Will the Republicans split into the Libertarian Party and Christian Party?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 08:35:41 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Presidential Election Trends (Moderator: 15 Down, 35 To Go)
  Will the Republicans split into the Libertarian Party and Christian Party?
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Will the Republicans split into the Libertarian Party and Christian Party?  (Read 8201 times)
retromike22
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,433
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: April 18, 2009, 02:17:49 AM »

Will the Republicans split into the Libertarian Party and Christian Party?   There seems to be a large anti-tax uprising (the Tea Party Protests) along with some Republicans (Megan McCain, Steve Schmidt) saying that the GOP should endorse Gay Marriage.  These two ideas are really similar to the Libertarian position, which is that government should stay out of people's business, wallets, and private lives.  At the same time the Evangelical Christians are without a clear, strong GOP supporter other than Mike Huckabee and I've heard many don't believe that the Republicans really don't stand up for them since the GOP never stopped abortions, brought prayer back to schools, or did anything that the Christians support.  The GOP only said they would during elections but when they were in power, they didn't follow through.

It seems like the Libertarian group and the Christian group are increasingly at odds with each other.  Will they split?  Should they?
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: April 18, 2009, 06:43:41 AM »

Will the Republicans split into the Libertarian Party and Christian Party?   There seems to be a large anti-tax uprising (the Tea Party Protests) along with some Republicans (Megan McCain, Steve Schmidt) saying that the GOP should endorse Gay Marriage.  These two ideas are really similar to the Libertarian position, which is that government should stay out of people's business, wallets, and private lives.  At the same time the Evangelical Christians are without a clear, strong GOP supporter other than Mike Huckabee and I've heard many don't believe that the Republicans really don't stand up for them since the GOP never stopped abortions, brought prayer back to schools, or did anything that the Christians support.  The GOP only said they would during elections but when they were in power, they didn't follow through.

It seems like the Libertarian group and the Christian group are increasingly at odds with each other.  Will they split?  Should they?

Because the Republican Party is now the minority, such a split would ensure one dominant party and two marginal parties in opposition.  The desire of those seeking such a split is that the Libertarian and Christian groups could cut into support for the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party could always co-opt such an issue as Gay Marriage.



   
Logged
TeePee4Prez
Flyers2004
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,480


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: April 18, 2009, 12:52:03 PM »

Will the Republicans split into the Libertarian Party and Christian Party?   There seems to be a large anti-tax uprising (the Tea Party Protests) along with some Republicans (Megan McCain, Steve Schmidt) saying that the GOP should endorse Gay Marriage.  These two ideas are really similar to the Libertarian position, which is that government should stay out of people's business, wallets, and private lives.  At the same time the Evangelical Christians are without a clear, strong GOP supporter other than Mike Huckabee and I've heard many don't believe that the Republicans really don't stand up for them since the GOP never stopped abortions, brought prayer back to schools, or did anything that the Christians support.  The GOP only said they would during elections but when they were in power, they didn't follow through.

It seems like the Libertarian group and the Christian group are increasingly at odds with each other.  Will they split?  Should they?

Because the Republican Party is now the minority, such a split would ensure one dominant party and two marginal parties in opposition.  The desire of those seeking such a split is that the Libertarian and Christian groups could cut into support for the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party could always co-opt such an issue as Gay Marriage.



   

I know people don't like me bringing up local politics, but I could see a Democratic schism just as easily and this is simply looking at things within a 20 mile radius of me.  This is a generalization, I know, but you have African American Dems, urban yuppie/professor white Dems, ethnic white union Dems, and soccer mom suburban Dems.  All of the above seemed to be pretty united fairly well this past election save a few union white Dems that weren't crazy about voting for a black guy.  In 2004, the Christian Right and Big Business were in harmony and that's why they won while the Democrats were split and arguing.  It's all a matter of who's united and who's split.

That said, I don't regret my vote for Obama, but one thing I've noticed is some blacks I've come across act like now that Obama's president, they can afford to be a bit more cocky, entitled, and black guys are getting more aggressive with white women at clubs.  Myself and other union Dems I know have noticed this and there are people I know who aren't happy with it.  I've even heard some blacks suggest that Obama is an "uncle Tom" and would rather have a Cynthia McKinney or Al Sharpton as president.  I'm not kidding.  Thankfully that will never happen.   

When you think about it, you can really have multiple parties/coalitions like they do in Germany  or Italy in this country.  Where would I fall in?  Probably as a union Dem, but then again a lot of them are more socially conservative than I because I'm pro-choice and pro-gay marriage.
Logged
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,693
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: April 18, 2009, 01:07:05 PM »

Not unless the US switches to some form of proportional representation (in which case the Democrats would fragment too.)
Logged
retromike22
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,433
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: May 23, 2009, 03:55:07 PM »

I think that the Libertarian Party has the potential to bring recently converted Democrats (Republicans who left the party because of social issue differences) into their party.

And the Christian Party could very well be moderate on economic issues, which could convince many conservative Democrats in the South to join it.
Logged
Magic 8-Ball
mrk
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,674
Czech Republic


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: May 26, 2009, 04:05:33 PM »

Probably not.  Eventually, the Republican leadership will tire of being locked out of power and alter the party's message accordingly.  This isn't the 1850s.
Logged
tmthforu94
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,401
United States


Political Matrix
E: -0.26, S: -4.52

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: May 26, 2009, 08:27:04 PM »

Doubtful. It would be political suicide, as Democrats would dominate in elections nationwide.
Logged
Scam of God
Einzige
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,159
United States


Political Matrix
E: 6.19, S: -9.91

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: May 26, 2009, 09:01:23 PM »

Doubtful. It would be political suicide, as Democrats would dominate in elections nationwide.

You presume that libertarians still have a stake in the electoral success of the Republican Party. It is exceedingly clear to me that we do not.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,960
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: May 27, 2009, 07:43:47 AM »

Doubtful. It would be political suicide, as Democrats would dominate in elections nationwide.

You presume that libertarians still have a stake in the electoral success of the Republican Party. It is exceedingly clear to me that we do not.

Libertarian ideology has in fact very few to do with current republican party's political position. In fact, it's the most anti-libertarian party I ever saw. However, I think many libertarians still vote for the GOP, just by tradition. Without them, the GOP would be dead. And that's a pity.
Logged
Frodo
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,509
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: May 27, 2009, 09:20:35 AM »

Will the Republicans split into the Libertarian Party and Christian Party?  (...) It seems like the Libertarian group and the Christian group are increasingly at odds with each other.  Will they split?  Should they?

There already is a Constitution Party tailormade for religious/socially conservative Republicans if they choose to defect.
Logged
Mint
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,566
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: May 27, 2009, 02:19:48 PM »
« Edited: May 27, 2009, 02:23:48 PM by Mint »

Doubtful. It would be political suicide, as Democrats would dominate in elections nationwide.

You presume that libertarians still have a stake in the electoral success of the Republican Party. It is exceedingly clear to me that we do not.
I think many libertarians still vote for the GOP, just by tradition. Without them, the GOP would be dead. And that's a pity.

A lot of libertarians and fiscally-oriented conservatives tend to vote Republican because in essence, their track record on economic issues has been much better than their track record on social issues. To clarify, taxes and welfare spending are still far lower than they were when Reagan took office. Not so much with abortion, homosexuality, secularism, etc. where by and large the status quo has prevailed OR we've moved in a more tolerant direction.

The one biggest, and most recent exception to that, is really the Bush years where domestic spending on things like entitlements and massive roll backs in civil liberties both took place (both parties are to blame though). But even the Bush years were mostly a failure for the Christian Right's agenda, despite his strong support from them. People like Thomas Frank basically have it right, social issues are just a carrot the Republicans use to attract people that otherwise would be lukewarm or hostile to them.

Now could the GOP survive without us? I'd say they could, but it would require taking a more moderate to liberal stance on economic issues. Of course that would leave us fiscal conservatives and libertarians even more politically homeless than we are now.
Logged
Earth
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,548


Political Matrix
E: -9.61, S: -9.83

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: May 27, 2009, 02:24:13 PM »

I don't see this ever happening. Republicans and Libertarians have little to build a bridge with; even fiscally. With the spending that went on under the last eight years, libertarians would be doing themselves a big disservice to be mixing with Republicans.
Logged
HAnnA MArin County
semocrat08
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,037
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: May 31, 2009, 05:49:07 AM »

You would think the Republican Party has already split into these two factions with all the talk you here on the cable news channels about how the GOP is in exile and is falling apart. All it will take though is for another repeat of some big policy blunder like the 1993-1994 health care debacle or for Democrats to have a lame-duck and unpopular president like Bush in 2006 for the Republicans to come back in power. It's all an endless cycle. The United States is a multiparty system but third parties are so often shut out that they don't stand a chance. Plus, Democrats and Republicans have already established themselves as "national" parties. I think another problem is that most average people simply don't know what most third parties stand for. A college professor elegantly defined Libertarians as "the pot-smoking/sex-having Republicans." Another party that is sometimes mentioned in the media is the Green Party, and of course most everyone will assume that it's an environmentalist party. But I am digressing from my point. I don't think disgruntled Republicans will break away and join the Libertarian, Constitution or any other third-/minor party.

Obviously, the Republican Party itself is not going to split because not only would it give victory to the Democrats in all national elections, but it would also signal the end of the GOP. Republicans are losing power (and members) because the party has pushed itself so far to the right, giving into the ultraconservative ideologies of the Rush Limbaughs and Sean Hannitys of the party, and they are in turn alienating moderate and liberal Republicans, particularly those from New England, the West Coast and other blue bastions, so instead of joining the Libertarian Party or Constitution Party or another party, many of them are joining the Democrats. The GOP simply isn't a very inclusive party if you ask me. But I can see where they are coming from. I myself get frustrated with our own DINOs (conservative/Blue Dog Democrats from the South, Dixiecrats if you will, who are pretty much Republican on all issues except populist issues) so I can see where Republicans would get annoyed with their RINOs like the Sisters of Maine and other libertarian-leaning elephants. But one has to be pragmatic, I guess, because obviously a Republican from Connecticut is not going to vote like a Republican from Alabama.

As much as I hate to say it, I don't think the Democrats are growing so much because of our message/radical left-wing San Francisco values of killing babies and hugging trees, but we are a more inclusive (and diverse) party than the Republicans. Our coalition is broader and stronger and growing more so than the Republicans'. The GOP should and must allow moderates and, dare I say it, liberals, back into the party or else they will downsize from a national/major party to a regional party that dominates only in the rural white and Bible Belt regions of the South and Great Plains. I don't know but I wouldn't like to be known as a "regional party." Brings back a time period, oh, say around 1860 in American history.
Logged
Zarn
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,820


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: May 31, 2009, 08:49:17 AM »

The Maine senators aren't libertarian. Republicans aren't joining the Dems. They are becoming independent or libertarian. They are upset over the spending, so the solution is not joining the party of care free. Some former independents may have identify as Dem from the election cycle, but that will die down over time.
Logged
Magic 8-Ball
mrk
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,674
Czech Republic


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: May 31, 2009, 05:37:07 PM »

As much as I hate to say it, I don't think the Democrats are growing so much because of our message/radical left-wing San Francisco values of killing babies and hugging trees, but we are a more inclusive (and diverse) party than the Republicans. Our coalition is broader and stronger and growing more so than the Republicans'. The GOP should and must allow moderates and, dare I say it, liberals, back into the party or else they will downsize from a national/major party to a regional party that dominates only in the rural white and Bible Belt regions of the South and Great Plains. I don't know but I wouldn't like to be known as a "regional party." Brings back a time period, oh, say around 1860 in American history.

By inclusive, you mean like how Sestak isn't challenging Specter?  Smiley

I think that the Democrats are growing so much partly because politics is cyclical and partly because Republicans so tacked themselves to Bush that when he tanked, the entire party went with him.  No one wants to be associated with losers.
Logged
HAnnA MArin County
semocrat08
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,037
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: May 31, 2009, 06:52:44 PM »

The Maine senators aren't libertarian. Republicans aren't joining the Dems. They are becoming independent or libertarian. They are upset over the spending, so the solution is not joining the party of care free. Some former independents may have identify as Dem from the election cycle, but that will die down over time.

Yeah, I only said they lean libertarian because of the social issues as I believe both Susan and Olympia are pro-choice and pro-gay rights, clearly why they are often labeled as RINOs. They're certainly not libertarians, I agree, on most fiscal issues seeing as how they voted for the economic stimulus package.

Do you really think most Republicans are joining Libertarians? I'm asking wholeheartedly, not trying to be condescending. It's just that third parties don't have a big track record in the U.S. and what kind of nominee would the GOP need to nominate to win back some of these Republicans who have embraced their new libertarianism? If they are joining the Libertarian Party, I'd say they're obviously not doing so because of the social issues so you can eliminate Mike Huckabee and Sarah Palin from that list. Would they be inclined to vote for someone like Mitt Romney? I'd also throw Charlie Crist in that list but seeing as how he's a moderate running for the U.S. Senate seat, yeah. Or will they really adhere to the Libertarian Party and vote for whomever the Libertarians nominate?
Logged
Zarn
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,820


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: June 02, 2009, 10:13:44 AM »

More of them independent than libertarian, although there is a slight rise in libertarian thought, due to the Sarah Palin fallout.

Really, most of it isn't reregistration, just people identifying themselves as something else.

Then you had some independents claim to be Dem. So, it looks like Republicans are jumping to the Dems.
Logged
retromike22
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,433
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: June 25, 2009, 10:33:08 PM »

I think that most of the Republicans who have joined the Democrats recently have done it because of the recent Bush-era problems, not because of a change in political ideology.

To expand on what I meant when I started this topic, I believe that the Republican party cannot contain both libertarians and social conservatives.  So two new parties should be created to see which of the two is stronger against the Democrats.  I don't believe that is will be 50% Dem, 25% Lib, 25% Christian, because some Democrats (especially new ones) may move to either of the two new parties.

I think that the ideology would be something like this:

Democratic Party: Social Liberal/Economic Liberal (liberal to moderate democrats)
Libertarian Party: Social Liberal/Economic Conservative ("new" democrats who recently converted in the past years, moderate Republicans,  pro-business republicans)
Christian Party: Social Conservative/Economic Liberal (social conservative Republicans, current conservative Democrats)

 
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderators
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: June 25, 2009, 11:01:39 PM »
« Edited: June 25, 2009, 11:10:07 PM by North Carolina Yankee(RPP-NC) »

I think that most of the Republicans who have joined the Democrats recently have done it because of the recent Bush-era problems, not because of a change in political ideology.

To expand on what I meant when I started this topic, I believe that the Republican party cannot contain both libertarians and social conservatives.  So two new parties should be created to see which of the two is stronger against the Democrats.  I don't believe that is will be 50% Dem, 25% Lib, 25% Christian, because some Democrats (especially new ones) may move to either of the two new parties.

I think that the ideology would be something like this:

Democratic Party: Social Liberal/Economic Liberal (liberal to moderate democrats)
Libertarian Party: Social Liberal/Economic Conservative ("new" democrats who recently converted in the past years, moderate Republicans,  pro-business republicans)
Christian Party: Social Conservative/Economic Liberal (social conservative Republicans, current conservative Democrats)

 

It would then split into three parties. With people like me who are both fiscally and socially conservative remaining in the Republican party. Then don't be surprised if whats left of the GOP is larger then either the Libertarian or the Christian Party. This so called divide is exaggerated. Huckabee has some populist leanings and he appeals to "Legacy populism" that goes back to William Jennings Bryan. But don't forget a large number of people who are fiscally conservative as well as socially conservative supported him because they "thought" him more conservative then other choices. Huckabee is the candidate of the Evangelical true but at most they represent 25 to 33% of the Republican party when not matched with Conservative Catholics(who ironically were not attracted to his campaign), and Mormons(turned off by his bigoted campaign, plus they had one of there own in the running). When you combine all three you have a party that is 55% to 60% socially conservative. And most of those Envangelicals are pretty conservative on Economics now, and Huck did not win them unanimously. The wasn't a Libertarian candidate in 2008 at all. You have the people who backed Romney, Thompson, and McCAin whose supporters  were either conservative on both issues, or moderates to some degree on one of the other or both. When you consider that when you combine those three's performances in say Iowa it beats Huck's 52-34.  Finally consider that maybe Half of Hucks people may be considered populist, that 17% of a Republican Primary in a state where Republicans are 33% of the state you are talking less then 5% of all Iowa voters, and that is very generaous.

Again the so called "populism" of Huck and his supporters his truly far fetched, eventhough we Romney supporters have will continue to throw that around to damage him. Wink
Logged
5280
MagneticFree
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,404
United States


Political Matrix
E: 6.97, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: June 26, 2009, 12:10:09 AM »
« Edited: June 26, 2009, 12:11:49 AM by MagneticFree »

It's a good thing somebody brought this thread up.

I doubt this will ever happen.  We already have the Constitution party and obviously the party I'm in right now. The Constitution party is for social conservative/economic conservative people.  Libertarian party is social liberal/moderate, economic conservative.  If the Republican party ever split up, the two "new" parties would be smaller and probably alienate other people and they could join either the Democrat party or be unaffliated.  That is not good.

The reason I switched parties was the GOP was becoming too much of a party to the Christians/Evangelicals and not focusing enough on being pro-capitalist or business friendly. Also McCain losing election in 2008. Bob Barr could of got my vote, but he always flip flopped on issues such as the patriot act and immigration.  No, my social issues aren't exactly liberal, but they are moderate. I only wish the GOP would stick with the small government agenda that they always talk about.  I will still vote for GOP or Libertarian, depending on the candidate and who is running.
Logged
Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon
htmldon
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,983
United States


Political Matrix
E: 1.03, S: -2.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: June 26, 2009, 12:20:01 AM »

While we are dividing beyond recognition, could we add a third "National Party" for those of us who aren't Libertarians, aren't extremely social conservative, and who support the pre-culture-war GOP Smiley
Logged
5280
MagneticFree
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,404
United States


Political Matrix
E: 6.97, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: June 26, 2009, 12:43:44 AM »

While we are dividing beyond recognition, could we add a third "National Party" for those of us who aren't Libertarians, aren't extremely social conservative, and who support the pre-culture-war GOP Smiley
Isn't the Reform party for that?
Logged
zclark1994
Rookie
**
Posts: 55
United States


Political Matrix
E: 1.55, S: -1.04

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: July 14, 2009, 03:05:49 PM »

You would think the Republican Party has already split into these two factions with all the talk you here on the cable news channels about how the GOP is in exile and is falling apart. All it will take though is for another repeat of some big policy blunder like the 1993-1994 health care debacle or for Democrats to have a lame-duck and unpopular president like Bush in 2006 for the Republicans to come back in power. It's all an endless cycle. The United States is a multiparty system but third parties are so often shut out that they don't stand a chance. Plus, Democrats and Republicans have already established themselves as "national" parties. I think another problem is that most average people simply don't know what most third parties stand for. A college professor elegantly defined Libertarians as "the pot-smoking/sex-having Republicans." Another party that is sometimes mentioned in the media is the Green Party, and of course most everyone will assume that it's an environmentalist party. But I am digressing from my point. I don't think disgruntled Republicans will break away and join the Libertarian, Constitution or any other third-/minor party.

Obviously, the Republican Party itself is not going to split because not only would it give victory to the Democrats in all national elections, but it would also signal the end of the GOP. Republicans are losing power (and members) because the party has pushed itself so far to the right, giving into the ultraconservative ideologies of the Rush Limbaughs and Sean Hannitys of the party, and they are in turn alienating moderate and liberal Republicans, particularly those from New England, the West Coast and other blue bastions, so instead of joining the Libertarian Party or Constitution Party or another party, many of them are joining the Democrats. The GOP simply isn't a very inclusive party if you ask me. But I can see where they are coming from. I myself get frustrated with our own DINOs (conservative/Blue Dog Democrats from the South, Dixiecrats if you will, who are pretty much Republican on all issues except populist issues) so I can see where Republicans would get annoyed with their RINOs like the Sisters of Maine and other libertarian-leaning elephants. But one has to be pragmatic, I guess, because obviously a Republican from Connecticut is not going to vote like a Republican from Alabama.

As much as I hate to say it, I don't think the Democrats are growing so much because of our message/radical left-wing San Francisco values of killing babies and hugging trees, but we are a more inclusive (and diverse) party than the Republicans. Our coalition is broader and stronger and growing more so than the Republicans'. The GOP should and must allow moderates and, dare I say it, liberals, back into the party or else they will downsize from a national/major party to a regional party that dominates only in the rural white and Bible Belt regions of the South and Great Plains. I don't know but I wouldn't like to be known as a "regional party." Brings back a time period, oh, say around 1860 in American history.

Finally someone who makes sense.  Thank you for telling everybody the obvious.
Logged
RIP Robert H Bork
officepark
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,030
Czech Republic


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: July 14, 2009, 06:33:44 PM »

Again the so called "populism" of Huck and his supporters his truly far fetched, eventhough we Romney supporters have will continue to throw that around to damage him. Wink

I knew you were accusing Huckabee of populism just to damage him.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.257 seconds with 12 queries.