Is there still a GOP?

[PureX]

1980's?!

Yes. The young "neo-cons" entered the GOP back in the 1980s during the Reagan administration and declared their intention to destroy the Democratic Party and dominate US politics well into the 21st century. And to serve the cause of capitalism and free enterprise all the while.

And they have not wavered from that goal, since. Carl Rove was one of them, and was hailed a hero and a genius for stirring up bigotry and social hatred and aiming it at the Democratic Party to win elections for republicans. It's what started the "moral majority" in politics that eventually led to the "MAGA maniacs" and Trumpism. The neo-cons in the Republican Party deliberately turned Americans against each other to destroy the Democratic Party and to win elections for republicans, just as they'd set out to do. With the goal of creating an American plutocrisy for the 21st century. And they have not wavered from that goal.

One more turn in power and they will gut the ability of the voters to remove them from office and their plan will be complete. All because the American people let their bigotry and social animosity blind them to the real threat among them.

And most are still blinded to it.

 

[F1fan]

No, the GOP is not “defunct”.

What is defunct is the minds of those who let themselves become so obsessed with politics that all they think about night and day is “the other side” of the political spectrum. This goes for Red as well as Blue.

There is a remedy for this condition. Sever your ties to everything that fuels this pathetic obsession. Take an extended break from social media, and from major “news” outlets. Detach yourself from your favorite media personalities and start thinking for yourself. Change the subject when people bring up politics. Get out of the house. Enjoy life.

Stop letting your politics define you. Stop perpetuating propaganda by regurgitating the opinions of those who do your thinking for you. You could be more than that. So much more.

Your solution is to ignore the problem of a collapse of ethics for Republicans. That won't solve anything. Notice you won't even acknowledge the problem of low ethics. Trump keeps repeating the lie of election fraud, and MAGA candidates are doing the same and winning primaries over more ethical Republicans. That is the problem. Conservative voters should be voting for ethical Republicans, not the MAGAs.

We see many conservatives in this forum make comments that indicate they consume far right wing disinformation media. They should sever ties with those poor quality media, and instead rely on reputable media, of which there are plenty. Not being informed is NOT a solution to being poorly informed.

If you can'r handle the truth that Trump is corrupt, then you shouldn't be voting.

 

[F1fan]

???!!!! There's an ethical side?

There are many ethical Republicans who acknowledge that Trump's pis corrupt and there is a MAGA movement that poses a threat to democracy. Most are being quiet about it to avoid the backlash. Those who are leaving office or have been voted out have been speaking out, namely Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger who are on the Jan 6 committee. Michael Steele, Joe Walsh, Joe Scarborough, plus the Lincoln project republicans and republican strategists are highly critical of the collapse of ethics and honor among republicans in office today.

 

[PureX]

It's all about winning, now. Ethics have no relevance. They are just about to achieve their goal of total control. They just need to gain the levers of power one more time and they'll have it, permanently. So morality is out the window. They're in the big push to the finish line.

 

[fantome profane]

There are many ethical Republicans who acknowledge that Trump's pis corrupt and there is a MAGA movement that poses a threat to democracy. Most are being quiet about it to avoid the backlash.

That is not ethical!!!

 

[crossfire]

Who are "the crazies?"

The ones who refuse to accept the evidence of the reality that the election was not stolen via widespread fraud and that January 6th was an insurrection, who also want to keep people who do not share their views from voting.

 

[PureX]

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Corporations are able to donate massive sums, anonymously, to buy candidates of their choice.
Corporations are able to fund campaigns, anonymously, under the guise of concerned citizens.
Legislation no longer reflects the will of the people,it reflects the will of the oligarchs.
You've read Gilens' and Page's, Princeton study.

Thank you for that reference, I've not seen it. I'm reading it now.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

For example, abortion rights were just lost...why? The will of one people.

I couldn't possible agree less with that statement. The "will of the people" (if the polls are correct) is that some abortion rights be retained. They were lost as a consequence of the Macchivelian machinations of Repbulicans in the Senate, and deliberate dissimulation by seekers after the highest judicial positions in the United States. Furthermore, the loss does not represent the policy of the present administration.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

To be fair the Republican Party was at one time a very liberal progressive party. You have to go back to the 1800’s, but they were.


Strange but true.

Yes, well awful once meant the same thing as awesome. Not any more.

 

[Revoltingest]

I couldn't possible agree less with that statement. The "will of the people" (if the polls are correct) is that some abortion rights be retained. They were lost as a consequence of the Macchivelian machinations of Repbulicans in the Senate, and deliberate dissimulation by seekers after the highest judicial positions in the United States. Furthermore, the loss does not represent the policy of the present administration.

Republicans are one of the Big Two parties here.
They tend to loathe abortion.
Call it "Macchivelian [sic] machination" if you want,
but he was elected with almost half the votes.
(Manipulation of SCOTUS was what got abortion
rights in the first place.)
The people (one big group therein) have spoken.

 

[Valjean]

The way the current GOP differs from the GOP of the past, was that Trump was able to get their agenda done. Before Trump was president, the GOP had the same agenda as him, but the party was more than willing to just talk about it and then accept a secondary role to the Democrat party. The Democrat party would vote lockstep like trained horses, with the Republicans more thoughtful and split, before Trump.

Democrat Party (epithet) - Wikipedia
I'm not convinced Trump actually had an agenda. His focus was not on the GOP's usual corporate and deregulatory agenda.

Trump repaired the split in the GOP by getting their agenda done.

Please clarify this "agenda." Trump's agenda seemed to be Trump.

This is why the Republicans started to follow Trump, even though there was a rocky start due to the Russian Collusion Coup. Mitt Romney and Trump may still have a personality clash, but both can see the common goals and needed outcomes.

The 'common goals' pander to diminished prosperity, replacement panic, nativism, and racism. The diminished prosperity is legitimate, but falsely attributed.
In times of insecurity, people tend to turn to authoritarian, strong-father leaders, who offer simplistic solutions and a specific demographic to blame. Historically, these movements haven't ended well.

This get the job done approach has messed up the Democrat party and caused it to go way too far Left.

The Democratic Party has moved significantly to the Right in recent decades. It's currently more Right than the Republican party was in the '70s and before.

The Left has not moved. The Republicans have moved far Right. The Democrats abandoned their traditional, working class base in favor of the better funding offered by the technical class. Both parties have abandoned the interests of The People.

The Democrat party needed to go too far Left to match the drive and enthusiasm of the unified Trumpsters. This helped the GOP, since the new agenda of the Democrat party became farther from the mainstream.

How did the Democratic party move left? Details, please.
Neither major party currently represents the interests of The People. One panders to the oligarchs and their authoritarian followers, the other to the diminishing technical class.

The pandemic sealed the fate of the Democrat party, when its true authoritarian colors were shown. The CDC is now changing course about its pandemic strategy, more in line with the GOP states, since the writing is on the walls.

Holy projection, Batman! The authoritarians are not the Democrats.
Wasn't it Trump who cancelled Obama's pandemic plans; an initiative conceived well before Covid?

The GOP, on the other hand, has made inroads with Hispanics and Black voters due to Trump. Trump did more for the Blacks and Hispanics, compared to the promises and throw a bone solutions of the Democrats. These groups did not just want welfare, but more opportunities and jobs.

Which the Republicans have been steadily chipping away at since Reagan's "welfare queen." The Republicans have diminished the social safety net, and the opportunities for education and social advancement for the underclass.

These groups used to exclusively vote for the Democrat party, until they had the opportunity to see which side was making promises and which side was doing what it said

What have the Republicans done to benefit the working classes; cancel social services and educational opportunities? send jobs overseas?

The push too far to Left, no longer works for these groups, who now better relate to the GOP. The GOP has become the party of the blue color and middle class and all those who wish to enter the middle class. The Democrat party alliance with Wall Street, Big media, Big Tech, Intelligence Agencies, and Big government Bureaucracy and Globalist makes them appear like the party of the rich and pampered classes, who think there are above the law; dual justice system.

But it's the Republicans who've always allied with Wall Street, Big Business, and globalist Neo-Liberalism. The Occupy Wall Street protestors were not Republicans, and it wasn't The People that were bailed out after the '08 housing crisis.

I think the Democrat party needs to be dissolved and then reinvent itself, by finding a way to get back to the middle.

Here we agree. It needs to return to its roots, perhaps merge with the Green Party.

Government should not be led by incompetent people who give the tax payer a large negative rate of return; budget deficits and interest on previous debt We need more fiscally responsible leaders. If I am not mistaken all 50 states have a balanced budget requirement. The Federal Government has too many leaders who are not competent enough to do this. To solve the problem, there may be an upcoming shift of resources back to the states, so tax payers gets a better deal, until Big Gov can get its act together.

I agree government should be the domain of experts in history, economics, politics, sociology, psychology, &c. Currently, our "leaders" are narcissists who pander to our emotions, offer simplistic solutions, and couldn't contrast Keynes and Mises to save their lives.
Big Government is the only organization with the power to curb the exploitative power of the bankers and corporations. Government should promote the general welfare; the interests of The People who are supposed to be running it.

There is so much good change, that the Democrat are sad about the glory days when the GOP was not able to stop their incompetence and reckless spending. They project and do not see that they are problem.

It's the GOP who've been undermining the middle class, who've been making healthcare, housing and education unaffordable. This is demonstrable, historical fact. It's their stated goal: The Powell Memo (AKA the Powell Manifesto) ⋆ Reclaim Democracy!
The Republican Party opposes democracy.

 

[Valjean]

Yes. The young "neo-cons" entered the GOP back in the 1980s during the Reagan administration and declared their intention to destroy the Democratic Party and dominate US politics well into the 21st century. And to serve the cause of capitalism and free enterprise all the while.

And they have not wavered from that goal, since. Carl Rove was one of them, and was hailed a hero and a genius for stirring up bigotry and social hatred and aiming it at the Democratic Party to win elections for republicans. It's what started the "moral majority" in politics that eventually led to the "MAGA maniacs" and Trumpism. The neo-cons in the Republican Party deliberately turned Americans against each other to destroy the Democratic Party and to win elections for republicans, just as they'd set out to do. With the goal of creating an American plutocrisy for the 21st century. And they have not wavered from that goal.

One more turn in power and they will gut the ability of the voters to remove them from office and their plan will be complete. All because the American people let their bigotry and social animosity blind them to the real threat among them.

And most are still blinded to it.

Good points, but what I'm questioning is the origin of the movement only 30 years ago.
My point is that the GOP has always been the party of Big Business. Who, for example, were the authors of The Gilded Age, and the exploitative trusts Teddy Roosevelt was opposing?

 

[questfortruth]

So, is the party of Lincoln now dead? Or is democracy in the United States dead? I think it must be one or the other.

BOTH.

 

[PureX]

Good points, but what I'm questioning is the origin of the movement only 30 years ago.
My point is that the GOP has always been the party of Big Business. Who, for example, were the authors of The Gilded Age, and the exploitative trusts Teddy Roosevelt was opposing?

Yes, they are the party of the wealthy, hence their desire for plutocracy. But a new generation of young republicans showed up in the 1980s that were basically amoral. For some reason that generation was particularly materialistic and devoid of character. I remember meeting some young people from that time period and being shocked by their blatant greed and willingness to do whatever it took to "get it all". The ones I met were not active politically, but they certainly shared in an attitude that was prevalent among their peers in the mid to late 80s. I don't know what made them so jaded, but they were honestly a little scary.

And it was some of these that went into politics under the republicans, and Ronald Reagan. And they were accepted because they breathed "new life and passion" into the republican party. But unfortunately, they also brought with them a willingness to do whatever it took to "win". And they wanted to "win it all".

 

[Stevicus]

Good points, but what I'm questioning is the origin of the movement only 30 years ago.
My point is that the GOP has always been the party of Big Business. Who, for example, were the authors of The Gilded Age, and the exploitative trusts Teddy Roosevelt was opposing?

Teddy Roosevelt himself may have changed the GOP somewhat, even though he was at odds with many in his own party. He split the Republican vote which allowed Wilson to get elected in 1912. After WW1 and Wilson, Republicans seemingly became more isolationist, xenophobic, and anti-immigration. And they were also the party of Big Business, as they were all along.

There seemed to be a brief period when both Republicans and Democrats were more interested in working together. Big Business seemed okay with the idea of negotiating in good faith with Big Labor, and they seemed okay with other changes which helped to better the standard of living, improve civil rights, and be more amenable to liberal and progressive ideals. Even guys like Nixon and Eisenhower seemed to be okay with some of that, as they were more focused on dealing with a far more important issue, the Cold War and the fight against international communism.

Reagan was certainly a longtime Cold Warrior, but unlike many of his predecessors, he seemed even more right wing and uncompromising on domestic economic issues. They called it the Reagan Revolution, as I recall. It was at that time that I thought the whole country had gone stark raving mad. Not just the Republicans, but Democrats too. The culture had also changed, reflected in characters like Gordon Gekko on Wall Street. It's also the same time when the name Trump started to become more and more known across the culture. The Moral Majority also became a more noticeable influence on a national level.

 

[Heyo]

Not being informed is NOT a solution to being poorly informed.

While it's not a solution it is at least better. It has been found that people watching no news at all are better informed than people watching Fox News.

 

[Valjean]

Yes, they are the party of the wealthy, hence their desire for plutocracy. But a new generation of young republicans showed up in the 1980s that were basically amoral. For some reason that generation was particularly materialistic and devoid of character. I remember meeting some young people from that time period and being shocked by their blatant greed and willingness to do whatever it took to "get it all". The ones I met were not active politically, but they certainly shared in an attitude that was prevalent among their peers in the mid to late 80s. I don't know what made them so jaded, but they were honestly a little scary.

And it was some of these that went into politics under the republicans, and Ronald Reagan. And they were accepted because they breathed "new life and passion" into the republican party. But unfortunately, they also brought with them a willingness to do whatever it took to "win". And they wanted to "win it all".

The 1980s was the advent of Reagan's Neoliberal economics. One of the 'moral tenets' of Neoliberalism is "greed is good." An enterprise that doesn't realize a profit -- usually in the short term -- is a waste of time.
Infrastructure? Social services? Where's the profit in these?

 

[PureX]

The 1980s was the advent of Reagan's Neoliberal economics. One of the 'moral tenets' of Neoliberalism is "greed is good." An enterprise that doesn't realize a profit -- usually in the short term -- is a waste of time.
Infrastructure? Social services? Where's the profit in these?

And ethical politics ... not much monetary profit there, either. The profit is in taking all that corporate bribe money for doing their bidding. No point in running the government if you can't get rich from it. Especially when getting rich is now everyone's goal in life.

 

[PureX]

The culture had also changed, reflected in characters like Gordon Gekko on Wall Street. It's also the same time when the name Trump started to become more and more known across the culture.

And Trump started to become a make-believe "hero" for playing Richie Rich on a tv show that was all about rewarding greed.