Why are Republicans the "radical" party?

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

(A) No it didn’t. [Polling on the public option] fluctuated a lot, but it was generally somewhere between “no” and “HELL NO”, as public opinion is want to change quite quickly.

False.

Do a Google search on “public option” and you’ll see it was majority support throughout 2009 and 2010. Certainly not a "no" or a "HELL NO."

http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2009/12/health-care-in-states.html

Exactly one state of ten polled had a positive view of the "public option", and that was by 1%. The states were definitely not all Republican leaning, yet even states like Delaware, New Jersey, Colorado and Wisconsin were heavily against it.

[sg0508]

Because the "general" consensus right now in America is that the GOP is out of touch with what's important (jobs, taxes, deficit) and they're focus is on nonsense (anti-gay marriage and other social issues).

It's become the party of hate.

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

It seems like the general consensus on this forum (and among the general public to a certain extent) is that the GOP is a party of radicals under the control of such people like Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann, and Paul Ryan.  The GOP is the party of "birthers" and racists, so it appears.  The GOP wants to push granny off the cliff and end welfare forever.  Nevermind that not a single "radical conservative" holds any position of authority within the GOP House or Senate leadership.

Taken objectivley, applying these labels to Republicans seems pretty ignorant.  However, once we compare the "radical-ness" of the GOP to the Democrats assumptions like those made above become just plain stupid.

The most radical presidents in history--Andrew Jackson, Woodrow Wilson, and FDR--have all been Democrats.  The only "radical" president to be a Republican was probably Abraham Lincoln.  Let us not forget, either, that extremley radical candidates always seem to find their way into Democratic primaries--Howard Dean, Al Sharpton, Dennis Kuchinich, and Jesse Jackson.  Did I forget to mention that the Senate's only self-described "socialist" cacuses with the Democrats?

So, since its true that the Republicans are no more radical then the Democrats...why do people insist that they are?  Is the left really just that blind-sighted?  Has the liberal media pulled the wool over the eyes of most Americans?  What is it?
 

I'll give you Wilson being extreme, but more to do with his racism and less to do with his policies. FDR wasn't extreme. Jackson was a genocidal maniac, but the parties were completely different back then. Dean isn't extreme, Kucinich and Jackson are debatable, and Al Sharpton is a douche, but not extreme. And the GOP isn't filled with sane people; look at Alan Keyes, Tom Tancredo, Pat Robertson, and Ron Paul. Socialism is considered to be mainstream everywhere except America and a few right-wing dictatorships (and even they pretend to be left-wing).

And the liberal media, like most boogeymen, is something of a myth. It exists, but is too hooked on sensationalism to have as much of an impact as the propaganda machines of FOX and 99% of talk radio.

You appear to have it right on the money.

Now, at the risk of sounding like someone who has no idea what they're talking about, I suppose to define "extreme" you would have to look at the political demographics of your country.  In countries like Canada and Britain, the Republican Party would be seen as quite extreme.  The United States is very much a "centrist" country, and both parties are accused of being extreme by each other.  However, because we have a two-party system, consequentially the two major parties subsume different ideological "factions", especially the Democratic Party, which is composed of people who consider themselves populists, libertarians, liberals, conservatives, moderates, Third Way, socialists, centrists etc., but are all established on the left side of the spectrum.  The same is mostly true for the Republican Party.  The bottom line here is, point-of-view determines what can be considered "extreme".

Personally, I consider the views of national GOP leaders to be quite extreme, but there are moderate Republicans as there are moderate Democrats.

[DS0816]

http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2009/12/health-care-in-states.html

Exactly one state of ten polled had a positive view of the “public option”, and that was by 1%. The states were definitely not all Republican leaning, yet even states like Delaware, New Jersey, Colorado and Wisconsin were heavily against it.

^ This refers to the Senate’s healthcare bill — which did not have a public option. (The House’s did.) Once again — do a Google search on polling of the public option, during 2009. It was not unpopular; it was not greeting with a no or a hell, no!


http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/12/03/us-healthcare-usa-poll-idUSTRE5B20OL20091203

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/republican-party/poll-public-option-way-more-popular-than-senate-health-bill/

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And then refer to: http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/images/12/10/rel18h.pdf

Page 4, Question #15:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Lulz]

Obama is a corpratist, Pelosi, Newsom and Feingold all want to force gay marriage on he states that want to keep it banned (that does include liberal California)

I love that conservative argument against gay marriage. I remember hearing the same argument back in the 60s during the days of segregation. "The radical liberals want to force desegregation and integration and change our way of life here in the good ole South."


 

Well to be honest most black people that were fighting for their rights did not have pictures of black people half naked making out on their signs like you do with gays.  I really wouldn't equate what blacks went through in this country with whatever it is you are promoting with those pictures plastered everywhere.

[All Along The Watchtower]

The demographics of the GOP might have something to do with it....

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

It comes down to trust really. The GOP base has no faith in it's leadership.

[Rollback]

Paul Ryan is not a radical. All Ryan proposes to reform Medicare and Medicaid so that they don’t bankrupt the country. It doesn't even touch current beneficiaries. He still believes in government-subsidized healthcare.

[Mechaman]

Paul Ryan is not a radical. All Ryan proposes to reform Medicare and Medicaid so that they don’t bankrupt the country. It doesn't even touch current beneficiaries. He still believes in government-subsidized healthcare.

Hell, if anything Paul Ryan is for MORE GOVERNMENT in Healthcare.  He's just lucky that SOME of the tea party idiots aren't smart enough to know that government funded vouchers=government intervention.  Who the hell do they thinking is paying for these "vouchers"?  Home Depot?

The idea that Paul Ryan is a radical anti-government politician is just lolarious.

EDIT: Had to add the SOME to make a distinction between tea partiers who are smart enough to put two and two together and actually believe in the sh*t they preach and those who only started caring when Fox News took over.

[allnjhaugh]

Simple. Because Democrats don't really have a definitave leader, minus Obama, who's frustratingly "reasonable".