe that? Do you really think the next GOP nominee won’t be entirely bought and paid for by US corporations before he even gets nominated? And that the GOP won’t use the same old social issues as wedge issues during/after the next election? LOL Obama and McCain had 6 of the same organizations among their top 10 contributers. They’re all bought and paid for friend (save a handful perhaps) A fundamentalist is a fundamentalist. It just depends on who they proselytize for. The fact that most bills can only get votes on the side that proposes it tells me we have quite a lot of fundies running around Washington these days, across the board. ---
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2010, 2:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-americas-fundamentalists/528648/42 "2010-02-23T02:08:46Z")
Whack-a-Mole, do you have any idea how to conduct an actual survey that can be relied upon to reflect the opinion of the surveyed group? It really appears you do not. Here, I will help. Let’s say you want the opinion of “Americans” on an issue. So what you do is (i) make a list of Americans, (ii) randomly select some members from that list, and (iii) ask them their opinion on the issue. You can now determine the opinion of all Americans within a certain margin of error depending on the relationship between the number of people surveyed and the number of Americans. Now, let’s look at how this poll was apparently conducted (NOTE: I couldn’t find anything with a good description of how this was conducted exactly, so I’ve pieced this together from various articles). First, Esquire apparently made a list of people they consider “Republican leaders,” which includes current Congresspeople, former politicians, and who knows who else. Next, Esquire interviewed 75 of them. We have no indication whatsoever how those 75 were selected. We also have no indication that those 75 were the only ones interviewed (i.e., they could have interviewed 109 but then removed the answers from 24 of them). So, I’m sure you can compare and contrast the reliable survey methodology with the method apparently used in this poll. The bottom line is this poll says nothing about any group of people other than the group of people that actually responded. ---
**Author:** ![Otara](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/a88e4f/32.png) [@Otara](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Otara)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2010, 2:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-americas-fundamentalists/528648/43 "2010-02-23T02:21:45Z")
From what I can read these 75 Republican leaders said certain beliefs about Obama being a socialist. The assumption seems to be that because they were promised anonymity they were more honest? I find that hard to believe myself. They _want_ that meme to be the one thats out there. Any opportunity to get it out there would be used, the idea that a political type of person is generally going to say ‘Ok you got me, he isnt really a socialist we’re just saying that for political gain’ seems like a wee bit of a reach. You could possibly check for this I guess by seeing how many of the ‘in office’ types compared to retired people said it I guess but overall its hard to see how this survey can be taken too literally without a lot more work. ---
**Author:** ![Frank\_apisa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/47e85d/32.png) [@Frank\_apisa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank_apisa)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2010, 2:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-americas-fundamentalists/528648/44 "2010-02-23T02:44:42Z")
> [@The\_Facts](#): > > Oh, so you can see into his brain and read his mind now? Fucking Bullshit. > > Of course they’re going to downplay their social conservatism now. They know that showing their racist, homophobic anti-choice true selves the will kill them in elections. So they cover themselves up, hide behind fiscal conservativism, and throw out scarey words like “socialist” to scare the sheep. Then once in office, they’re back to the same old religious Jesus God Bless America bullshit. > > Not anymore. They’re never getting back in. I wish I were a certain of that as you. Fact is though, if the liberal/progressives don’t get their shit in order…they may not only get back in…the transition back to them may begin much sooner than you think. ---
**Author:** ![Knorf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/58956e/32.png) [@Knorf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Knorf)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2010, 2:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-americas-fundamentalists/528648/45 "2010-02-23T02:59:12Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > As for Obama being a socialist… Hell, -I- think he’s a socialist. I don’t think his _policies_ are socialist, because he could never get away with it. But if he were suddenly made king, I have little doubt that he’d nationalize critical industries, crank up marginal rates on the rich to a large degree, adopt extreme pro-union and pro-labor policies, and treat large businesses like dirt. I think he’d like far more regulations on commercial activity, and a much heavier hand of government in American decision-making. Sure, there are some areas where he doesn’t fit the strict dictionary definition, but he’s close enough that I could be comfortable fitting the label to him. Point to a single document anywhere where you can find support for the notion that Obama has ever been interesting in doing any of the things you insist he would do if he could. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2010, 3:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-americas-fundamentalists/528648/46 "2010-02-23T03:00:16Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > The new party is much younger, much less animated by social issues, and they’re on fire right now. On fire, as in US hockey team on-fire? Or Buddhist monk on-fire; it could go either way… ---
**Author:** ![Dick\_Dastardly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c4cdca/32.png) [@Dick\_Dastardly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dick_Dastardly)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2010, 3:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-americas-fundamentalists/528648/47 "2010-02-23T03:28:03Z")
> [@Oveja\_Slayer](#): > > LOL Obama and McCain had 6 of the same organizations among their top 10 contributers. > > They’re all bought and paid for friend (save a handful perhaps) > > A fundamentalist is a fundamentalist. It just depends on who they proselytize for. > > The fact that most bills can only get votes on the side that proposes it tells me we have quite a lot of fundies running around Washington these days, across the board. I agree. Effectively we get the choice to vote for one of two wings of the same party. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2010, 3:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-americas-fundamentalists/528648/48 "2010-02-23T03:50:21Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > The big story about the right side of American politics is that it is being increasingly dominated by fiscal conservatism and Libertarian/classical liberal ideals. This explains why books like Hayek’s “Road to Serfdom” and Ayn Rand’s books are best sellers again, and why the old guard of the Republican establishment, like Trent Lott, Phylis Schlafly, Newt Gingrich, Ralph Reed and Rick Santorum are almost invisible. Their day is done. The old big-government, corporatist, ‘compassionate conservatism’ eastern establishment Republicans are history. The new party is much younger, much less animated by social issues, and they’re on fire right now. WFT?! The most visibly dynamic wings of the conservative movement right now are the stupidest – the religious right and the paleocons. Palin, Huckabee, Limbaugh, Beck – they’re not “classical liberals” and they’re all about social issues. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2010, 3:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-americas-fundamentalists/528648/49 "2010-02-23T03:53:06Z")
> [@The\_Facts](#): > > Oh, so you can see into his brain and read his mind now? Fucking Bullshit. So, I’m not allowed to integrate what I’ve heard, read, and seen of him, and come to a conclusion about what he’s really all about? You ‘progressives’ do this every day. People in this thread are doing it right now. Despite any evidence, there are people right above this message proclaiming that everything the Republicans say they stand for today is a smoke-screen for what they ‘really’ believe - that evil hidden agenda. And to some degree, they may be right. I’ve been disappointed by enough politicians in my life to expect the worst from them, whether they are on the right or the left. But yes, I can look at who Obama has associated with in his life, what he’s instinctively said about businesses when asked, how he’s attacked various corporate leaders, his comments about ‘spreading the wealth’, the trial balloons his administration has floated about nationalizing the banks, nationalizing the student loan program, nationalizing mortgages, raising taxes on the rich, giving billions of dollars to labor unions… Andy Stern of the SEIU is the most frequent visitor to the White House. Saying he’s a socialist in outlook is being charitable. If you want me to be uncharitable, I could say he’s a stooge for big labor - an inexperienced man in way over his head, pushing policies that will increase the divide between unionized public sector workers and everyone else. > [@](#): > > Of course they’re going to downplay their social conservatism now. They know that showing their racist, homophobic anti-choice true selves the will kill them in elections. So they cover themselves up, hide behind fiscal conservativism, and throw out scarey words like “socialist” to scare the sheep. Then once in office, they’re back to the same old religious Jesus God Bless America bullshit. Oh look! We didn’t even have to look beyond your own message to find someone making sweeping judgments about the other side based on nothing more than prejudice. You’ve got a lot of nerve calling me out for making my own judgment about Obama when you’re willing to tar the entire side of the aisle with the ‘racist, homophobe’ brush. > [@](#): > > Not anymore. They’re never getting back in. Really? What, are you hoping for a dictatorship? Or are you so young that you’ve never seen the pendulum swing before? I’ve got news for you: They WILL get back in. And the rules you set up now, such as using reconciliation to pass health care and letting Obama rule through Presidential Order, are going to come back and bite you in the ass - hard. Just as Bush’s expansion of Presidential power wound up giving Obama the power he wants. You might not even have to wait that long. There is a very good chance that the Democrats will lose one or both houses of Congress this fall. If the Democrats ram health care through under reconciliation, I predict they lose both. The [Cook Political Report](http://www.cookpolitical.com/) is a pretty good source of analysis for the upcoming elections. Right now, of the 36 Senate races happening in the fall, ten lean Democratic, nine are a toss-up, and 17 lean Republican. If that pattern holds, the Democrats will lose seven Senate seats. But if you look at the direction the races are moving in, it’s all towards the Republicans. In the House, Cook has 60 seats vulnerable to changing parties. Of those, 54 lean Republican, and only 6 lean Democrat. I don’t think you have any real idea of just how much the public has turned against the Democrats. Losing the Massachusetts Senate seat should have been a wakeup call. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2010, 3:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-americas-fundamentalists/528648/50 "2010-02-23T03:58:43Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > WFT?! The most visibly dynamic wings of the conservative movement right now are the stupidest – the religious right and the paleocons. Palin, Huckabee, Limbaugh, Beck – they’re not “classical liberals” and they’re all about social issues. You need to pay more attention. Palin got 7% support at CPAC. Huckabee was a non-entity. Limbaugh and Beck have support - but that’s because they’re attack dogs. And Beck isn’t a Paleo anything. He’s not even a Republican. He’s a libertarian who spent a good part of his CPAC speech attacking the Republican party. If you look at where the conservative members actually stand, and at the Esquire Poll linked in the OP (which is quite consistent with the CPAC poll), you’ll find that the vast majority of current conservatives just aren’t interested in social issues. It’s all about stopping the spread of big government. They are starting to look a lot more like the conservatives on this message board than they are like Pat Buchanan. You WANT the Republicans to be the god-fearin’ paleo conservatives, because they’re juicy targets. Easy to mock, easy to fight. You’re going to have a much harder time of it if the new conservatives rising out of the ashes of the old Republican establishment is smarter, younger, and more focused on liberty and small government than on whether two dudes want to marry each other. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2010, 4:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-americas-fundamentalists/528648/51 "2010-02-23T04:00:14Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > WFT?! The most visibly dynamic wings of the conservative movement right now are the stupidest – the religious right and the paleocons. Palin, Huckabee, Limbaugh, Beck – they’re not “classical liberals” and they’re all about social issues. You need to pay more attention. Palin got 7% support at CPAC. Huckabee was a non-entity. Limbaugh and Beck have support - but that’s because they’re attack dogs. And Beck isn’t a Paleo anything. He’s not even a Republican. He’s a libertarian who spent a good part of his CPAC speech attacking the Republican party. If you look at where the conservative members actually stand, and at the Esquire Poll linked in the OP (which is quite consistent with the CPAC poll), you’ll find that the vast majority of current conservatives just aren’t that interested in social issues. It’s all about stopping the spread of big government. They are starting to look a lot more like the conservatives on this message board than they are like Pat Buchanan. You WANT the Republicans to be the god-fearin’ paleo conservatives, because they’re juicy targets. Easy to mock, easy to fight. You’re going to have a much harder time of it if the new conservatives rising out of the ashes of the old Republican establishment is smarter, younger, and more focused on liberty and small government than on whether two dudes want to marry each other. ---
**Author:** ![Oveja\_Slayer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/47e85d/32.png) [@Oveja\_Slayer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oveja_Slayer)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2010, 4:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-americas-fundamentalists/528648/52 "2010-02-23T04:12:49Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > WFT?! The most visibly dynamic wings of the conservative movement right now are the stupidest – the religious right and the paleocons. Palin, Huckabee, Limbaugh, Beck – they’re not “classical liberals” and they’re all about social issues. Agreed, though I do not think they by any mean represent the majority, any more than the democrat talking heads do. A lot of people don’t feel identified by either party right now. The TEA Party movement was started by independents, libertarians, constitutionalists, etc. It was a very bipartisan movement. Well we can’t have the people organizing to ruin the big government hooplah. The TEA Party has been hijacked by the Republicans, steering well meaning individuals back into the same neo-con web of lies the TEA party was (in part) trying to escape from. Realize the media controls who the talking heads are and skews reality by creating a perceived majority. They do this across the board. This is not a left/right issue. It’s a government/populace issue. Beck has claimed to be a libertarian, a classic liberal, a neo-con, and even recently claimed that global warming holds some weight in [this article.](http://www.usaweekend.com/article/20100219/ENTERTAINMENT01/100218001/Don-t-judge-Beck-by-his-cover) It’s on page 3 at the top. He’s a corporate shill, just like the rest of the people on your list (with the exception of Huckabee who may just be legitimately out of touch with reality). Understand that the way you see those people, many people infected with Republican bias view the democrat talking heads. The democrats have their share of paid media hitmen as well, but the bottom line is none of them give two shits about anything they say they do. People in both parties blindly follow along, scrounging for votes, money, and power. People who speak up in the name of logic and reason are shunned on both sides by the mainstream party lines (Mike Gravel, Dennis Kucinich, and Ron Paul come to mind). The talking heads yell and scream, demanding the American people take sides…only they falsely present two sides as encompassing all views on the issues. American politics are at their essence fundamentalist and inflammatory. Otherwise people might realize how much bullshit they actually are. Like I said, virtually all bought and paid for. Washington is the newest brothel, with pimps and whores bursting from the seams. ---
**Author:** ![Robot\_Arm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robot_arm/32/18280_2.png) [@Robot\_Arm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robot_Arm)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2010, 4:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-americas-fundamentalists/528648/53 "2010-02-23T04:23:11Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > The big story about the right side of American politics is that it is being increasingly dominated by fiscal conservatism and Libertarian/classical liberal ideals. The right is being dominated by _talk_ of fiscal conservatism. but there’s nothing remotely new about that. Republicans have been doing that since the days of Reagan. Then when they get elected, they spend like drunken sailors and refuse to pick up the tab. And now they’re calling themselves fiscal conservatives. Well, whoop-de-doo. Give me any reason to believe them this time; any reason at all. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Facts](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bb73d2/32.png) [@The\_Facts](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Facts)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2010, 4:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-americas-fundamentalists/528648/54 "2010-02-23T04:46:42Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > So, I’m not allowed to integrate what I’ve heard, read, and seen of him, and come to a conclusion about what he’s really all about? Integrate whatever the fuck you like. Just don’t claim to read his mind. > [@](#): > > You ‘progressives’ do this every day. People in this thread are doing it right now. Despite any evidence, there are people right above this message proclaiming that everything the Republicans say they stand for today is a smoke-screen for what they ‘really’ believe - that evil hidden agenda. And to some degree, they may be right. I’ve been disappointed by enough politicians in my life to expect the worst from them, whether they are on the right or the left. Oh, right … “they all lie.” Most politicians lie a little bit to get elected. Republicans lie about who they are. Oh, and to start wars. Little stuff like that. [QUOTE] But yes, I can look at who Obama has associated with in his life, what he’s instinctively said about businesses when asked, how he’s attacked various corporate leaders, his comments about ‘spreading the wealth’, the trial balloons his administration has floated about nationalizing the banks, nationalizing the student loan program, nationalizing mortgages, raising taxes on the rich, giving billions of dollars to labor unions… Andy Stern of the SEIU is the most frequent visitor to the White House. Saying he’s a socialist in outlook is being charitable. If you want me to be uncharitable, I could say he’s a stooge for big labor - an inexperienced man in way over his head, pushing policies that will increase the divide between unionized public sector workers and everyone else. [QUOTE] Oh, no! He gets visited by representatives of the working class! Horrors! Doesn’t he know presidents are only supposed to be visited by the “right” kind of people? Why it’s almost like he cares about them! Why, that makes him a socialist right there! > [@](#): > > Oh look! We didn’t even have to look beyond your own message to find someone making sweeping judgments about the other side based on nothing more than prejudice. You’ve got a lot of nerve calling me out for making my own judgment about Obama when you’re willing to tar the entire side of the aisle with the ‘racist, homophobe’ brush. If the shoe fits, put it on. I’ve never met a republican who wasn’t. > [@](#): > > Really? What, are you hoping for a dictatorship? Or are you so young that you’ve never seen the pendulum swing before? I’ve got news for you: They WILL get back in. And the rules you set up now, such as using reconciliation to pass health care and letting Obama rule through Presidential Order, are going to come back and bite you in the ass - hard. Just as Bush’s expansion of Presidential power wound up giving Obama the power he wants. > > You might not even have to wait that long. There is a very good chance that the Democrats will lose one or both houses of Congress this fall. If the Democrats ram health care through under reconciliation, I predict they lose both. > > The [Cook Political Report](http://www.cookpolitical.com/) is a pretty good source of analysis for the upcoming elections. Right now, of the 36 Senate races happening in the fall, ten lean Democratic, nine are a toss-up, and 17 lean Republican. If that pattern holds, the Democrats will lose seven Senate seats. But if you look at the direction the races are moving in, it’s all towards the Republicans. > > In the House, Cook has 60 seats vulnerable to changing parties. Of those, 54 lean Republican, and only 6 lean Democrat. > > I don’t think you have any real idea of just how much the public has turned against the Democrats. Losing the Massachusetts Senate seat should have been a wakeup call. Blah, blah blah. Obama’s poll numbers are down because he’s hasn’t listened enough to the people who elected him. He’s been trying to reach out to you people, and you’ve pissed all over him. Not anymore. Healthcare reform will pass, and Obama’s popularity will soar. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2010, 4:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-americas-fundamentalists/528648/55 "2010-02-23T04:48:12Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > You’re going to have a much harder time of it if the new conservatives rising out of the ashes of the old Republican establishment is smarter, younger, and more focused on liberty and small government than on whether two dudes want to marry each other. I might be worried if the new conservatives pledged to cut spending before they cut taxes. Unfortunately, I don’t see any more backbone in the new crop than the old; they all want their dessert before they eat their vegetables. In that respect, they are just as hopey/changey as the Democrats. They will gladly cut spending next Tuesday, for the tax cut they vote for today. Unfortunately, next Tuesday is always a week away. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2010, 4:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-americas-fundamentalists/528648/56 "2010-02-23T04:52:26Z")
> [@Sam Stone](#): > > As for Obama being a socialist… Hell, -I- think he’s a socialist. I don’t think his policies are socialist, because he could never get away with it. But if he were suddenly made king, I have little doubt that he’d nationalize critical industries, crank up marginal rates on the rich to a large degree, adopt extreme pro-union and pro-labor policies, and treat large businesses like dirt. I think he’d like far more regulations on commercial activity, and a much heavier hand of government in American decision-making. Sure, there are some areas where he doesn’t fit the strict dictionary definition, but he’s close enough that I could be comfortable fitting the label to him. 😃 I totally believe that. After all, you’re the guy who thought [George W. Bush was going to be a budget cutter](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5294175&postcount=14): > [@Sam Stone on 9/24/2004](#): > > On the other hand, I have this suspicion that Bush is going to morph into a budget cutter if he is re-elected. Ever since the first election I’ve kind of felt that Bush’s strategy was a ‘starve the beast’ plan - Tax cuts are always more politically palatable than spending cuts. So you cut taxes in your first term, get re-elected, and then when you no longer have election pressure on you, you switch to stage II of your plan, which is to cut spending. Look at all your “i have little doubt…” “I think he’d like…” “I have this suspicion…” “I’ve kind of felt…” and all the other classic _argumentum ab ano_ wishful-thinking faffaroofle. Basically, **Sam** , you seem to just decide what you **want** to be true about any particular politician, and then make up reasons why it seems plausible to you. ---
**Author:** ![Oveja\_Slayer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/47e85d/32.png) [@Oveja\_Slayer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oveja_Slayer)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2010, 4:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-americas-fundamentalists/528648/57 "2010-02-23T04:57:36Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > 😃 I totally believe that. After all, you’re the guy who thought [George W. Bush was going to be a budget cutter](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5294175&postcount=14): > > Look at all your “i have little doubt…” “I think he’d like…” “I have this suspicion…” “I’ve kind of felt…” and all the other classic _argumentum ab ano_ wishful-thinking faffaroofle. Basically, **Sam** , \*\*you seem to just decide what you **want** to be true about any particular politician, and then make up reasons why it seems plausible to you. \*\* I thought that’s what all people who still believe in the two party system did. ---
**Author:** ![Oveja\_Slayer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/47e85d/32.png) [@Oveja\_Slayer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oveja_Slayer)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2010, 4:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-americas-fundamentalists/528648/58 "2010-02-23T04:59:47Z")
> [@The\_Facts](#): > > If the shoe fits, put it on. I’ve never met a republican who wasn’t. If you’ve never met a republican who isn’t racist or a homophobe, you should probably talk to more republicans. PS I’m not a republican, so I’d appreciate foregoing the simple-minded group-think ad hominem attacks, thanks. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2010, 5:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-americas-fundamentalists/528648/59 "2010-02-23T05:09:54Z")
> [@Oveja Slayer](#): > > I thought that’s what all people who still believe in the two party system did. > [@Oveja Slayer](#): > > I’d appreciate foregoing the simple-minded group-think ad hominem attacks, thanks. :dubious: You might want to try foregoing the beam in your own eye first… ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2010, 5:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-americas-fundamentalists/528648/60 "2010-02-23T05:12:13Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > You need to pay more attention. Palin got 7% support at CPAC. Huckabee was a non-entity. So, who do you think represents more votes – CPAC, or the Tea Partiers? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-americas-fundamentalists/528648.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-americas-fundamentalists/528648.md?page=4)