Full Version: The Future of the Party
My hot-headedness in most debates with the left, gets me in hot water. So i plan on cooling it a little bit with a nice, Republican discussion. I guess we can call it similar to the thread in the Demcorat Party forum.
No doubt that we had a big election recently. Presidency, Senate, House...all in our control. But what are we going to do with it? Maybe i am a little naive, but i do not see "neocons" in the current administration. But the prospect of our party being corrupted by the very far right just like the Dems were hijacked by the Moores and Soros of the world...scares me.
Ok so let me think of some questions...
1) What are some policies (domestic/foreign) that you want to see the Republicans push for the next four years and beyond?
2) Do you think we should become more moderate, more far right, or remain on our current line of reasoning?
3) What are some ways that the Republicans can increase foreign relations while still remaining tough on terrorism and tyranny?
4) Do you think social moderates like Giuliani and especially Shwarzenegger are the future of the party?
No doubt that we had a big election recently. Presidency, Senate, House...all in our control. But what are we going to do with it? Maybe i am a little naive, but i do not see "neocons" in the current administration. But the prospect of our party being corrupted by the very far right just like the Dems were hijacked by the Moores and Soros of the world...scares me.
Ok so let me think of some questions...
1) What are some policies (domestic/foreign) that you want to see the Republicans push for the next four years and beyond?
2) Do you think we should become more moderate, more far right, or remain on our current line of reasoning?
3) What are some ways that the Republicans can increase foreign relations while still remaining tough on terrorism and tyranny?
4) Do you think social moderates like Giuliani and especially Shwarzenegger are the future of the party?
Leder, you have given us quite a lot in a single thread to consider - perhaps too much, but that's ok. In a way it is most appropriate I think for the Republican Party faces a daunting task in the next two years. While our friends on the other side of the aisle busy themselves with attempting to re-define their party and re-build, our party has to lead this nation. We asked for this opportunity in the last election and made a promise to the American people that we could do it. They called us on it. 
It is now time for us to walk the walk.
Ideally the topics raised in this thread would be better addressed in the main forum areas of America's Debate, but I'm afraid they would quickly turn into yet another "Let's bash Bush" thread by those who seem to be unable to accept the decision made by the American People last November. This too is in keeping with the current climate in Washington where people like California's own Bouncing Barbie Boxer seem to be more interested in throwing a political temper tantrum than they are in addressing the problems this nation faces. It is my hope that other declared Republicans here will join in with their ideas on where we should go. As a nation, as a party......
1) What are some policies (domestic/foreign) that you want to see the Republicans push for the next four years and beyond?
I don't want to get too specific here at this time because I'm not really sure where the President wants to go. He sets the agenda and he'll do that in the State of the Union address in a few weeks. We know right now that he wants to take a careful look at re-doing Social Security and based on Bill Thomas' interview with Tim Russert this morning on Meet the Press, that's going to happen. I wouod urge Republicans who have not seen that interview to at least read the transcript of it when it becomes available. Bill Thomas is one of our superstars in Congress. He is thoughtful, intelligent and extremely articulate. As the Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, he also happens to be one of the most powerful members of Congress.
2) Do you think we should become more moderate, more far right, or remain on our current line of reasoning?
We need to lead with courage. All too often the safest line is to follow the path of least resistance and the Republican Party absolutely can not follow that path. That's what led to the downfall of the Democrats after half a century in power. I think we need to stay away from political doctrine and instead come up with creative new ideas and approaches to solving the problems our nation faces today. Are we going to get ripped by the liberals for doing this? You bet, but that's going to happen anyway.
3) What are some ways that the Republicans can increase foreign relations while still remaining tough on terrorism and tyranny?
I honestly don't think this is a high priority because I don't think this is a real problem. Within the area of foreign relations there is a pubic side and a private side. Foreign politicians have to play to their audience just as ours have to play to theirs. Right now, being anti-American/anti-Bush plays well overseas. In private however, some of the leaders that are most critical of us in public are our closest allies in the war on terrorism. It seems hardly a week goes by where we don't read of some tip on a potential terrorist scheme comes to light and more often than not, that tip comes from France. It's fun for us to feud in public, but when push comes to shove, the French are as good of allies as we have and they will stand by our side at the end of the day. I don't think we have a serious problem here.
4) Do you think social moderates like Giuliani and especially Shwarzenegger are the future of the party?
I don't think any doctrine is the "future of the party". Republicans have become the "big tent" party and there's room for people like Rudy and Arnold under that tent. But, they don't define us any more than some of the more conservative members do. Right now, the defining element in the Republican Party is President Bush and that definition is "Action". President Bush is a man who cares less what you say than he does what you do. I think that philosophy is the direction this party should take. We need to seek creative solutions without regard to political doctrine. The Republican Party has been handed a historical challenge by the American people and it is up to the party to meet that challenge. To do so it will require ideas from all parts of our party.
It is now time for us to walk the walk. Ideally the topics raised in this thread would be better addressed in the main forum areas of America's Debate, but I'm afraid they would quickly turn into yet another "Let's bash Bush" thread by those who seem to be unable to accept the decision made by the American People last November. This too is in keeping with the current climate in Washington where people like California's own Bouncing Barbie Boxer seem to be more interested in throwing a political temper tantrum than they are in addressing the problems this nation faces. It is my hope that other declared Republicans here will join in with their ideas on where we should go. As a nation, as a party......
1) What are some policies (domestic/foreign) that you want to see the Republicans push for the next four years and beyond?
I don't want to get too specific here at this time because I'm not really sure where the President wants to go. He sets the agenda and he'll do that in the State of the Union address in a few weeks. We know right now that he wants to take a careful look at re-doing Social Security and based on Bill Thomas' interview with Tim Russert this morning on Meet the Press, that's going to happen. I wouod urge Republicans who have not seen that interview to at least read the transcript of it when it becomes available. Bill Thomas is one of our superstars in Congress. He is thoughtful, intelligent and extremely articulate. As the Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, he also happens to be one of the most powerful members of Congress.
2) Do you think we should become more moderate, more far right, or remain on our current line of reasoning?
We need to lead with courage. All too often the safest line is to follow the path of least resistance and the Republican Party absolutely can not follow that path. That's what led to the downfall of the Democrats after half a century in power. I think we need to stay away from political doctrine and instead come up with creative new ideas and approaches to solving the problems our nation faces today. Are we going to get ripped by the liberals for doing this? You bet, but that's going to happen anyway.
3) What are some ways that the Republicans can increase foreign relations while still remaining tough on terrorism and tyranny?
I honestly don't think this is a high priority because I don't think this is a real problem. Within the area of foreign relations there is a pubic side and a private side. Foreign politicians have to play to their audience just as ours have to play to theirs. Right now, being anti-American/anti-Bush plays well overseas. In private however, some of the leaders that are most critical of us in public are our closest allies in the war on terrorism. It seems hardly a week goes by where we don't read of some tip on a potential terrorist scheme comes to light and more often than not, that tip comes from France. It's fun for us to feud in public, but when push comes to shove, the French are as good of allies as we have and they will stand by our side at the end of the day. I don't think we have a serious problem here.
4) Do you think social moderates like Giuliani and especially Shwarzenegger are the future of the party?
I don't think any doctrine is the "future of the party". Republicans have become the "big tent" party and there's room for people like Rudy and Arnold under that tent. But, they don't define us any more than some of the more conservative members do. Right now, the defining element in the Republican Party is President Bush and that definition is "Action". President Bush is a man who cares less what you say than he does what you do. I think that philosophy is the direction this party should take. We need to seek creative solutions without regard to political doctrine. The Republican Party has been handed a historical challenge by the American people and it is up to the party to meet that challenge. To do so it will require ideas from all parts of our party.
1) What are some policies (domestic/foreign) that you want to see the Republicans push for the next four years and beyond?
I think we need to return to policies of fiscal conservatism. Although the Republican Party has been on the rise of late, I think it has been done at the expense of many of the parties values. At some point, this will turn against them. Even within this forum, I think you can see that many people (myself included) who count themselves Republican are actually closer to the Libertarian Party in basic values..they just don't have the national presence yet to be a force in elections. But that could change...if either the Libertarian or even the Democratic Party can lay claim to the fiscal conservative mantel, I think they will win enough votes to lose the Republican Party the majority they now enjoy.l
2) Do you think we should become more moderate, more far right, or remain on our current line of reasoning?
None of the above...rather, I think they need to return to the fundamental values of the party. In some ways, this might be more moderate (on social issues), but in others more conservative (on fiscal issues). On the social issues front, I think that the two fastest growing minority groups (blacks and hispanics) actually are closely aligned with traditional Republican values...so the party desparately needs to move back to that to garner support from these groups. This might indeed be seen as more moderate (although I don't think it is...upholding personal freedeom over group or governmental infringements is really about as conservative as you can get)...but it is essential to the long term success of the party.
3) What are some ways that the Republicans can increase foreign relations while still remaining tough on terrorism and tyranny?
I don't think they need to change a thing, maybe just advertise themselves better. I think a great deal of the unrest created by the current policy was due to the fact that too often the US subjugated its needs to those of our allies or others. All we have done is stop doing that...which naturally caused some consternation. Much like taking candy from a baby...the baby will throw a termporary fit, even though it never should have had the candy to begin with. However, once it realizes its not going to get the candy, and that throwing a fit is not working in its own interests, it will then go back to relations as normal. Also, I think it should be a fairly easy sell to get other nations on board the freedom bandwagon...who is really going to take a stand against freedom. Supporting freedom does not mean supporting actions to forcibly achieve it...so really this ties in exactly with the overall goals of the UN. As many of the political pundits have been saying...this policy is really very liberal in its premis (remember New World Order?)--so it should be closer in concept to the policies of those countries that have been opposing us recently.
4) Do you think social moderates like Giuliani and especially Shwarzenegger are the future of the party? I think they could be, and that if they are, it's not a bad thing. As I stated in 1 and 2 above, I think the Republican Party needs to return more to its fundamental values, and both Guiliani and Schwarzenegger do that. At its core, the Republican Party is socially moderate---it has only swung right to capture the so-called right wing Christian elements. However, in doing so, it has gotten away from some of its core social values, and those values are essential in gaining support from the growing minority groups.
I think we need to return to policies of fiscal conservatism. Although the Republican Party has been on the rise of late, I think it has been done at the expense of many of the parties values. At some point, this will turn against them. Even within this forum, I think you can see that many people (myself included) who count themselves Republican are actually closer to the Libertarian Party in basic values..they just don't have the national presence yet to be a force in elections. But that could change...if either the Libertarian or even the Democratic Party can lay claim to the fiscal conservative mantel, I think they will win enough votes to lose the Republican Party the majority they now enjoy.l
2) Do you think we should become more moderate, more far right, or remain on our current line of reasoning?
None of the above...rather, I think they need to return to the fundamental values of the party. In some ways, this might be more moderate (on social issues), but in others more conservative (on fiscal issues). On the social issues front, I think that the two fastest growing minority groups (blacks and hispanics) actually are closely aligned with traditional Republican values...so the party desparately needs to move back to that to garner support from these groups. This might indeed be seen as more moderate (although I don't think it is...upholding personal freedeom over group or governmental infringements is really about as conservative as you can get)...but it is essential to the long term success of the party.
3) What are some ways that the Republicans can increase foreign relations while still remaining tough on terrorism and tyranny?
I don't think they need to change a thing, maybe just advertise themselves better. I think a great deal of the unrest created by the current policy was due to the fact that too often the US subjugated its needs to those of our allies or others. All we have done is stop doing that...which naturally caused some consternation. Much like taking candy from a baby...the baby will throw a termporary fit, even though it never should have had the candy to begin with. However, once it realizes its not going to get the candy, and that throwing a fit is not working in its own interests, it will then go back to relations as normal. Also, I think it should be a fairly easy sell to get other nations on board the freedom bandwagon...who is really going to take a stand against freedom. Supporting freedom does not mean supporting actions to forcibly achieve it...so really this ties in exactly with the overall goals of the UN. As many of the political pundits have been saying...this policy is really very liberal in its premis (remember New World Order?)--so it should be closer in concept to the policies of those countries that have been opposing us recently.
4) Do you think social moderates like Giuliani and especially Shwarzenegger are the future of the party? I think they could be, and that if they are, it's not a bad thing. As I stated in 1 and 2 above, I think the Republican Party needs to return more to its fundamental values, and both Guiliani and Schwarzenegger do that. At its core, the Republican Party is socially moderate---it has only swung right to capture the so-called right wing Christian elements. However, in doing so, it has gotten away from some of its core social values, and those values are essential in gaining support from the growing minority groups.
1) What are some policies (domestic/foreign) that you want to see the Republicans push for the next four years and beyond?
My number one issue would be for the “Government” to finally do what is right by our military men and women who put their life on the line to defend and fight for freedom around the world. Not just while they serve but for all the years after. I was very pleased to see that the death and disability benefits increased. I also think something needs to be done with the immigration problem. If a charismatic Democrat adopts this issue and is believable the Republicans are
toast.
2) Do you think we should become more moderate, more far right, or remain on our current line of
reasoning?
A lot of people believe the religious right wing have too much power in the party already so going to the right isn’t an option. We have way too many left leaning moderates for my taste. I think the party can give some to both sides without compromising the party platform.
3) What are some ways that the Republicans can increase foreign relations while still remaining tough on terrorism and tyranny?
IMHO we will get more respect in the world if we follow the “Bush doctrine”. We don’t need Iran to “like” us. We need Iran to know if they don’t comply with an agreement they make or UN mandates, “someone” will hold them accountable. The problem we have had in the past is relying on the UN to “do” something when UN Resolutions weren’t followed. Now we know why they didn’t, but that is a different thread.
4) Do you think social moderates like Giuliani and especially Shwarzenegger are the future of the party?
I think anyone who shows their love of America, our heritage, and our constitution will do well by the party. I think Guiliani is terrific because he is tough on crime and did a wonderful job in NY. I could support him but I would rather see Condi Rice run in 2008 . I think she is more of a constitutionalist.
My number one issue would be for the “Government” to finally do what is right by our military men and women who put their life on the line to defend and fight for freedom around the world. Not just while they serve but for all the years after. I was very pleased to see that the death and disability benefits increased. I also think something needs to be done with the immigration problem. If a charismatic Democrat adopts this issue and is believable the Republicans are
toast.
2) Do you think we should become more moderate, more far right, or remain on our current line of
reasoning?
A lot of people believe the religious right wing have too much power in the party already so going to the right isn’t an option. We have way too many left leaning moderates for my taste. I think the party can give some to both sides without compromising the party platform.
3) What are some ways that the Republicans can increase foreign relations while still remaining tough on terrorism and tyranny?
IMHO we will get more respect in the world if we follow the “Bush doctrine”. We don’t need Iran to “like” us. We need Iran to know if they don’t comply with an agreement they make or UN mandates, “someone” will hold them accountable. The problem we have had in the past is relying on the UN to “do” something when UN Resolutions weren’t followed. Now we know why they didn’t, but that is a different thread.
4) Do you think social moderates like Giuliani and especially Shwarzenegger are the future of the party?
I think anyone who shows their love of America, our heritage, and our constitution will do well by the party. I think Guiliani is terrific because he is tough on crime and did a wonderful job in NY. I could support him but I would rather see Condi Rice run in 2008 . I think she is more of a constitutionalist.
QUOTE(Aquilla @ Jan 23 2005, 11:54 PM)
In a way it is most appropriate I think for the Republican Party faces a daunting task in the next two years. While our friends on the other side of the aisle busy themselves with attempting to re-define their party and re-build, our party has to lead this nation. We asked for this opportunity in the last election and made a promise to the American people that we could do it. They called us on it. It is now time for us to walk the walk.
It is now time for us to walk the walk.I agree with Aquilla on this point. The Republican party has won the war of words (and thus the election). And now the party must solidify, in the hearts and minds of the populace, that individualism and freedom are the better way. This is done by walking the walk and returning the powers of government back to the people. President Bush scored an enormous win this week with regards to this in Iraq. He has also taken some steps in this direction in the US with the proposed changes to social security. It will be interesting to see what he says in the upcoming state of the union address.
1) I'd like to see an attempt at overturning Roe v. Wade, possibly even revamping the process of judicial review. Also, more 2nd amendment rights would be nice, and a social initiative discouraging affirmative action.
2) I do think that the party will need to become more moderate, because that's what the Democrats are doing. I wouldn't be posting here today if the liberal Democrats hadn't been so holier-than-thou when I first started following politics. If the Republicans start to take that attitude, while the Democrats try to be all-inclusive, then we'll lose a lot of members. You may even lose me.
2) I do think that the party will need to become more moderate, because that's what the Democrats are doing. I wouldn't be posting here today if the liberal Democrats hadn't been so holier-than-thou when I first started following politics. If the Republicans start to take that attitude, while the Democrats try to be all-inclusive, then we'll lose a lot of members. You may even lose me.
I'm both a Republican and a Libertarian. I've been an officer of College Young Republicans, a Republican party official, and a candidate for the state legislature on the GOP ticket, and I'm a member of the Republican Liberty Caucus. But I'm also a card carrying member of the Libertarian Party, and have been seen they were first on the ballot in 1972. So I'm definitely one of those libertarian-at-heart Republicans Hobbes was talking about. Or to look at it another way, I'm a leftover Goldwater Republican; he never really was a conservative, but more a hawkish libertarian, just like me.
1) What are some policies (domestic/foreign) that you want to see the Republicans push for the next four years and beyond?
I'm happy with the Bush foreign policy, especially now that Rice is SecState. I love what I've seen from her so far. I can't suggest any improvements.
I think Bush is on the right track with Social Security reform, making the tax cuts permanent, and with a new effort to hold the line on spending... which I hope he's serious about. I've liked most of his judicial appointments, and I hepe he'll fight hard for them this term. He didn't last term, and that was a big disappointment.
I'm very happy that the Ashcroft Justice Dept. supports the individual rights interpretation of the Second Amendment, which I expect Gonzales will continue.
I'd like to see a reversal of course on drug policy, since I'm convinced the only possible way to win the drug war is legalization. Stopping stomping on state's rights concerning medical marijuana laws would be a good tiny first step.
If Bush must support an anti-gay marriage amendment, I wish he'd go with the Hatch alternative version, which doesn't prohibit gay marriage, but prohibits judges from making changes in the institution of marriage. That IMHO is the real problem.
2) Do you think we should become more moderate, more far right, or remain on our current line of reasoning?
I'd say more moderate socially and more "far right" on property rights, economics and gun rights.
3) What are some ways that the Republicans can increase foreign relations while still remaining tough on terrorism and tyranny?
I think Bush is already doing about as well as possible, at least now that Rice is SecState. She's made a good impression on the Europeans. Powell did too, but in the wrong way: they liked him but he didn't change many minds. Rice isn't just being credible and likable, she's also making persuasive arguments.
4) Do you think social moderates like Giuliani and especially Shwarzenegger are the future of the party?
Sort of. They're the only way we can win in places like New York and California, and either would be a formidable nominee in 2008, if they could be nominated (aside from Schwarzenegger's needing an amendment that is). That they couldn't now is something I see as a weakness. We're showing some of the same polarization disease as the Dems, where the party activists keep some of the strongest general election candidates from being nominated. That we've managed to chase away people like Overlandsailor worries me. The Big Tent has always been a GOP strength -- let's not lose it.
1) What are some policies (domestic/foreign) that you want to see the Republicans push for the next four years and beyond?
I'm happy with the Bush foreign policy, especially now that Rice is SecState. I love what I've seen from her so far. I can't suggest any improvements.
I think Bush is on the right track with Social Security reform, making the tax cuts permanent, and with a new effort to hold the line on spending... which I hope he's serious about. I've liked most of his judicial appointments, and I hepe he'll fight hard for them this term. He didn't last term, and that was a big disappointment.
I'm very happy that the Ashcroft Justice Dept. supports the individual rights interpretation of the Second Amendment, which I expect Gonzales will continue.
I'd like to see a reversal of course on drug policy, since I'm convinced the only possible way to win the drug war is legalization. Stopping stomping on state's rights concerning medical marijuana laws would be a good tiny first step.
If Bush must support an anti-gay marriage amendment, I wish he'd go with the Hatch alternative version, which doesn't prohibit gay marriage, but prohibits judges from making changes in the institution of marriage. That IMHO is the real problem.
2) Do you think we should become more moderate, more far right, or remain on our current line of reasoning?
I'd say more moderate socially and more "far right" on property rights, economics and gun rights.
3) What are some ways that the Republicans can increase foreign relations while still remaining tough on terrorism and tyranny?
I think Bush is already doing about as well as possible, at least now that Rice is SecState. She's made a good impression on the Europeans. Powell did too, but in the wrong way: they liked him but he didn't change many minds. Rice isn't just being credible and likable, she's also making persuasive arguments.
4) Do you think social moderates like Giuliani and especially Shwarzenegger are the future of the party?
Sort of. They're the only way we can win in places like New York and California, and either would be a formidable nominee in 2008, if they could be nominated (aside from Schwarzenegger's needing an amendment that is). That they couldn't now is something I see as a weakness. We're showing some of the same polarization disease as the Dems, where the party activists keep some of the strongest general election candidates from being nominated. That we've managed to chase away people like Overlandsailor worries me. The Big Tent has always been a GOP strength -- let's not lose it.
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.