This is an honest request. As an independent it's easy for me to find both good and bad on both sides, although mostly bad lately on both sides. I know that conservatives can be just as smart as anyone else so this is not meant as a put down, but on the forum I'm left with the impression that the conservative posters here NEVER find any thing wrong with a republican position. I would love to find out that I am misinformed and that conservatives and republicans can have an open mind.
What kind of answers are you looking for?
Do you want to know if there have been any Republicans that have comitted crimes?
Or... are you looking to see if there's anyone here that agrees with your less conservative views as if to suggest that this believes there is "fault" in the conservative logic?
I mean, kind of a dumb question, honestly, because you're always going to find politicians through the entire scope of politics that have comitted crimes or done something stupid. I assume that should be obvious to most of us... what I'm not sure about is exactly what kind of responses you're looking for. I question your claim of being an independant.
If you're talking about policy... then this is still a dumb question because there's people through the whole political spectrum that agree with some things and don't agree with others. I don't pretend to claim that I'm independant. I'm a true Reagan Republican. I'm Republican on my voter registration card, and that's how I live my life.
But that doesn't mean that I won't vote for a better candidate when I think it's pretty clear. Like I've told to you three times already, even though you seem to post this question here with no clue??? I've voted for Senator Bill Nelson twice now, and... still not sure, but I might end up voting for him again. He's a Democrat Senator from Florida. He's big on the space program (though lately he's really been a huge pussy when it comes to standing up to Obama on the massive NASA cuts), but he's also a fiscal conservative (he's a Blue Dog). Although I'd rather he be a Republican for the sake of balance of power in the Senate... he's still a moderate, and I often fear that putting a less than stellar Republican in his seat would result in the long-term replacement of the seat by a radical leftist who would spend money like crazy.
If you want a list of things I disagree with:
Nixon - Took us off the Gold standard, Forced the EPA program / catalytic converters before the technology was tried and true, this hurt the auto industry. Reagan - Nothing, he's totally awesome. Bush Sr. - Didn't speak up enough, or defend his positions enough... too soft spoken. Bush Jr. - QE1, and pretty much all the spending bills he passed during the last two years of his administration... which essentially were all Democrat spending bills from Pelosi.
Now stop asking dumb questions when you already know the answers.
IP: Logged
06:22 PM
partfiero Member
Posts: 6923 From: Tucson, Arizona Registered: Jan 2002
Led us into a Civil War. Anything else he did is moot as he was at the helm, and therefore the cause of many unneeded deaths.
Brad
What other president is responsible for a war that cost us over 1/2 million casualties, and sooo early in our existence. Wonder if anyone has ever calculated how many Americans were never born and never had a chance to experience living in this great country because of that war. The number grows with each generation.
IP: Logged
07:17 PM
E.Furgal Member
Posts: 11708 From: LAND OF CONFUSION Registered: Mar 2012
What other president is responsible for a war that cost us over 1/2 million casualties, and sooo early in our existence. Wonder if anyone has ever calculated how many Americans were never born and never had a chance to experience living in this great country because of that war. The number grows with each generation.
WASHINGTON
IP: Logged
07:19 PM
fierobear Member
Posts: 27116 From: Safe in the Carolinas Registered: Aug 2000
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: Reagan - Nothing, he's totally awesome.
I have one criticism of Reagan, and it is a fault he himself acknowledged. He pushed for and got tax rate cuts, but didn't follow through on the spending cuts he wanted. Same thing for Bush 2.
IP: Logged
07:48 PM
spark1 Member
Posts: 11159 From: Benton County, OR Registered: Dec 2002
I contend that LBJ created the conditions that forced Nixon to take the U.S. off the gold standard. He basically devalued the dollar to pay for a war and his Great Society programs. There wasn't near enough gold in the world to back all the money he printed. Other countries knew this and were trading all the dollars they had for gold. If Nixon hadn't acted, the U.S. gold reserves would have been totally depleted. Carter inherited the whole mess and the dollar was forced down to it's true value by hyper inflation.
Right, but I wasn't getting into the details of it, just going on the "he was in charge" part.
Brad
True, we dont need all the details, some believe he was the greatest thing to walk the planet , others not so much.
Where i work there is a big 2 story mural of him on the wall, 'the greatest product of mankind'. it irritates the hell out of me. But ill drop the subject, as its too OT to the thread.
What other president is responsible for a war that cost us over 1/2 million casualties, and sooo early in our existence. Wonder if anyone has ever calculated how many Americans were never born and never had a chance to experience living in this great country because of that war. The number grows with each generation.
I wasn't aiming for a pissing match.
But if you follow history with an open mind it seems both sides have issues here.
Brad
IP: Logged
08:54 PM
partfiero Member
Posts: 6923 From: Tucson, Arizona Registered: Jan 2002
I have one criticism of Reagan, and it is a fault he himself acknowledged. He pushed for and got tax rate cuts, but didn't follow through on the spending cuts he wanted. Same thing for Bush 2.
Yeah, he mentioned that in his farewell address from the oval office.
IP: Logged
09:33 PM
spark1 Member
Posts: 11159 From: Benton County, OR Registered: Dec 2002
Glad to see that this thread now goes all over the place. That's the way I think anyway. The original point has had a pretty good run anyway and we have probably covered it. Thanks, for the responses, I actually understand some of you better than before.
IP: Logged
10:36 PM
Boondawg Member
Posts: 38235 From: Displaced Alaskan Registered: Jun 2003
Of course. The worst president in US history was a republican.
I disagree. He was a Democrat. Woodrow Wilson implemented the federal income tax (which is better than just tariffs), but the kicker is he promised the public "Let me do this and I promise the top rate will never go above 7%." By the time his term was over, it was 73%.
That's the worst president we've ever had. He was a lying, manipulative destroyer of a president. He set the precedent for the "tax the rich" mantra.
IP: Logged
02:44 AM
dratts Member
Posts: 8373 From: Coeur d' alene Idaho USA Registered: Apr 2001
I was still forming my political views when Ike made that speech. Ike was truly visionary. I was too young to vote for him back then. I was for Barry Goldwater after my military discharge, but I'm no logger hard right on my politics. I'm pretty sure that I'm a centrist now.
[This message has been edited by dratts (edited 06-24-2012).]
IP: Logged
10:16 AM
PFF
System Bot
OKflyboy Member
Posts: 6607 From: Not too far from Mexico Registered: Nov 2004
Originally posted by Wichita: Have you ever voted for a Conservative Democrat?
quote
Originally posted by OKflyboy: No, but I've voted for Libertarians.
"The difference between the Republicans and Democrats now at the national level, is that the D's want to tax and spend to promote the welfare state. The R's want to borrow and spend to promote the warfare state. But neither party in Washington D.C. wants to live by the Constitution."
- Chuck Baldwin
IP: Logged
01:30 PM
82-T/A [At Work] Member
Posts: 25719 From: Florida USA Registered: Aug 2002
I was still forming my political views when Ike made that speech. It was truly visionary. I was too young to vote for him back then. I was for Barry Goldwater after my military discharge, but I'm no longer hard right on my politics. I'm pretty sure that I'm a centrist now.
How do you mean that you were "still forming your political views?"
It seems to me it would have been pretty obvious. The Democrat party at the time was hard-core racist, while the Republican party was the ONLY PARTY that wanted anything to do with passing any civil rights acts. Eisenhower, was the one who passed the education desegregation act. From my perspective, it should have been a pretty easy decision? What else was there to formulate? The party of epic racism and socialism, from what I can tell, didn't have much of a draw.
Maybe it's just me, but I wasn't raised during a time of segregation and racism, so to me, that decision isn't very difficult.
Just sayin'...
IP: Logged
03:53 PM
E.Furgal Member
Posts: 11708 From: LAND OF CONFUSION Registered: Mar 2012
"The difference between the Republicans and Democrats now at the national level, is that the D's want to tax and spend to promote the welfare state. The R's want to borrow and spend to promote the warfare state. But neither party in Washington D.C. wants to live by the Constitution."
- Chuck Baldwin
thats funny right there.. the rep. the new rep.. the ones the media likes to call, you know racist , the tea party.. and most rep. outside the tea. want to stop borrowing.. as they know doing so.. nevermind from whom we are. is going to cause problems..
IP: Logged
04:17 PM
dratts Member
Posts: 8373 From: Coeur d' alene Idaho USA Registered: Apr 2001
I was only 20 years old. I've changed my views lots of times in the fifty years since then. I had no racist ideas at all because black people weren't allowed to stay in town after dark. It had to do with a national guard unit that was black being used to break a strike at the mine. I may very well change my mind again on some things. Depends on facts as they emerge and they way I analyze them. My mind may have jelled some but it's not set in stone yet.
quote
Originally. posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: How do you mean that you were "still forming your political views?"
It seems to me it would have been pretty obvious. The Democrat party at the time was hard-core racist, while the Republican party was the ONLY PARTY that wanted anything to do with passing any civil rights acts. Eisenhower, was the one who passed the education desegregation act. From my perspective, it should have been a pretty easy decision? What else was there to formulate? The party of epic racism and socialism, from what I can tell, didn't have much of a draw.
Maybe it's just me, but I wasn't raised during a time of segregation and racism, so to me, that decision isn't very difficult.
Just sayin'...
[This message has been edited by dratts (edited 06-24-2012).]
IP: Logged
06:55 PM
spark1 Member
Posts: 11159 From: Benton County, OR Registered: Dec 2002
I was only 20 years old. I've changed my views lots of times in the fifty years since then. I noticed that in my original post that my iPad changed the sentence beginning with "Ike" to "It". That changed the meaning considerably. I had no racist ideas at all because black people weren't allowed to stay in town after dark. It had to do with a national guard unit that was black being used to break a strike at the mine. I may very well change my mind again on some things. Depends on facts as they emerge and they way I analyze them. My mind may have jelled some but it's not set in stone yet.
I know where your coming from since I'm about the same age. The world is much different now than in the 50's.
Same reason Obama did when he first ran. The 'party leaders' picked him, and what the voters wanted becomes irrelevant after that.
That and the primary system is broken. I think primaries should be held on the same day, or at least the same week. Too much wax and wane is based on media's coverage or lack thereof.
That and the primary system is broken. I think primaries should be held on the same day, or at least the same week. Too much wax and wane is based on media's coverage or lack thereof.
Well said.
Brad
IP: Logged
10:27 PM
dratts Member
Posts: 8373 From: Coeur d' alene Idaho USA Registered: Apr 2001
Frankly, to answer the original question you don't have to look very hard. Most of us don't like Romney worth a damn.
Do you think that he is too conservative? Too moderate? Something else about him bothers you? I'm trying not to be disrespectful. I DO respect other peoples viewpoints.
IP: Logged
11:33 PM
Khw Member
Posts: 11139 From: South Weber, UT. U.S.A. Registered: Jun 2008
Do you think that he is too conservative? Too moderate? Something else about him bothers you? I'm trying not to be disrespectful. I DO respect other peoples viewpoints.
Well, there would be the healthcare system he signed into law as Governor that many feel is alot like Obamacare. So I'd say probably along the to moderate line of thinking. The problem is trying to get a person conservative enough to win the election, but not so conservative as to lose it. By getting that balance, you will always upset people because they don't think this person represents what they want enough. Nevermind the idea that such a person would have a real difficult time winning a election... Oh and then there's the whole "He's LDS" thing.
IP: Logged
11:47 PM
OKflyboy Member
Posts: 6607 From: Not too far from Mexico Registered: Nov 2004
