IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags fiscal conservatives , republicans , social conservatives

Reply
Old 27th March 2011, 04:39 AM   #1
seayakin
Graduate Poster
 
seayakin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,400
Republican Party, Social Conservatism and Fiscal Conservatism

I was just reading this article from the New York Times and I thought it raises interesting questions (albeit not new questions) for the Republican part

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/27/us...l?ref=politics

Is the republican party more likely to have national success if the the social conservatives or fiscal conservatives win broader control? It seems to me that the fiscal conservatives would have broader appeal.
__________________
"I kayak, therefore I am"
seayakin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2011, 05:57 AM   #2
Bikewer
Penultimate Amazing
 
Bikewer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: St. Louis, Mo.
Posts: 13,231
You'd think so... But who knows? There is that notion that's been floated for some years that the Republicans hijacked the middle class by appealing to the "culture wars" issues, even though Republican policies were generally deleterious to the financial interests of those voters....
Yesterday, on Weekend Edition, they interviewed one of the participants in the big conservative forum held over the weekend. This the most-conservative of the conservatives, the radical fringe. Hint, Phyllis Schlaffly was one of the keynote speakers.
Scott Simon asked that very question..."Wouldn't it be better, considering the current economic climate, to soft-pedal these social issues and work on the economy?"
Not so, said the spokesman (I forget who was being interviewed). We wouldn't want a sound economy that was based on moral laxity, would we? (paraphrasing just a bit...)
Bikewer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2011, 11:45 AM   #3
Undesired Walrus
Penultimate Amazing
 
Undesired Walrus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 11,691
I didn't think the Republicans practiced social conservatism much before Nixon?
__________________
Man's material discoveries have outpaced his moral progress. - Clement Attlee, 1945
Undesired Walrus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2011, 12:01 PM   #4
seayakin
Graduate Poster
 
seayakin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,400
Originally Posted by Undesired Walrus View Post
I didn't think the Republicans practiced social conservatism much before Nixon?
Interesting question and I think they did. Wikipedia uses the following definition for social conservatism:

"Social conservatism is a political or moral ideology that believes that government has a role in encouraging or enforcing what they consider traditional values or behaviors. "

However it also states:

"A second meaning of the term social conservatism developed in the Nordic countries and continental Europe. There it refers to liberal conservatives supporting modern European welfare states. Social conservatism is distinct from cultural conservatism which focuses on cultural aspects of the issues, such as protecting one's culture, although there are some overlaps."

In any case, my use of the term was referring to the first definition as in groups like the "Moral Majority". Christian conservatives in the Republican party certainly predate Nixon.
__________________
"I kayak, therefore I am"
seayakin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2011, 12:05 PM   #5
respect
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 3,854
Fiscal conservatism does considerably more to appeal to moderates. Bush and a Republican dominated congress did not alienate voters because they just weren't socially conservative enough.

A small government platform sells much better than a big government in the name of moral decency platform. The Republican Party is a giant oxymoron, "the government should not interfere with individual's decision making, and...oh, sweet Jesus...they showed a breast on television, let's get them."
respect is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2011, 12:07 PM   #6
quixotecoyote
Howling to glory I go
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 10,379
I've never met anyone who wasn't a 'fiscal conservative.' It's one of those phrases that sounds so good it must be positive. The people I've met use it to mean "cautious with money," and who wouldn't want to be cautious with money?

Anecdotal of course, but it doesn't seem like it's a widely understood term.
__________________
If people needed video games to live, a national single payer plan to fund those purchases would be a great idea.
quixotecoyote is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2011, 12:20 PM   #7
seayakin
Graduate Poster
 
seayakin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,400
Originally Posted by quixotecoyote View Post
I've never met anyone who wasn't a 'fiscal conservative.' It's one of those phrases that sounds so good it must be positive. The people I've met use it to mean "cautious with money," and who wouldn't want to be cautious with money?

Anecdotal of course, but it doesn't seem like it's a widely understood term.
Yes, I would agree with this. Everyone's pet program is too important to cut and disaster will befall us we cut the Planet X program. However, I think true deficit hawks have been willing to make broad based cuts and I think at least Obama's Deficit Reduction Commission seemed to present a report that spread the pain around.
__________________
"I kayak, therefore I am"
seayakin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2011, 12:21 PM   #8
respect
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 3,854
Originally Posted by quixotecoyote View Post
I've never met anyone who wasn't a 'fiscal conservative.' It's one of those phrases that sounds so good it must be positive. The people I've met use it to mean "cautious with money," and who wouldn't want to be cautious with money?

Anecdotal of course, but it doesn't seem like it's a widely understood term.
In this context you could take it to mean that government growth will generally not exceed realistic expectations of total economic growth. The last time there was a serious attempt at this was Clinton and the Contract With America crowd.
respect is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2011, 12:23 PM   #9
respect
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 3,854
Originally Posted by seayakin View Post
Yes, I would agree with this. Everyone's pet program is too important to cut and disaster will befall us we cut the Planet X program. However, I think true deficit hawks have been willing to make broad based cuts and I think at least Obama's Deficit Reduction Commission seemed to present a report that spread the pain around.
Simply reducing annual budget increases into line with realistic expectations of economic growth would go a long way. That is what Clinton and the Contract With America crowd did.
respect is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2011, 01:04 PM   #10
Trakar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Trakar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 12,637
Originally Posted by seayakin View Post
...In any case, my use of the term was referring to the first definition as in groups like the "Moral Majority". Christian conservatives in the Republican party certainly predate Nixon.
Actually, memories from the period (and a quick perusal of the inter-tubes) indicate that Undesired Walrus is more correct than not.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_Majority

The main fusion of the various conservative factions and adoption of them as mainstays by Republicans occurred in '64 when Goldwater became the Republican candidate. Of course, it helps to remember that what the US calls "conservative" is largely the same as "liberalism/neo-liberalism" in the rest of the world. Nixon was the first modern political candidate to embrace "social conservatism" and institute it as a major campaign feature of the Republican party, primarily in response to the anti-war, pro-drug and redefinitions of morality occurring in the youth rebellions of the late 60s and early 70s. This didn't peak and reach full maturity until Reagan's campaigns and politics of the 80s.

http://chnm.gmu.edu/courses/schrag/w...title=Backlash
__________________
Trakar
"By doubting we come to inquiry, and through inquiry we perceive truth." — Peter Abelard
"My civilization can do anything!" - David Brin (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i275AvgVvow)
Trakar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2011, 01:09 PM   #11
Undesired Walrus
Penultimate Amazing
 
Undesired Walrus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 11,691
The last two seasons of The West Wing deal with this conflict in the Republican party, centring around a 'traditional' small-state, low-tax Republican (Alan Alda) who gets the nomination. He's also an Atheist who despises the religious right of the party.
__________________
Man's material discoveries have outpaced his moral progress. - Clement Attlee, 1945
Undesired Walrus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2011, 02:45 PM   #12
seayakin
Graduate Poster
 
seayakin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,400
Originally Posted by TShaitanaku View Post
Actually, memories from the period (and a quick perusal of the inter-tubes) indicate that Undesired Walrus is more correct than not.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_Majority

The main fusion of the various conservative factions and adoption of them as mainstays by Republicans occurred in '64 when Goldwater became the Republican candidate. Of course, it helps to remember that what the US calls "conservative" is largely the same as "liberalism/neo-liberalism" in the rest of the world. Nixon was the first modern political candidate to embrace "social conservatism" and institute it as a major campaign feature of the Republican party, primarily in response to the anti-war, pro-drug and redefinitions of morality occurring in the youth rebellions of the late 60s and early 70s. This didn't peak and reach full maturity until Reagan's campaigns and politics of the 80s.

http://chnm.gmu.edu/courses/schrag/w...title=Backlash
I'm not sure I would completely agree with that because in my mind, the origin of the Republican Party was founded on social conservatist values. I base this on its opposition to slavery based on moral grounds with a strong Christian ethic although there were many ex-Whigs who also joined to oppose the Democratic party.
__________________
"I kayak, therefore I am"
seayakin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2011, 02:44 AM   #13
Undesired Walrus
Penultimate Amazing
 
Undesired Walrus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 11,691
I thought it was opposed to slavery not so much on moral grounds but on economic grounds, as the expansion of slavery would make it harder for non-slave owners to make a living?
__________________
Man's material discoveries have outpaced his moral progress. - Clement Attlee, 1945
Undesired Walrus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2011, 03:43 AM   #14
seayakin
Graduate Poster
 
seayakin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,400
Originally Posted by Undesired Walrus View Post
I thought it was opposed to slavery not so much on moral grounds but on economic grounds, as the expansion of slavery would make it harder for non-slave owners to make a living?
There opposition to slavery was not soley economic but based in a fundamental belief that slavery was morally wrong. (Wikipedia refers to this slightly citing the slogan "free labor, free land, free men". I'll see if I can find a more substantial source.
__________________
"I kayak, therefore I am"

Last edited by seayakin; 28th March 2011 at 03:44 AM. Reason: typo
seayakin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2011, 05:38 AM   #15
Bikewer
Penultimate Amazing
 
Bikewer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: St. Louis, Mo.
Posts: 13,231
Being "fiscally conservative" might also be seen as code for "not spending money on people and projects we don't like."
Bikewer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2011, 05:47 AM   #16
seayakin
Graduate Poster
 
seayakin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,400
This web page probably sheds a little more light on the issue than the Wikipedia article.

http://www.ushistory.org/gop/convention_1856.htm

Quote:
The delegates got right down to business the first day by adopting a platform. The key plank was firm opposition to the extension of slavery. "It is the duty of Congress to prohibit in the territories those twin relics of barbarism, polygamy and slavery." The polygamy reference was aimed at the Mormon settlement in Utah territory.
The antislavery movement as a whole had a strong religious element to it even though there were free soilers who opposed for economic reasons because they considered it unfair competition with free labor. The paragraph on this page highlights the evangelical influence on the anti-slavery movement.

http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/history/A0856463.html

In the end, I think the anti-slavery plank of the Republican party's platform represented both economic and religious interests fighting for a common goal of ending slavery. Therefore, at its creation you had the social conservatives (evangelicals) who wanted to use government to impose their moral code on the country and you had the free soilers who perhaps were more interested in it for economic reasons.
__________________
"I kayak, therefore I am"
seayakin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2011, 01:14 PM   #17
gnome
Penultimate Amazing
 
gnome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 14,574
Originally Posted by Bikewer View Post
Being "fiscally conservative" might also be seen as code for "not spending money on people and projects we don't like."
That's it, yep. "I promise to stop wasting money on stuff the other party likes, and waste it instead on stuff my party likes."
__________________

gnome is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2011, 04:45 PM   #18
MattusMaximus
Intellectual Gladiator
 
MattusMaximus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 15,948
Originally Posted by Undesired Walrus View Post
The last two seasons of The West Wing deal with this conflict in the Republican party, centring around a 'traditional' small-state, low-tax Republican (Alan Alda) who gets the nomination. He's also an Atheist who despises the religious right of the party.
This got me thinking... the scuttlebutt is that there are a number of in-the-closet gay Republicans on Capitol Hill. I wonder how many in-the-closet atheist/agnostic/etc Republicans there are?

I'm going to guess at least a dozen or so.
__________________
Visit my blog: The Skeptical Teacher
"We ****** up the air, the water, we ****** up each other. Why don't we just finish the job by flushing our brains down the toilet?" -- John Trent, In the Mouth of Madness
MattusMaximus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2011, 08:53 PM   #19
lomiller
Penultimate Amazing
 
lomiller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 13,208
Originally Posted by Undesired Walrus View Post
I didn't think the Republicans practiced social conservatism much before Nixon?
and they haven't practiced fiscal conservatism since Ford...
__________________
"Anything's possible, but only a few things actually happen"
lomiller is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2011, 09:28 PM   #20
DavidJames
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Front Range, CO
Posts: 10,493
Originally Posted by lomiller View Post
and they haven't practiced fiscal conservatism since Ford...
and yet somehow, Republicans, even "skeptics", fall for the lie.

Fascinating.
__________________
For 15 years I never put anyone on ignore. I felt it important to see everyone's view point. Finally I realized the value of some views can be measured in negative terms and were personally destructive.
DavidJames is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th March 2011, 08:42 PM   #21
respect
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 3,854
Originally Posted by lomiller View Post
and they haven't practiced fiscal conservatism since Ford...
The Contract With America crowd gave it a go in the mid 90's.
respect is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th March 2011, 09:41 PM   #22
lomiller
Penultimate Amazing
 
lomiller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 13,208
Originally Posted by respect View Post
The Contract With America crowd gave it a go in the mid 90's.
Not really. They wanted tax cuts without meaningful spending cuts, pretty much like every Republican since 1980.

The key turning point in the 90's came with the budget deal (91?) between Bush senior and the democratic congress that both increased taxes and cut spending. The contract with America crowd vehemently opposed this deal.
__________________
"Anything's possible, but only a few things actually happen"
lomiller is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th March 2011, 09:57 PM   #23
respect
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 3,854
Originally Posted by lomiller View Post
Not really. They wanted tax cuts without meaningful spending cuts, pretty much like every Republican since 1980.

The key turning point in the 90's came with the budget deal (91?) between Bush senior and the democratic congress that both increased taxes and cut spending. The contract with America crowd vehemently opposed this deal.
What they did primarily, with Clinton (D), was reduce automatic budget growths in government agencies. As the economy grew (boomed with the growth of computers and the internet) the government became a smaller part compared to the whole and (real) budgets approached being balanced. While both sides exaggerate their achievements, both Clinton and the congressional Republicans deserve some credit here.
respect is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th March 2011, 10:06 PM   #24
lomiller
Penultimate Amazing
 
lomiller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 13,208
Originally Posted by respect View Post
What they did primarily, with Clinton (D), was reduce automatic budget growths in government agencies.
Non-defense government agencies then, as now, made up only a small part of the US budget. There is no significant savings to be had here, and as I said above the real heavy lifting of getting things straightened out in the 90's happened before any of these people were elected.

Again the people who were talking about the contract with America actively and and vocally opposed the key budget deals that set the stage for the balanced budgets in the 90's. Clinton by and large supported this deal so it would be more accurate to say he blocked the Republicans from ringing up more debt.
__________________
"Anything's possible, but only a few things actually happen"
lomiller is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th March 2011, 10:11 PM   #25
Darth Rotor
Salted Sith Cynic
 
Darth Rotor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 38,527
Originally Posted by Undesired Walrus View Post
I didn't think the Republicans practiced social conservatism much before Nixon?
Try reading up on how the Republicans responded to FDR ...
__________________
Helicopters don't so much fly as beat the air into submission.
"Jesus wept, but did He laugh?"--F.H. Buckley____"There is one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked upon our earth ... His mirth." --Chesterton__"If the barbarian in us is excised, so is our humanity."--D'rok__ "I only use my gun whenever kindness fails."-- Robert Earl Keen__"Sturgeon spares none.". -- The Marquis
Darth Rotor is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th March 2011, 10:12 PM   #26
Darth Rotor
Salted Sith Cynic
 
Darth Rotor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 38,527
Originally Posted by Undesired Walrus View Post
I thought it was opposed to slavery not so much on moral grounds but on economic grounds, as the expansion of slavery would make it harder for non-slave owners to make a living?
It was both. It wasn't an either or issue.

That didn't mean that Republicans in the 1860's liked blacks, but they did oppose slavery.
__________________
Helicopters don't so much fly as beat the air into submission.
"Jesus wept, but did He laugh?"--F.H. Buckley____"There is one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked upon our earth ... His mirth." --Chesterton__"If the barbarian in us is excised, so is our humanity."--D'rok__ "I only use my gun whenever kindness fails."-- Robert Earl Keen__"Sturgeon spares none.". -- The Marquis
Darth Rotor is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th March 2011, 10:33 PM   #27
respect
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 3,854
Originally Posted by lomiller View Post
Non-defense government agencies then, as now, made up only a small part of the US budget. There is no significant savings to be had here, and as I said above the real heavy lifting of getting things straightened out in the 90's happened before any of these people were elected.

Again the people who were talking about the contract with America actively and and vocally opposed the key budget deals that set the stage for the balanced budgets in the 90's. Clinton by and large supported this deal so it would be more accurate to say he blocked the Republicans from ringing up more debt.
Are you seriously trying to suggest that the majority of federal spending is on defense?

Right that reductions in defense spending helped. Wrong that it was the primary driver. The primary driver was a computer and internet fueled economic boom. Tax revenues largely stayed the same as a percentage of the economy. The difference was that the economy grew faster than the government. Something it couldn't do before and something it couldn't do now. The difference between 2% and 8% when compared to GDP is significant.
respect is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th March 2011, 07:09 AM   #28
lomiller
Penultimate Amazing
 
lomiller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 13,208
Originally Posted by respect View Post
Are you seriously trying to suggest that the majority of federal spending is on defense?
We were discussing spending on government departments. Total spending on all non-defense related government departments in the current US budget amounts to about $450 billion.

There is also programs (not departments) lice Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid to consider but the contract with America people did nothing to contain these costs and as recently as last year Republicans were campaigning on what they claimed were cuts to Medicare/Medicaid by Democrats.
__________________
"Anything's possible, but only a few things actually happen"
lomiller is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:00 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.