does anyone see the republican party turning nationalist?

[freepcrusher]

the idea is that is that the party turns into a nationalist party and believes in redistributing wealth to people like themselves who they believe have earned their money the right way They then want to take the money from the people they see as the hostile elite.

The hostile elite (or "ruling class") would be those in academia, law, federal government, and the entertainment industry whose loyalties are not American but globalist which is why they support Free Trade and also support massive immigration to the United States.

This would not be a racist party per se because they would not condone using racial epithets. They believe that racial minorities are fundamentally good people but have been exploited by the hostile elite as pawns.

I would think an example of this type of ideology would be Gerald L.K. Smith.

[Cory]

No.

[Supersonic]

lol no.

[TNF]

I could easily see it turning Third Positionist.

[All Along The Watchtower]

no

[Bacon King]

You're on to something in general, I think. This could happen if the masses who vote Republican begin electing their own into high office in large numbers (rather than the typical elite corporate insider who is the stereotypical republican officeholder these days). This is already starting to happen in some ways with the Tea Party movement and such, but I have no idea if it will continue.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

You're on to something in general, I think. This could happen if the masses who vote Republican begin electing their own into high office in large numbers (rather than the typical elite corporate insider who is the stereotypical republican officeholder these days). This is already starting to happen in some ways with the Tea Party movement and such, but I have no idea if it will continue.

are there socialist teapartiers?

[memphis]

You're on to something in general, I think. This could happen if the masses who vote Republican begin electing their own into high office in large numbers (rather than the typical elite corporate insider who is the stereotypical republican officeholder these days). This is already starting to happen in some ways with the Tea Party movement and such, but I have no idea if it will continue.

are there socialist teapartiers?

I suspect a substantial percent of them happily draw Social Security.

[DC Al Fine]

Maybe if Pat Buchanan took them down the nationalist road and then some more economically left wing guy steered the party that way... Not likely though

[The Simpsons Cinematic Universe]

lol no.

[muon2]

The common thread of the GOP since Lincoln's time has been to promote self reliance. Redistribution of wealth as suggested by the OP has rarely fit into that thread. So, it's hard for me to see that thread totally severed, but nothing's impossible in US politics.

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

This is essentially what I can see the Tea Party evolving into - a rather reactionary Populist party.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

There is plenty of room to the Democratic party's left, but no.

[courts]

You're on to something in general, I think. This could happen if the masses who vote Republican begin electing their own into high office in large numbers (rather than the typical elite corporate insider who is the stereotypical republican officeholder these days). This is already starting to happen in some ways with the Tea Party movement and such, but I have no idea if it will continue.

i'm curious as to what you're basing this on. that's not my impression of the subject. granted i suspect the dynamic will change pretty soon as you know. mostly because of the following:

- obamacare. people tend to support the status quo just by their nature. granted i think obamacare will prove itself to be expensive and unworkable. but opposing any kind of 'universal healthcare' was always a major plank of 'movement conservatism.'
- as kind of implied above, people never want to cut programs they use. only ones others besides them use.
- changing demographics. hispanics are even less receptive to platitudes about 'small government', which is already a loser with the public. of course republicans reaction to this is to just make snide remarks and throw temper tantrums over 'blacks and mexicans voting for free stuff.'
- lets face it, it was already kind of absurd to be going on about welfare after 1996 but much more so in when you're the worst economy since the '40s. it's just not relevant to most people, even most 'white people'.

with that said not only are they not there yet but 'the tea party' is so all over the place that its kind of pointless talking about them. they're basically pure emotion. it is interesting that for all 'the tea party' and republicans go on about 'the economy' being the most important issue to them their actual behavior doesn't seem to bear that out. i'd say they were a failed rebranding attempt by the religious right/christian zionists.. except it seems that the border issue is something the 'tea party' bloc does differ substantially from evangelicals (who are more pro amnesty than the mainline gop) on. i suspect that will be a major game changer if the border bill makes it past the house.

[Torie]

Sounds like some variant of populism to me, rather than socialism per se. I don't see the Pubs turning populist unless somehow that manages to attract large numbers of persons of color. Otherwise, I don't see how that works politically. The Dems tend to be more naturally attuned to populistic rhetoric, and for the parties to switch places on this, requires attracting large cohorts of people that more than replace the Torie types who will leave.

[Sbane]

Sounds like some variant of populism to me, rather than socialism per se. I don't see the Pubs turning populist unless somehow that manages to attract large numbers of persons of color. Otherwise, I don't see how that works politically. The Dems tend to be more naturally attuned to populistic rhetoric, and for the parties to switch places on this, requires attracting large cohorts of people that more than replace the Torie types who will leave.

You are way overestimating how many "Torie types" that are out there. In many states in the middle is the country, it is because of the populist rhetoric that the Republican party does so well. That's true even in places like the Central Valley and IE in California.

[Person Man]

It would seem to be a good strategy for them to go down the road that W set for them to win over fast growing minority communities but if they win that way in 2016 (winning enough blacks in the swingy south, enough po' whites in the midwest and enough Hispanics in the west), it would still be too soon to tell how that would change Conservatism in the future and it would be decades before something like a truly socialist/communitarian conservatism to emerge....or it could be sooner but it would be very unlikely. I think it becomes more likely if the main emphasis of conservatives becomes more about the Religious Right than Big Business and at times during W, it seemed that way

[TDAS04]

Nope.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

You're on to something in general, I think. This could happen if the masses who vote Republican begin electing their own into high office in large numbers (rather than the typical elite corporate insider who is the stereotypical republican officeholder these days). This is already starting to happen in some ways with the Tea Party movement and such, but I have no idea if it will continue.

are there socialist teapartiers?

I suspect a substantial percent of them happily draw Social Security.

I'd say a larger percent are unhappy about it than among eligible non-teapartiers the same age.

[Person Man]

You're on to something in general, I think. This could happen if the masses who vote Republican begin electing their own into high office in large numbers (rather than the typical elite corporate insider who is the stereotypical republican officeholder these days). This is already starting to happen in some ways with the Tea Party movement and such, but I have no idea if it will continue.

are there socialist teapartiers?

I suspect a substantial percent of them happily draw Social Security.

I'd say a larger percent are unhappy about it than among eligible non-teapartiers the same age.

It must be very easy for them to say that, but very hard for their actions to prove it. 4 years ago, they were stirred almost to violence when someone even attempted to slightly alter some of their age-based entitlements.

[old timey villain]

Sounds like some variant of populism to me, rather than socialism per se. I don't see the Pubs turning populist unless somehow that manages to attract large numbers of persons of color. Otherwise, I don't see how that works politically. The Dems tend to be more naturally attuned to populistic rhetoric, and for the parties to switch places on this, requires attracting large cohorts of people that more than replace the Torie types who will leave.

You are way overestimating how many "Torie types" that are out there. In many states in the middle is the country, it is because of the populist rhetoric that the Republican party does so well. That's true even in places like the Central Valley and IE in California.

Seriously, the Republican party is guilty of the same class warfare that Democrats are always being accused of, it's just a different style. Dems attack corporate fat cats and good ol boy networks that they see as controlling everybody's lives. Republicans attack ivy leaguers, academic elites and hollywood types claiming that they're trying to reshape and degrade America's values. That type of populist rhetoric is the reason why Republicans have done so well in white rural areas these past few decades.

[barfbag]

Sounds like some variant of populism to me, rather than socialism per se. I don't see the Pubs turning populist unless somehow that manages to attract large numbers of persons of color. Otherwise, I don't see how that works politically. The Dems tend to be more naturally attuned to populistic rhetoric, and for the parties to switch places on this, requires attracting large cohorts of people that more than replace the Torie types who will leave.

You are way overestimating how many "Torie types" that are out there. In many states in the middle is the country, it is because of the populist rhetoric that the Republican party does so well. That's true even in places like the Central Valley and IE in California.

Seriously, the Republican party is guilty of the same class warfare that Democrats are always being accused of, it's just a different style. Dems attack corporate fat cats and good ol boy networks that they see as controlling everybody's lives. Republicans attack ivy leaguers, academic elites and hollywood types claiming that they're trying to reshape and degrade America's values. That type of populist rhetoric is the reason why Republicans have done so well in white rural areas these past few decades.

Republicans attract Hollywood types?

[Beet]

If the Democratic party continues to support corporatism, free trade agreements, and Wall Street while ignoring income inequality and stagnating wages, then popular demand for change could push the GOP to address these issues. That's the Democrats' worst nightmare. Their own capture coming back to bite them because the GOP decides to do what they only claimed to do.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Well I did hear that Ann Coulter wants the GOP to go populist, but considering the source, I would say that isn't going to happen. In six months she will regret saying that and figure out what that leads to and she already rejected that in 2008 (Mike Huckabee).

No, especially with the Tea Party around, I would say that the GOP's fiscally conservative and libertarian blocks are more connected to the party then they were in the Bush years.

Now, I think that the GOP is moving in a direction that is one of being pro-business by virtue of creating the better environment for business, as opposed to the direct subsidies and tax code carve outs and other forms of coporate welfare they used to love. That could lead to specific industries relying on and getting in bed with the Dems to keep the gravy flowing at the expense of business overall. That could open the door for a "populist" appeal that targets the relationship between big business and big government in the form of the Democratic party, especailly with a Clinton leading the ticket. You kind of already saw that with GE in the previous cycle or two and Sarah Palin was pushing them to go that route (tax code, regulatory capture, etc etc), probably one of the few things she has gotten right since being picked as VP. That is right up Rand Paul and Pat Toomey's alley though, so one could hardly call it Socialist.

Going Socialist though, no, just plain no.

[old timey villain]

Sounds like some variant of populism to me, rather than socialism per se. I don't see the Pubs turning populist unless somehow that manages to attract large numbers of persons of color. Otherwise, I don't see how that works politically. The Dems tend to be more naturally attuned to populistic rhetoric, and for the parties to switch places on this, requires attracting large cohorts of people that more than replace the Torie types who will leave.

You are way overestimating how many "Torie types" that are out there. In many states in the middle is the country, it is because of the populist rhetoric that the Republican party does so well. That's true even in places like the Central Valley and IE in California.

Seriously, the Republican party is guilty of the same class warfare that Democrats are always being accused of, it's just a different style. Dems attack corporate fat cats and good ol boy networks that they see as controlling everybody's lives. Republicans attack ivy leaguers, academic elites and hollywood types claiming that they're trying to reshape and degrade America's values. That type of populist rhetoric is the reason why Republicans have done so well in white rural areas these past few decades.

Republicans attract Hollywood types?

They attack hollywood types- not attract them.