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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
On fire, as in US hockey team on-fire? Or Buddhist monk on-fire; it could go either way…
I agree. Effectively we get the choice to vote for one of two wings of the same party.
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.
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.
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.
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 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.
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.
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.
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. 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.
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.
Integrate whatever the fuck you like. Just don’t claim to read his mind.
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!
If the shoe fits, put it on. I’ve never met a republican who wasn’t.
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.
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.
I totally believe that. After all, you’re the guy who thought George W. Bush was going to be a budget cutter:
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.
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.
:dubious: You might want to try foregoing the beam in your own eye first…
So, who do you think represents more votes – CPAC, or the Tea Partiers?