In response to:

The Republicans' Primary Problem

Stuart95 Wrote: Feb 07, 2013 10:29 AM
The facts cited by Coulter do not prove causation. Conservatives faced the most polarizing, flawed, failed, socialist threat in the history of the country, raised a billion dollars, and still lost. Evidently, "conservatives" alone do not have the numbers and/or ambition to defeat the Rise of the Takers. To shrug the shoulders and attribute this to the power of incumbency is a dangerous misinterpretation. Fiscally conservative social liberals are the only logical allies in the fight against corrupt Big Government. Social conservatives, we do not want you to abandon your beliefs. But if you don't ease up the shrillness, then you will continue to see a radical rush toward all of the social ills you detest AND a ruined economy.
MoreFreedom Wrote: Feb 07, 2013 11:14 AM
The difference between "fiscally conservative social liberals" (you could call them libertarians) and social conservatives, is that social conservatives want to use government to create and enforce laws regarding behavior that they consider offensive, yet harm no one except perhaps those engaging in such behavior.

Social conservatives are just like liberals in using government to force their "virtues" onto others. It's just that their idea of what's virtuous is different.

Wouldn't it be better to restrict government to dealing with situations in which force has already been used against someone or their property (e.g., theft, assault, fraud, breach of contract, etc.)?
Stuart95 Wrote: Feb 07, 2013 11:20 AM
MoreFreedom, Between you and me, we know that libertarianism is the only political philosophy that maximizes freedom - that situation that gives man the best opportunity to live a happy and prosperous life - and minimizes the likelihood that an opposing party will come to power and visit upon society the opposite extremes visited upon society by the previous regime.

But that's a difficult point to grasp for most people, so we don't use the L-word when talking about enlisting the libertarians to help defeat socialism and its attendant loss of freedom.
Beircheart2 Wrote: Feb 07, 2013 10:46 AM
The American culture, by which I mean the collective attitudes of adults who also are, coincidentally, voters, is anything but conservative. That needs to change before any true political victory can be won. That change won't happen by your suggested strategy of pandering to their selfishness, their struggle to be held unaccountable, or overlooking their preoccupation with sex. We need to be more vocal, more visible, and more aggressive. That needs to be backed up with facts so we also need to be well educated before we open our mouths.
Stuart95 Wrote: Feb 07, 2013 11:11 AM
If wanting to find a coalition that can stop Obama, Pelosi, Reid, Schumer, Biden, Wasserman-Schultz, etc. and their puppet masters is pandering, then I hereby endorse pandering.
Texas Chris Wrote: Feb 07, 2013 10:42 AM
You assume that ALL conservatives were willing to show up for Romney. We weren't. Running a MORE moderate candidate than Romney is a losing strategy.

Run a true conservative. Just once. Let's see.
Stuart95 Wrote: Feb 07, 2013 11:08 AM
Yes, Romney may be an idiot. But to say turn up your nose at Romney and allow a socially radical Marxist to continue his attack on American values and success is inexcusable. Would you have been more motivated if, say, Romney were running against Satan?

I contend that there are not enough voting "conservatives" to win a national election. Open the tend wide enough to bring in fiscally conservative, social liberals. Social liberals are not militant hedonists; they just believe that issues like abortion, religion, and gay marriage are not primary issues with which to select a government.
wmou Wrote: Feb 07, 2013 10:36 AM
The moral issues are best fought in the public arena, not the national political arena. Convince people abortion is hiddeous and evil, and no laws are needed.

Having just lost an election, many Republicans are anxious to remake our party in the image of Democrats. The theory seems to be that whatever we're doing isn't working, so we better change everything.

But in fact, whatever Republicans did in 2012 -- other than an overly long primary fight -- worked amazingly well, given the circumstances.

In a detailed analysis of the 2012 election, William A. Galston, a fellow with the liberal Brookings Institution, makes a number of fascinating observations that Republicans would do well to consider before embracing amnesty, abortion, gay marriage and Beyonce.

In my...