Why Did Republicans Abandon Conservatism?

[superrific]

Awfully convenient to simply label everything conservatives support as "white grievance." So I don't want 10.5B people flooding into the country illegally and that's racism? Cuba normalization, racism? Screaming racism from the mountaintops for literally every issue conservatives support is soo 2012. Nobody buys that anymore and conservatives no long cower in fear of being accused of it since the card has been played so often. Even black and Hispanic men are trending towards the GOP.

Not making a difference in anyone's life?; tell that to the family of Laken Riley. Guess they're racists too.

1. 10.5 billion people?
2. Your motivations are obvious. You don't care about the illegality. If you cared at all about legality, you would be up in arms about Trump running roughshod over the constitution. You'd certainly be up in arms about the corrupt deal with Eric Adams that caused 7 attorneys (including conservative ones) to resign rather than sign motions unethically.

But you don't care about that. All you care about is the brown people coming across the border. That and trans. It's 90% of what you post. And there's no reasonable view that immigration is a huge problem.

3. I'm not talking about racism for every issue conservatives support. I'm talking about the racism in the specific issues you crow about. If you were here raising holy hell about the debt, that would be reasonable and not racist. But that's not what you're doing. You almost never mention it except in passing. There are plenty of things that conservatives can worry about that aren't racist. It's just that you don't talk about them.

4. I'm only going to explain this once more, since I've already explained it. When immigrants come into the country, if their crime rate is lower than the natives (it is), then their presence is making everyone's lives SAFER. Your odds of being a victim of violent crime are decreased by the presence of illegal immigrants (as they will be victims of crimes more than perps of crime, that's just statistics).

Think about what you're saying. The number of murders in this country used to be way, way lower than it is today. Per capita, not. But in absolute numbers, yes. In particular, there were way more incidents of crime as the baby boomers became adults. By your logic, we'd be safer if the baby boomers had never been born. Does that make any sense? It does not.

That you are willing to swallow nonsense arguments about crime rates is another mark against you. Maybe it's stupidity and not just racism. Personally, I think you don't really understand probability, but you're more than willing to latch onto stupidity because it reinforces your point that migrants = bad. And that is, I'm sorry to say, a racist view. Especially since you are turning a blind eye to rampant criminal conduct when it's committed by your side, or your boss for that matter.

 

[UNCatTech]

Then explain to me why conservatives try to limit opportunities and dictate social behavior that is injurious and limiting to others? That is anything but hands off.

True, conservatives claim to want freedoms, then they work to pass laws that limit freedom.

But that's fine as long as the limitations align with the cults worldview.

 

[UNCatTech]

For example...

A Man can only marry a woman.
A pregnant woman doesn't have the right to certain medical treatments.
A trans person doesn't have the right to certain medical treatments.
Now we're seeing things like a doctor doesn't have the right to recommend vaccinations in Louisiana.
They are for censorship of books, instead of letting people have the freedom to choose what to read.

There are more, but you know that.

 

[billybobblockhead]

I do think, as was the case in the first term, that Congressional Republicans are acquiescing to Trump to a degree that is honestly embarrassing and I think a lot of it has to do with job security. MAGA is a very influential voting bloc and opposing Trump will turn them against you.

100% agree with you on this. Don't say anything that can even remotely be against Trump = more votes from his supporters, which = more time in office on the federal dollar.

The Reagan era conservatism gave out of gas in the 2nd term of the Bush Administration. It was a good run with the small government/libertarians/strong national defense/evangelical alliance lasting approximately 30 years (1975-2005). The Press in the early to mid 2000s transitioned from being simply biased towards the Dems to being Democratic activists - opening rooting for the Dems and vocally opposing the Rs. This caused the conservatives to retreat to Fox News and Rush and talk radio. Then, the Great Recession ushered in the Obama "we're all socialists" era.

Obama turned the party hard left, especially in his 2nd term. He was worshiped by the boot licking press. The reaction on the right was the Tea Party - which was a populist movement emphasizing the debt Obama was running up. The two R Presidential candidates of this era - McCain and Romney - simply wouldn't fight back and respond to the activist Press and increasingly leftist Dems - choosing to play by the old rules. The activists gained power in the Dem party and were pushing the boundaries on the cultural front (what we now call "woke").

Then comes the 2016 primary. Most of the candidates were pretty normal conservatives. Early on, I aligned myself with Rubio thinking the country needed some new conservative blood. Plus, he was marginally associated with the Tea Party. Trump comes in like a bull dozer and does his Trump thing. I didn't initially support him because I didn't think there was anyway in Hell he could win a general election. As time went by, many if not most traditional conservatives supported him because "at least he fought back" with the Press and the Dems unlike McCain and Romney. The unrelenting attacks by the left only caused more Rs to line up behind him as "their guy." Trump appealed to blue collar types the way Romney wing of the R party never could.

As everyone notes, Trump is not a conservative. The Rs have essentially leased Trump to disrupt and take on the Dems - who were growing more left and more woke during and after his term. A lot of Trump support from traditional Rs is "I can't stand those nut cases" and Trump's at least taking them on. Plus, Trump does have some conservative views:

Law and order and support for the police.
He's now embracing a smaller leaner government with DOGE - which he didn't support during his first term.
Tough on China.
Pro Life
Strong borders
Supporter of religious institutions
Strong ally of Israel
Anti - woke madness
Equal - not equitable - opportunities for all

Tariffs and foreign policy is where he strongly veers from the Reagan era. But, on these issues, he has a point. Free trade is great but not always - especially when other countries to not reciprocate. Strong national defense is fine until it evolves into Neocon and endless war foreign policy.

All the crazy stuff about Trump conservatives don't always like, but generally accept, is simply part of the package. We don't see Trump as a "threat to democracy" or that we're headed to a dictatorship. After he completes this glorious term, he'll be gone and parts of the MAGA movement will remain but there won't be another Trump. He's a unicorn. No other politician can get away with what he does so they won't try. Some of the hard core MAGA will stop supporting Rs and return to not voting.

In short, I really haven't changed my conservative principles, I'm just willing to allow Trump to do his thing as the Disrupter in Chief since the Dems went so far crazy and his methods often get things done.

Remember, you asked my opinion.

Thanks for posting this. Appreciate your transparency.

I’m more interested in this “hard left turn” Obama made in his second term. I don’t remember that at all.

Yeah, I'm struggling to remember this one too.

 

[UNCatTech]

But you are still equating a belief that the owner can run his company as being the same as supporting the owner exploiting employees, which I really don't understand because, again, the employer/employee relationship is voluntary on both sides. Nobody is forced to hire you and you aren't forced to work somewhere.

Damn man, look at history. There is a reason unions were formed and labor laws had to be passed.

 

[StrangePackage]

Damn man, look at history. There is a reason unions were formed and labor laws had to be passed.

Virtually every labor regulation in the country was erected over the bodies of dead or mangled workers.

 

[UNCatTech]

Here is a great explainer of how anti-abortion (pro life) became a proxy for racial segregation.

Loading…

www.politico.com

Wait according to drump politico is an undercover democratic operation siphoning money off the government tit.

 

[UNCatTech]

"Let's cut our military budget in half." Truly unfathomable to hear those words come out of the mouth of a Republican president.

Ok, something I can get behind. As long as the money goes to SS and social services for the most needy.

 

[finesse]

A Man can only marry a woman.
A pregnant woman doesn't have the right to certain medical treatments.
A trans person doesn't have the right to Brian medical treatments.
Now we're seeing things like a doctor doesn't have the right to recommend vaccinations in Louisiana.
They are for censorship of books, instead of letting people have the freedom to choose what to read.

There are more, but you know that.

It's worth mentioning that the administration is essentially conducting a cyber book burning.

 

[UNCatTech]

But you are still equating a belief that the owner can run his company as being the same as supporting the owner exploiting employees, which I really don't understand because, again, the employer/employee relationship is voluntary on both sides. Nobody is forced to hire you and you aren't forced to work somewhere.

This sounds like the good guys with guns argument.

You are for the good owners who care and will take care of their employees. And in sure they do exist, but they are the vast minority.

Most will treat employees, like Amazon. You did read about Amazon employees urinating in bottles so they didn't have to go to the restroom in order to meet their efficiency standards, didn't you?

 

[ZenMode]

So, you believe the wage gap for women is non existent?

And you believe that there weren't reasons to have affirmative action laws? Those were driven by mistreatment, unfair practices in hiring, and unequal pay and treatment in the work place.

The goal of the current conservatives is that the rich get richer, the leadership just tries to keep the minions from knowing.

I think we have no idea if there is a wage gap because the original calculation that everyone references, which puts women's earnings at about 75% of men's, took absolutely no variables into consideration. Variables being things like the fact that men are more likely to work overtime. The fact that men are more likely to get into higher paying fields of work. The fact that women are more likely to stay home to have children or stay home to take care of children when they're sick or out of school on a break.

I think there was a point in time where affirmative action laws made sense. That time has long since passed.

 

[BillOfRights]

Wait according to drump politico is an undercover democratic operation siphoning money off the government tit.

It wasn't a regular Politico piece. It was written by Randall Balmer, the John Phillips Professor in Religion at Dartmouth College, and the author of Bad Faith: Race and the Rise of the Religious Right.

 

[UNCatTech]

I’m more interested in this “hard left turn” Obama made in his second term. I don’t remember that at all.

Well see it's relative. As Obama was pretty steady the republicans started drifting quickly right. Ram attributes that new distance between the parties incorrectly as a dem move when it was in reality hia party moving right. He also buys into the fox news BS that the Republicans are victims of the media.

I know, I was there. But Trump and life wvwnts were too much for me to hold on. I might have voted republican in 2016 had there been a different candidate, but not the worthless piece of shit trump. Then after a few years of trump I knew I was voting against him. Then in 2024 I voted Dem because they more align with my position that no one should be marginalized. AKA Woke.

 

[superrific]

I think we have no idea if there is a wage gap because the original calculation that everyone references, which puts women's earnings at about 75% of men's, took absolutely no variables into consideration.

This is a lie. I've seen the research. It has controlled for every variable you can imagine.

What makes you think you know how to conduct research better than actual researchers? You have trouble tying your shoes.

 

[UNCatTech]

It wasn't a regular Politico piece. It was written by Randall Balmer, the John Phillips Professor in Religion at Dartmouth College, and the author of Bad Faith: Race and the Rise of the Religious Right.

I meant it as a joke.

I appreciate the link. I've read several articles about how abortion became the ralling cry of the conservative party.

 

[ZenMode]

This is a lie. I've seen the research. It has controlled for every variable you can imagine.

What makes you think you know how to conduct research better than actual researchers? You have trouble tying your shoes.

Okay. Where is the research you referenced?

Past research, which references around a 75 cents per dollar difference, was done simply by taking the total amount earned by each sex and dividing by the total number of employed people of each sex.

 

[superrific]

Okay. Where is the research you referenced?

Past research, which references around a 75 cents per dollar difference, was done simply by taking the total amount earned by each sex and dividing by the total number of employed people of each sex.

You can read a full explainer here. You're welcomes.

What is the gender pay gap and is it real?: The complete guide to how women are paid less than men and why it can’t be explained away

Working women are paid less than working men. A large body of research accounts for, diagnoses, and investigates this “gender pay gap.” But this literature often becomes unwieldy for lay readers, and because pay gaps are political topics, ideological agendas often seep quickly into discussions...

www.epi.org

Look in particular (though not exclusively) for this heading:

"Would adjusting the raw gender wage gap to include factors such as education help explain the gap? Maybe it is not as big of a problem as it seems?"

 

[UNCatTech]

Yep it’s Sitman and Sam Adler-Bell. One of the best podcasts out there right now IMO.

I plan to listen driving back to Atlanta.

 

[Paine]

I plan to listen driving back to Atlanta.

The episode that @breepf mentioned is a great starting point.

All the more interesting in that it was released prior to the 2022 midterms. Think they were pretty prescient about 2024.

 

[UNCatTech]

Not making a difference in anyone's life?; tell that to the family of Laken Riley. Guess they're racists too.

It was tragic what happened, but it isn't the norm.

You guys love pretending your 1 in a million examples are normal activity.

The same way you justify the conservative bigotry toward the 1% of people who are trans and the .001% that want to play sports.