Skip to main content

View Diary: RIP: GOP - Thank you, Christian Right!!!! (39 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  You say . . . (4+ / 0-)

    They have lost almost everyone except white racists and apologists for corporate corruption.

    Do you find it scary that these people exist in numbers almost as large (let's say ~ 93% as many) as the "sensible" folk who voted for Obama?

    •  I find everything about them scary! n/t (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Roadbed Guy

      "Sunlight is the best disinfectant" - Louis Brandeis

      by the national gadfly on Sat Nov 15, 2008 at 08:32:20 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yeah, totally I agree with that (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        kurt, limpidglass

        perhaps where I take issue is that maybe - just maybe - they are not as marginalized as your diary might suggest.

        For example, nothing like Mulrooney's (sp?) collapse of his PC government in Canada a few years back where his party when from a majority to having two (yes 2!) seats in the parliament.   Your diary would seem to suggest that the Repubs have suffered a similar fate (but they're still hanging in there at ~45% - which is not that far behind).

        •  The PC collapse... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Roadbed Guy, the national gadfly

          ... was brought about during Kim Campbell's tenure;  Brian Mulroney had resigned by the time the federal Progressive Conservatives were swept into the dustbin.

          But the demise of the PCs was really brought about more by the fracturing of their coalition and splitting of the vote they formerly held, in no small part because of the Charlottetown Accord the year earlier; the Western populists went to the right-wing Reform Party (which had run a strong, grassroots "NO" campaign against the Accord in the West), and their soft nationalists in Quebec moved to the Bloc Quebecois (founded by Lucien Bouchard, a former Mulroney cabinet minister, who was fired\left the PC caucus after the Accord failed).  

          That's important, because most majority governments in Canada are run by parties who get 40% of the popular vote, 60% of the seats (or more) and 100% of the power.  The Liberal one elected in 1993 was no different in this regard.

          Slower Traffic Keep Right.

          by Wisewood on Sat Nov 15, 2008 at 09:44:31 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  indeed (3+ / 0-)

      the fact that a whopping 46% of the electorate voted for McCain is incredibly troubling.

      Because you know those people will never, ever, under any circumstances vote for any Democrat, no matter how bad things get or how far the GOP descends into race hatred or religious fanaticism.

      If we enter a prolonged economic crisis, the GOP could rebuild itself as an ultra-right wing populist movement and sway enough swing voters to its side to win a presidential election. And whomever they'd nominate then would be a thousand times worse than Bush or McCain could ever be.

      •  some people (3+ / 0-)

        are scared of change. Many McCain supporters I know are decent people. If you choose experience over message, McCain was obviously your better choice. Plus, a lot of people just don't pay attention and vote based on what they hear randomly.

        Neither the Democrats nor the Republicans have all the answers, but the Democrats have their heart in the right place.

        by thematt523 on Sat Nov 15, 2008 at 08:58:47 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  I find it demoralizing (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Roadbed Guy, kurt, kafkananda

      that this many people voted for McCain, but I don't think it's accurate to suggest that the majority of these voters belonged to the Christian Right.  For a lot of Republicans the Christian Right simply isn't on the radar at all.  These are the fiscal, moderate, and defense Republicans that are still locked in the 80s.  My father is a good example of such a Republican.  He simply isn't even aware of the religious dimension of the party at all or even the heated debates over values, but votes republican for economic reasons alone.  As the diarist points out, part of the problem here is that these groups use code in talking about their platform.  They're extremely adept in hiding their agenda and making it appear far more moderate than it is.  Thus when these moderate voters here the word "Christian" talked about by a republican candidate, they don't think of an extremist agenda interested in overturning our Constitution and replacing our nation with a theocracy, rather they think of their mild Christian churches that they attend a few times a year without much thinking about it at all.  In other words, they think of nice things like the moment of peace during services where everyone shakes hands, or church picnics, or nice consumerized Christmas celebrations, etc.  These people are not voting for the Christian right, but for a rather watered down sense of national identity that they associate with better times in the 50s.  For these people Palin is not a religious zealot (they know little of Palin's beliefs), but just a nice woman who might live in their neighborhood.  This is why it's extremely important to make it publicly clear just what these extremist groups stand for.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (129)
  • Community (65)
  • Bernie Sanders (44)
  • Elections (40)
  • 2016 (38)
  • Climate Change (33)
  • Environment (32)
  • Culture (31)
  • Hillary Clinton (29)
  • Science (27)
  • Republicans (26)
  • Media (25)
  • Civil Rights (24)
  • Barack Obama (24)
  • Education (22)
  • Law (21)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (21)
  • Economy (19)
  • Congress (17)
  • Labor (16)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site