where did the "right" lose its way?

[p1k3]

If I were Hispanic I would be distancing myself as far from the republican party as possible. "Papers, please" and other similar policies can just GTFOOMF.

same. I'm pretty sure that's what we're seeing

[MakeItRain]

Dick Lugar was defeated in a primary by that fool Murdock.  Dick Lugar is one of the most serious foreign policy voices in the United States Senate.  He got freaking primary'd by the tea party.  The people that used to vote Republican are being shoved by a committed group of 25-30% of the electorate that forces Republicans to bow down or gtfo.  There are absolutely interest group politics on the left, but it has become such a diverse set of interests that it has mostly woven itself in to the generally electorate.  Meanwhile, demographics and fundamentalism is going to doom the Republicans.

But look, let's not get out of hand.  It is hard to beat an incumbent. 

Bush I
Clinton
Clinton
Bush II
Bush II
Obama
Obama

Republicans will have an excellent shot in four years.  Anyone that pretends to know what their candidate will be or what the Democratic nominee will be is nuts.  But a lot of issues on the ground are going to make fools of the religious right.  Gay Marriage, Pot, Birth Control, Immigration.  These are devastating losers for the right long term.

I think that Republicans are facing a growing demographic issue, this isn't going away with the end of Obama's term.

I think you're both right. But this guy on Fox was just saying that if the Rs continue to lose the Hispanic vote like they are, then they can forget about it

It will be interesting to see if the Rs can do this since the party is so chalk full of closed minded racists and bigots

its just not the Hispanic vote though, it is obvious with elections nationwide that Hispanics aren't as solid with liberals as other minority groups.  But as seven pointed out the electorate is becoming younger as well.  The democratic party has figured out how to turn out voters.  All these young people working on the ground aren't just going to stop just because Obama won again.  This has been happening for a while.  Look at the EC map from when Clinton won, it looks very differently today.  Even though Gore & Kerry lost you can start to see how the presidential elections started to change then.  Each of the last four elections have seen very impressive gains by Democrats.  This victory was much more impressive than the last despite how the popular vote will end up.  This republican ticket was much more viable than the last & they still got curb stomped.  The numbers are trending way away from the right and it isn't just a tea party issue, we've seen this for four elections now. 

[nicname]

Question: Are the Dems really helping minorities lower-income people?  I'm not talking about civil rights and gay marriage and stuff like that, but helping with other stuff, financial stuff, education, workforce, housing etc? 

I honestly don't know.  I mean, I'm pretty thankful for federal student-aid. I will say that.

I just don't know if a lot of stuff is really for the good of people or not.  Maybe I'm kinda buying into some GOP propaganda, but it seems kind of like usury to me.

[Stevesie60]

I get the impression that a lot of non-crazy people I talk to are libertarian, but without that candidate it comes down to who cares more about social issues and who cares more about fiscal issues. But with more and more people realizing how ridiculous it is to not allow gay marriage (and other social issues), I can see why the liberal is on an upward trend.

[star seed 7]

Question: Are the Dems really helping minorities lower-income people?  I'm not talking about civil rights and gay marriage and stuff like that, but helping with other stuff, financial stuff, education, workforce, housing etc? 

I honestly don't know.  I mean, I'm pretty thankful for federal student-aid. I will say that.

I just don't know if a lot of stuff is really for the good of people or not.  Maybe I'm kinda buying into some GOP propaganda, but it seems kind of like usury to me.

well, you can thank the republicans for doubling the interest this year.

past that, you are a perfect example.  i like the program that helps me, but eff those losers who use the other program, they should be more like me cause i don't need that program.  (not meant to make you into a douche)

[MixBerryCrunch]

This was a great thread and I'm sad I missed it as it was happening.  People were being real without rhetoric, well until John Doug posted.  I consider myself a liberal, a far left liberal but it is refreshing to see true moderates have an intelligent discussion.

I think people like me who consider themselves liberals are wholly social liberals and will flex a bit on fiscal issues.  The problem with the republican party, as most of you pointed out, have made it an issue to trample all over the social issues.  If they stayed true to the small government rhetoric and stayed out of peoples business they could make some headway.  The polling numbers state that most Americans think that Willard would handle the economy better, but he still got rolled.  You would think that the republican party would get the hint that Americans care more about social issues than they think and stop fighting a losing game.  They need to realize that you can't play the same game in national elections as you can in local elections.

Agree. It's so hard to convince people that Republicans aren't actually as stupid when it comes to economic, fiscal, and foreign relations issues as they are on social issues.  On the other hand it's hard to convince my liberal friends that capital gains are doubly taxed and so that is why Mitt only paid a 16% tax rate on them. It's extremely frustrating when 80% of the country can't see both sides of an argument and make an informative decision for themselves instead of just aligning all of their views with that of their political party.

Capital gains absolutely are not double-taxed. The only thing remotely unfair to people who earn capital gains is that there is a limit to the amount of loss you can claim in a single year.

Taxed as income at the corporate level and then again when passed on to investors. What the eff are you talking about? Have you ever taken a finance class? Not trying to be a dick but they teach that in an intro finance class, so I think it would be fairly common knowledge.

[p1k3]

its just not the Hispanic vote though

Oh I agree. The Republicans are trying to chase off whoever they can. Muslims, Gays, Blacks, women, etc. To the average American they hear them spout off this crap and think "WTF is wrong with these people?". Ten years ago that might not be the case, but it is now

I'm pretty conservative myself, but for this reason I can't vote for these idiots anymore. I know I'm not the only one on this board like this

[nicname]

I get the impression that a lot of non-crazy people I talk to are libertarian, but without that candidate it comes down to who cares more about social issues and who cares more about fiscal issues. But with more and more people realizing how ridiculous it is to not allow gay marriage (and other social issues), I can see why the liberal is on an upward trend.

Well, that and GOP seems to not really be concerned with fiscal responsibility.  Sure, they talk about it, but they have shown it is just talk.  They just spend money on other stuff, kind of, than the Dems/Libs.

Brings me back to what I said earlier.  If GOP would lose the religious-right, bigotry, social b.s. I think A LOT more people would consider themselves conservative.  I know I'm one.

[Rage Against the McKee]

Question: Are the Dems really helping minorities lower-income people?  I'm not talking about civil rights and gay marriage and stuff like that, but helping with other stuff, financial stuff, education, workforce, housing etc? 

I honestly don't know.  I mean, I'm pretty thankful for federal student-aid. I will say that.

I just don't know if a lot of stuff is really for the good of people or not.  Maybe I'm kinda buying into some GOP propaganda, but it seems kind of like usury to me.

The dems are not trying to help lower-income people. They are trying to provide the resources for those people to help themselves. These resources do get abused and the country probably cannot continue funding welfare programs indefinitely, but the argument that poor people would be better off without them sort of bothers me.

[MakeItRain]

Question: Are the Dems really helping minorities lower-income people?  I'm not talking about civil rights and gay marriage and stuff like that, but helping with other stuff, financial stuff, education, workforce, housing etc? 

I honestly don't know.  I mean, I'm pretty thankful for federal student-aid. I will say that.

I just don't know if a lot of stuff is really for the good of people or not.  Maybe I'm kinda buying into some GOP propaganda, but it seems kind of like usury to me.

Well yeah, when people ask this question like hamburglar did earlier I feel like the question is facetious because the information is easy to find.  I don't think republicans don't care about the working class, I just don't think trickle down economy works the way they think it does.

LOL at people using tax breaks to hire more people instead of building a bigger house, buying a bigger car, going on better vacations, its human nature to spend your additional income on yourself.

[Rage Against the McKee]

This was a great thread and I'm sad I missed it as it was happening.  People were being real without rhetoric, well until John Doug posted.  I consider myself a liberal, a far left liberal but it is refreshing to see true moderates have an intelligent discussion.

I think people like me who consider themselves liberals are wholly social liberals and will flex a bit on fiscal issues.  The problem with the republican party, as most of you pointed out, have made it an issue to trample all over the social issues.  If they stayed true to the small government rhetoric and stayed out of peoples business they could make some headway.  The polling numbers state that most Americans think that Willard would handle the economy better, but he still got rolled.  You would think that the republican party would get the hint that Americans care more about social issues than they think and stop fighting a losing game.  They need to realize that you can't play the same game in national elections as you can in local elections.

Agree. It's so hard to convince people that Republicans aren't actually as stupid when it comes to economic, fiscal, and foreign relations issues as they are on social issues.  On the other hand it's hard to convince my liberal friends that capital gains are doubly taxed and so that is why Mitt only paid a 16% tax rate on them. It's extremely frustrating when 80% of the country can't see both sides of an argument and make an informative decision for themselves instead of just aligning all of their views with that of their political party.

Capital gains absolutely are not double-taxed. The only thing remotely unfair to people who earn capital gains is that there is a limit to the amount of loss you can claim in a single year.

Taxed as income at the corporate level and then again when passed on to investors. What the eff are you talking about? Have you ever taken a finance class? Not trying to be a dick but they teach that in an intro finance class, so I think it would be fairly common knowledge.

The company I work for gets its profits taxed and then that money gets taxed again when I collect my salary. I guess my income is double-taxed too.

[nicname]

Question: Are the Dems really helping minorities lower-income people?  I'm not talking about civil rights and gay marriage and stuff like that, but helping with other stuff, financial stuff, education, workforce, housing etc? 

I honestly don't know.  I mean, I'm pretty thankful for federal student-aid. I will say that.

I just don't know if a lot of stuff is really for the good of people or not.  Maybe I'm kinda buying into some GOP propaganda, but it seems kind of like usury to me.

well, you can thank the republicans for doubling the interest this year.

past that, you are a perfect example.  i like the program that helps me, but eff those losers who use the other program, they should be more like me cause i don't need that program.  (not meant to make you into a douche)

Except I don't really vote along lines that benefit me personally.  I would much rather vote fiscally conservative and socially liberal, but that choice doesn't exist. 

[MakeItRain]

its just not the Hispanic vote though

Oh I agree. The Republicans are trying to chase off whoever they can. Muslims, Gays, Blacks, women, etc. To the average American they hear them spout off this crap and think "WTF is wrong with these people?". Ten years ago that might not be the case, but it is now

I'm pretty conservative myself, but for this reason I can't vote for these idiots anymore. I know I'm not the only one on this board like this

Man that's not what I'm saying.  The people who behave this way are the lunatic fringe of the party who pray on the stupid.

[sys]

The company I work for gets its profits taxed and then that money gets taxed again when I collect my salary. I guess my income is double-taxed too.

they don't pay your salary out of profits.

[Rage Against the McKee]

Question: Are the Dems really helping minorities lower-income people?  I'm not talking about civil rights and gay marriage and stuff like that, but helping with other stuff, financial stuff, education, workforce, housing etc? 

I honestly don't know.  I mean, I'm pretty thankful for federal student-aid. I will say that.

I just don't know if a lot of stuff is really for the good of people or not.  Maybe I'm kinda buying into some GOP propaganda, but it seems kind of like usury to me.

Well yeah, when people ask this question like hamburglar did earlier I feel like the question is facetious because the information is easy to find.  I don't think republicans don't care about the working class, I just don't think trickle down economy works the way they think it does.

LOL at people using tax breaks to hire more people instead of building a bigger house, buying a bigger car, going on better vacations, its human nature to spend your additional income on yourself.

Yeah, people are going to hire the amount of people that maximizes profits. LOL at the idea of a company that would be better off with additional staff, but just can't afford to hire them because of income taxes. More income taxed at a higher rate is still much better than less income taxed at a lower rate.

Higher taxes to reduce investment, though, which can make it harder for companies to grow and have a need for additional employees.

[Rage Against the McKee]

The company I work for gets its profits taxed and then that money gets taxed again when I collect my salary. I guess my income is double-taxed too.

they don't pay your salary out of profits.

Yeah, it was a poor example. The idea that your income shouldn't be taxed because you received it from the taxed income of some other entity is pretty ridiculous, though.

[MixBerryCrunch]

This was a great thread and I'm sad I missed it as it was happening.  People were being real without rhetoric, well until John Doug posted.  I consider myself a liberal, a far left liberal but it is refreshing to see true moderates have an intelligent discussion.

I think people like me who consider themselves liberals are wholly social liberals and will flex a bit on fiscal issues.  The problem with the republican party, as most of you pointed out, have made it an issue to trample all over the social issues.  If they stayed true to the small government rhetoric and stayed out of peoples business they could make some headway.  The polling numbers state that most Americans think that Willard would handle the economy better, but he still got rolled.  You would think that the republican party would get the hint that Americans care more about social issues than they think and stop fighting a losing game.  They need to realize that you can't play the same game in national elections as you can in local elections.

Agree. It's so hard to convince people that Republicans aren't actually as stupid when it comes to economic, fiscal, and foreign relations issues as they are on social issues.  On the other hand it's hard to convince my liberal friends that capital gains are doubly taxed and so that is why Mitt only paid a 16% tax rate on them. It's extremely frustrating when 80% of the country can't see both sides of an argument and make an informative decision for themselves instead of just aligning all of their views with that of their political party.

Capital gains absolutely are not double-taxed. The only thing remotely unfair to people who earn capital gains is that there is a limit to the amount of loss you can claim in a single year.

Taxed as income at the corporate level and then again when passed on to investors. What the eff are you talking about? Have you ever taken a finance class? Not trying to be a dick but they teach that in an intro finance class, so I think it would be fairly common knowledge.

The company I work for gets its profits taxed and then that money gets taxed again when I collect my salary. I guess my income is double-taxed too.

Come on man don't do this. You are not an owner of your company so their money gets taxed once and then they pay you and your money gets taxed once. That is not double taxation. An investor in a company is a partial owner of that company so any profit of that company is partially owned by the investor. When the company shells this money out to the investor in the form of dividends it is taxed again, so essentially the money is doubly taxed....Thank you for proving my point on how hard it is to explain this to my liberal friends. No hard feelings though man. 

[p1k3]

its just not the Hispanic vote though

Oh I agree. The Republicans are trying to chase off whoever they can. Muslims, Gays, Blacks, women, etc. To the average American they hear them spout off this crap and think "WTF is wrong with these people?". Ten years ago that might not be the case, but it is now

I'm pretty conservative myself, but for this reason I can't vote for these idiots anymore. I know I'm not the only one on this board like this

Man that's not what I'm saying.  The people who behave this way are the lunatic fringe of the party who pray on the stupid.

Well yeah, but for some reason they think it can keep working. It can't

[nicname]

its just not the Hispanic vote though

Oh I agree. The Republicans are trying to chase off whoever they can. Muslims, Gays, Blacks, women, etc. To the average American they hear them spout off this crap and think "WTF is wrong with these people?". Ten years ago that might not be the case, but it is now

I'm pretty conservative myself, but for this reason I can't vote for these idiots anymore. I know I'm not the only one on this board like this

Man that's not what I'm saying.  The people who behave this way are the lunatic fringe of the party who pray on the stupid.

The chasers used to be a pretty big base AFAIK, now that base is getting smaller every day.  I was talking about potential usuary by Dems earlier, and while not really usury, having that old base wither and die is pretty bad for the GOP. Not that many of the GOP candidates really agreed with the fringe groups anyway, or cared about them, but they def. pandered to them for votes.

[MixBerryCrunch]

The company I work for gets its profits taxed and then that money gets taxed again when I collect my salary. I guess my income is double-taxed too.

they don't pay your salary out of profits.

Yeah, it was a poor example. The idea that your income shouldn't be taxed because you received it from the taxed income of some other entity is pretty ridiculous, though.

It isn't. The profit of a company is owned by the investors. It is their profit and when they divide a portion of it out it is taxed again. Lower capital gains taxes encourages investing and is fairly critical to economic growth.

[MakeItRain]

its just not the Hispanic vote though

Oh I agree. The Republicans are trying to chase off whoever they can. Muslims, Gays, Blacks, women, etc. To the average American they hear them spout off this crap and think "WTF is wrong with these people?". Ten years ago that might not be the case, but it is now

I'm pretty conservative myself, but for this reason I can't vote for these idiots anymore. I know I'm not the only one on this board like this

Man that's not what I'm saying.  The people who behave this way are the lunatic fringe of the party who pray on the stupid.

The chasers used to be a pretty big base AFAIK, now that base is getting smaller every day.  I was talking about potential usuary by Dems earlier, and while not really usury, having that old base wither and die is pretty bad for the GOP. Not that many of the GOP candidates really agreed with the fringe groups anyway, or cared about them, but they def. pandered to them for votes.

Yep see Romney, Willard.  He could have and should have not pandered to the LCD, he's a moderate.  He moved to the middle late in the election but it was too late, he was married to the Rush crowd and it was too late for either of them to turn back.  The question is will the republican party utilize this lesson, its stunning how bad they got housed tonight, its time to change course.

[Rage Against the McKee]

This was a great thread and I'm sad I missed it as it was happening.  People were being real without rhetoric, well until John Doug posted.  I consider myself a liberal, a far left liberal but it is refreshing to see true moderates have an intelligent discussion.

I think people like me who consider themselves liberals are wholly social liberals and will flex a bit on fiscal issues.  The problem with the republican party, as most of you pointed out, have made it an issue to trample all over the social issues.  If they stayed true to the small government rhetoric and stayed out of peoples business they could make some headway.  The polling numbers state that most Americans think that Willard would handle the economy better, but he still got rolled.  You would think that the republican party would get the hint that Americans care more about social issues than they think and stop fighting a losing game.  They need to realize that you can't play the same game in national elections as you can in local elections.

Agree. It's so hard to convince people that Republicans aren't actually as stupid when it comes to economic, fiscal, and foreign relations issues as they are on social issues.  On the other hand it's hard to convince my liberal friends that capital gains are doubly taxed and so that is why Mitt only paid a 16% tax rate on them. It's extremely frustrating when 80% of the country can't see both sides of an argument and make an informative decision for themselves instead of just aligning all of their views with that of their political party.

Capital gains absolutely are not double-taxed. The only thing remotely unfair to people who earn capital gains is that there is a limit to the amount of loss you can claim in a single year.

Taxed as income at the corporate level and then again when passed on to investors. What the eff are you talking about? Have you ever taken a finance class? Not trying to be a dick but they teach that in an intro finance class, so I think it would be fairly common knowledge.

The company I work for gets its profits taxed and then that money gets taxed again when I collect my salary. I guess my income is double-taxed too.

Come on man don't do this. You are not an owner of your company so their money gets taxed once and then they pay you and your money gets taxed once. That is not double taxation. An investor in a company is a partial owner of that company so any profit of that company is partially owned by the investor. When the company shells this money out to the investor in the form of dividends it is taxed again, so essentially the money is doubly taxed....Thank you for proving my point on how hard it is to explain this to my liberal friends. No hard feelings though man.

That is a very weak argument. The dividends you are collecting are a form of payment to you from the company. Your ownership doesn't really matter. Do you also think that the income you earn from selling shouldn't be taxed?

[michigancat]

This was a great thread and I'm sad I missed it as it was happening.  People were being real without rhetoric, well until John Doug posted.  I consider myself a liberal, a far left liberal but it is refreshing to see true moderates have an intelligent discussion.

I think people like me who consider themselves liberals are wholly social liberals and will flex a bit on fiscal issues.  The problem with the republican party, as most of you pointed out, have made it an issue to trample all over the social issues.  If they stayed true to the small government rhetoric and stayed out of peoples business they could make some headway.  The polling numbers state that most Americans think that Willard would handle the economy better, but he still got rolled.  You would think that the republican party would get the hint that Americans care more about social issues than they think and stop fighting a losing game.  They need to realize that you can't play the same game in national elections as you can in local elections.

Agree. It's so hard to convince people that Republicans aren't actually as stupid when it comes to economic, fiscal, and foreign relations issues as they are on social issues.  On the other hand it's hard to convince my liberal friends that capital gains are doubly taxed and so that is why Mitt only paid a 16% tax rate on them. It's extremely frustrating when 80% of the country can't see both sides of an argument and make an informative decision for themselves instead of just aligning all of their views with that of their political party.

Capital gains absolutely are not double-taxed. The only thing remotely unfair to people who earn capital gains is that there is a limit to the amount of loss you can claim in a single year.

Taxed as income at the corporate level and then again when passed on to investors. What the eff are you talking about? Have you ever taken a finance class? Not trying to be a dick but they teach that in an intro finance class, so I think it would be fairly common knowledge.

The company I work for gets its profits taxed and then that money gets taxed again when I collect my salary. I guess my income is double-taxed too.

Come on man don't do this. You are not an owner of your company so their money gets taxed once and then they pay you and your money gets taxed once. That is not double taxation. An investor in a company is a partial owner of that company so any profit of that company is partially owned by the investor. When the company shells this money out to the investor in the form of dividends it is taxed again, so essentially the money is doubly taxed....Thank you for proving my point on how hard it is to explain this to my liberal friends. No hard feelings though man.

I hate to spiral even further from a pretty reasonable discussion, but dividends aren't the only capital gains out there.

[Rage Against the McKee]

The company I work for gets its profits taxed and then that money gets taxed again when I collect my salary. I guess my income is double-taxed too.

they don't pay your salary out of profits.

Yeah, it was a poor example. The idea that your income shouldn't be taxed because you received it from the taxed income of some other entity is pretty ridiculous, though.

It isn't. The profit of a company is owned by the investors. It is their profit and when they divide a portion of it out it is taxed again. Lower capital gains taxes encourages investing and is fairly critical to economic growth.

The investors cannot do anything with the profit of a company until they divide a portion of it to be taxed again. The investors are only taxed on the portion that they take for their own consumptive use, only this money is taxed at a much lower rate than the money almost everybody else earns for their own consumptive use. You cannot honestly think that is fair. Maybe it is good for the economy, but it's not even close to fair.

[michigancat]

its just not the Hispanic vote though

Oh I agree. The Republicans are trying to chase off whoever they can. Muslims, Gays, Blacks, women, etc. To the average American they hear them spout off this crap and think "WTF is wrong with these people?". Ten years ago that might not be the case, but it is now

I'm pretty conservative myself, but for this reason I can't vote for these idiots anymore. I know I'm not the only one on this board like this

Man that's not what I'm saying.  The people who behave this way are the lunatic fringe of the party who pray on the stupid.

The chasers used to be a pretty big base AFAIK, now that base is getting smaller every day.  I was talking about potential usuary by Dems earlier, and while not really usury, having that old base wither and die is pretty bad for the GOP. Not that many of the GOP candidates really agreed with the fringe groups anyway, or cared about them, but they def. pandered to them for votes.

Yep see Romney, Willard.  He could have and should have not pandered to the LCD, he's a moderate.  He moved to the middle late in the election but it was too late, he was married to the Rush crowd and it was too late for either of them to turn back.  The question is will the republican party utilize this lesson, its stunning how bad they got housed tonight, its time to change course.

It will be fascinating to see how the 2016 republican primary debates shake out.