Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Does Anyone Have a Grip on the G.O.P.?

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Does Anyone Have a Grip on the G.O.P.?

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/16/ma...n-the-gop.html

    article is too long to post here. interesting piece, though, and it takes a look at the behind-the-scenes struggle between the establishment republicans and the Tea Party, from the establishment's POV.
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

  • #2
    Originally posted by astralis View Post
    Does Anyone Have a Grip on the G.O.P.?
    Satan?

    Karl Rove?

    (Sorry, I'm repeating myself!)
    Trust me?
    I'm an economist!

    Comment


    • #3
      Who needs a grip? We're not into saviors or prophets.

      Geez. There are days that I can read 10 page opinion pieces in the NYT about Republicans and conservatives, and this is not one of them.

      I know the Gray Lady is eager to discern or define a figurehead for the conservative movement in this country so they can load up their poop-cannon, but the average conservative doesn't give a sh!t.

      -dale
      Last edited by dalem; 13 Oct 11,, 10:32.

      Comment


      • #4
        dale,

        Who needs a grip? We're not into saviors or prophets.
        seeing how every republican candidate genuflects in front of St Ronnie twice on regular days and three times on sunday, i'd say from that angle you're mistaken.

        and seeing how republicans haven't brought themselves to hold their nose and vote en masse for the presumptive front-runner, romney, it would argue that conservatives simply are not rallying around the establishment choice as they used to in the past.

        that's pretty much what the article talks about, and why this is the case. seriously, did you just read the title and comment?
        There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

        Comment


        • #5
          It does not suprise me that the TPM is threatening to the establishment GOPers.

          The TPM rank and file are actually NOT IN ON THE GOP SCAM.

          The TPM rank and file actually believe the rhetorical blather the RNC hands out, but the last thing in the world the GRNC wants is the kind of government they pretend to want.

          They want CONTROL, just like th DNC wants.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by astralis View Post
            dale,

            seeing how every republican candidate genuflects in front of St Ronnie twice on regular days and three times on sunday, i'd say from that angle you're mistaken.
            When true, that tends to be the candidates, not the electorate.

            and seeing how republicans haven't brought themselves to hold their nose and vote en masse for the presumptive front-runner, romney,
            We had a vote already? And nobody told me?

            it would argue that conservatives simply are not rallying around the establishment choice as they used to in the past.
            I agree, but I don't see that as problematic, or even very interesting.

            that's pretty much what the article talks about, and why this is the case. seriously, did you just read the title and comment?
            I think that's pretty obvious from my comment. The value of the NYT's opinion of conservatives and our issues is less than zero to me - no way I'm going to read 10 pages of their bullsh!t on that topic.

            -dale

            Comment


            • #7
              dale,

              When true, that tends to be the candidates, not the electorate.
              that's certainly not true this time; we've seen TPers run towards palin, then bachmann, then perry, then christie, and now cain as their savior from the Establishment Romney.

              which as the article points out is quite different from the earlier model of the Establishment agreeing upon a candidate who has "waited his turn" and expecting the machine to coalensce around the candidate.

              We had a vote already? And nobody told me?
              polls.

              The value of the NYT's opinion of conservatives and our issues is less than zero to me - no way I'm going to read 10 pages of their bullsh!t on that topic.
              so why bother to post?

              i posted the article because i thought it made some pretty good points about how this election is different from the past. you can agree or disagree with the article's points (and ironically, you seem to agree), but in essence you just wrote "TL;DR"...which gets close to being a troll.
              There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by astralis View Post
                dale,

                that's certainly not true this time; we've seen TPers run towards palin, then bachmann, then perry, then christie, and now cain as their savior from the Establishment Romney.
                Oh, I thought you were talking about Reagan specifically. Yes, there is a bit of a run on anyone who is perceived as a "real" conservative. I understand it, and purely on opinion, I can be counted in some of those runs, but it's a primary. Until it's inevitably Romney, having a counter is good for the movement and the party. But it's not a run of people begging for leadership, it's a run to leaders who seem to profess the right set of values and character - if those turn up short, the run ends.

                which as the article points out is quite different from the earlier model of the Establishment agreeing upon a candidate who has "waited his turn" and expecting the machine to coalensce around the candidate.
                True - except that it's not. "The Establishment" agreed on Romney a year ago - the (conservative) electorate doesn't care.

                polls.
                Ah. Polls.

                so why bother to post?
                Oh, I dunno, maybe to express my opinion on the basic posit of your statement.

                i posted the article because i thought it made some pretty good points about how this election is different from the past. you can agree or disagree with the article's points (and ironically, you seem to agree), but in essence you just wrote "TL;DR"...which gets close to being a troll.
                That's the second or third time in the last few months that you've tried to muscle me around as a moderator, while only half-wearing your magic moderator sweater. I'm getting tired of it. So.

                Since you've accused me of trolling "in public", I request that you provide your evidence of such and clearly define it as such so I can clarify or defend or agree, or apologize to me "in public".

                -dale

                Comment


                • #9
                  dale,

                  That's the second or third time in the last few months that you've tried to muscle me around as a moderator, while only half-wearing your magic moderator sweater. I'm getting tired of it. So.

                  Since you've accused me of trolling "in public", I request that you provide your evidence of such and clearly define it as such so I can clarify or defend or agree, or apologize to me "in public".

                  -dale
                  note i said you were CLOSE to being a troll, not a troll. but if you insist, i refer you to the forum guidelines.

                  http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/mem...3-13-11-a.html

                  To maintain a level of high-quality discussion, types of behaviors that are forbidden include, but are not limited to:

                  10. public criticism of a moderator's actions; if you have any concerns about a moderator, please contact an administrator.

                  so, follow the instructions.
                  There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by astralis View Post
                    dale,



                    note i said you were CLOSE to being a troll, not a troll. but if you insist, i refer you to the forum guidelines.

                    http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/mem...3-13-11-a.html

                    To maintain a level of high-quality discussion, types of behaviors that are forbidden include, but are not limited to:

                    10. public criticism of a moderator's actions; if you have any concerns about a moderator, please contact an administrator.

                    so, follow the instructions.
                    Huh? Where did dale criticise a moderator? You called him a troll because he said he wasn't going to waste his time on the NYT opinion piece. (Which you represented as being the establishment GOP position, I read it as the author's position.)

                    You regularly comment on the GOP and TP positions with hyperbole, and you have yet to accurately represent either, at least as far as I have seen.

                    This particular quote is hogwash:
                    Originally posted by astralis
                    that's certainly not true this time; we've seen TPers run towards palin, then bachmann, then perry, then christie, and now cain as their savior from the Establishment Romney.
                    TPers aren't "running" anywhere. Their positions have been consistent from day one, and they aren't complicated. Less federal control, more local control. To the extent the candidate's can align with that, they may get support. TPer's aren't looking for a "savior" as you put it. Their distaste of Romney is based on his record as Governor.

                    So if anything, accuse the candidates of running to the TPer's, not the other way around.

                    Why don't you make an attempt to more accurately portray the side you disagree with rather than attack members who hold a different position? (you called me a conspiracy theorist in the other thread)

                    I would say until then, you are not in a position to say what position the article represents, because you don't understand the people you are comparing.
                    "We will go through our federal budget – page by page, line by line – eliminating those programs we don’t need, and insisting that those we do operate in a sensible cost-effective way." -President Barack Obama 11/25/2008

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      :pop:

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        :pop: ^2
                        No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

                        To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Now everyone calm down. Have some dip. Remember http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/ame...-unite-us.html
                          "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            highsea,

                            Huh? Where did dale criticise a moderator? You called him a troll because he said he wasn't going to waste his time on the NYT opinion piece.
                            as per the forum guidelines, i've asked an admin to look this over, so let's drop this issue and let the big boys decide.

                            (Which you represented as being the establishment GOP position, I read it as the author's position.)
                            re-read what i wrote. i NEVER stated the article represented "establishment GOP position", i am merely stating that it makes OBSERVATIONS about what the establishment GOP used to do, and what it does today.

                            You regularly comment on the GOP and TP positions with hyperbole, and you have yet to accurately represent either, at least as far as I have seen.
                            your opinion, of course. that's not my issue, though, as we certainly have pretty good back and forth...with you at least doing me the favor of reading what i post.

                            TPers aren't "running" anywhere. Their positions have been consistent from day one, and they aren't complicated. Less federal control, more local control. To the extent the candidate's can align with that, they may get support. TPer's aren't looking for a "savior" as you put it. Their distaste of Romney is based on his record as Governor.
                            i disagree, else TPers would still be behind bachmann or palin, instead of running to newcomers perry or cain. cain hasn't changed much since he entered the race; why is he suddenly popular now?

                            Why don't you make an attempt to more accurately portray the side you disagree with rather than attack members who hold a different position? (you called me a conspiracy theorist in the other thread)
                            i'm NOT attacking members who hold a different position; i said you sounded like a conspiracy theorist (which is different from saying that you ARE one) because you made assumptions (which you agreed you made) to backfill your belief that there WAS a conspiracy going on.

                            I would say until then, you are not in a position to say what position the article represents, because you don't understand the people you are comparing.
                            and who are you to judge if i'm not in such a position? i daresay i don't think i can judge whether or not "you understand the people you are comparing".
                            There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by astralis View Post
                              highsea,



                              as per the forum guidelines, i've asked an admin to look this over, so let's drop this issue and let the big boys decide.
                              Ok by me. :)

                              Originally posted by astralis View Post
                              re-read what i wrote. i NEVER stated the article represented "establishment GOP position", i am merely stating that it makes OBSERVATIONS about what the establishment GOP used to do, and what it does today.
                              Change "position" to POV. You said the article discussed the struggle between the TP and the establishment, from the establishment POV.

                              I am saying the POV belongs to the author. You may think it's the establishment GOP POV, and so may the author. But neither of you are a part of that establishment, so declaring the article as establishment POV is not accurate.

                              Originally posted by astralis View Post
                              your opinion, of course. that's not my issue, though, as we certainly have pretty good back and forth...with you at least doing me the favor of reading what i post.
                              well, some of the time anyway. ;)

                              I wasn't going to wade through 10 pages of NYT op-ed any more than dale was. My day is to short for lefty manifestos about what's "wrong with the GOP".

                              Originally posted by astralis View Post
                              i disagree, else TPers would still be behind bachmann or palin, instead of running to newcomers perry or cain. cain hasn't changed much since he entered the race; why is he suddenly popular now?
                              You seem to give a lot of credence to these straw polls, but they don't mean anything. We've seen 5 polls and 5 different "favorites". It's just a reflection of where they choose to spend their money.

                              Originally posted by astralis View Post
                              i'm NOT attacking members who hold a different position; i said you sounded like a conspiracy theorist (which is different from saying that you ARE one) because you made assumptions (which you agreed you made) to backfill your belief that there WAS a conspiracy going on.
                              I never said anything about a conspiracy. I said I found it unbelievable that Holder and Obama were ignorant of what was going on. I have been posting more evidence on that thread, and the opinion that I offered is looking a lot more likely than not. Even Holder is now claiming that he "misunderstood the question".

                              Lol. The question was "how long have you known about the Fast and Furious operation?".

                              Originally posted by astralis View Post
                              and who are you to judge if i'm not in such a position? i daresay i don't think i can judge whether or not "you understand the people you are comparing".
                              Then again, I don't accuse liberals of running this way and that. I actually think they are very consistent. Wrong, but consistently so.
                              Last edited by highsea; 13 Oct 11,, 22:14.
                              "We will go through our federal budget – page by page, line by line – eliminating those programs we don’t need, and insisting that those we do operate in a sensible cost-effective way." -President Barack Obama 11/25/2008

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X