Support NeoGAF

[B-Dubs]

It appears immigration reform talks in the House have collapsed because of the GOP's hatred for Obamacare.

No! Say it ain't so! I for one did not see this coming. Nope, didn't see this coming at all.

 

[zero shift]

http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/results/president/exit-polls.html

This goes back to 1980, I'm sure you could find more detailed stuff if you looked.

Holy fuck are Republicans in trouble. Even when you look at 25-39 they are still fucked.

 

[TacticalFox88]

It appears immigration reform talks in the House have collapsed because of the GOP's hatred for Obamacare.

Grown adults acting like petulant children.

 

[PhoenixDark]

Rubio Threatens To Vote Against His Own Immigration Bill

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) said Tuesday that he's prepared to vote against the very immigration reform bill on which he's taken a leading role and ostensibly staked much of his political future.

Rubio told conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt that "a sizeable number of Republicans" are prepared to vote in favor of immigration reform, but not until amendments are added to the Gang of 8's proposal that will strengthen border security and limit the discretion given to the Department of Homeland Security in the bill's ultimate implementation.

Hewitt wondered if Rubio would still vote for the bill if those amendments fail to pass.

"Well, I think if those amendments don’t pass, then I think we’ve got a bill that isn’t going to become law, and I think we’re wasting our time. So the answer is no. If they don’t pass, then we’ve got to keep working to ensure that we get to a bill that can become a law," Rubio told Hewitt. "We’re not interested in passing a Senate bill. We’re interested in passing a law that reforms a broken legal immigration system, that begins to enforce the law, and that deals with the 11 million people who are here illegally. And that’s the goal of this endeavor. And so if those amendments fail, we’ve got to go back to the drawing board and keep working until we can figure out one that will pass. But I don’t understand why anyone would be against it, as such, I don’t think there is a good reason to be against strengthening border security for our country."

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.c...s-to-vote-against-his-own-immigration?ref=fpb

Hey, remember when Rubio said he specifically influenced the security measures in the immigration bill to ensure it was tough on security? Now: the bill needs security amendments or I won't vote for it.

 

[JesseEwiak]

I always wonder about this as well. My suspicion is that it's based more on the background changing than on people's views changing--what seemed liberal when you were young might shift to seem standard or even conservative when you get older. Imagine that you were a young supporter of women's suffrage in the World War I era. You probably lived to see the early days of feminism, and it probably shocked you and seemed like a nutty overturning of the social order. Things change, things move along without you.

Most studies show that once you vote for the same pary for President three times, you're basically locked into that party putting aside severe switches in ideology. Thus, the reason why you still had racist Southerners still voting for Michael Dukakis and Bill Clinton, but since many of the younger Southerners voted for Reagan, they didn't have the same problem voting for Bush II and so on.

 

[Link]

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.c...s-to-vote-against-his-own-immigration?ref=fpb

Hey, remember when Rubio said he specifically influenced the security measures in the immigration bill to ensure it was tough on security? Now: the bill needs security amendments or I won't vote for it.

Has there ever been a candidate anointed as the Chosen One, then went down in flames as quickly as Rubio? The guy's a complete joke at this point.

 

[TacticalFox88]

Has there ever been a candidate anointed as the Chosen One, then went down in flames as quickly as Rubio? The guy's a complete joke at this point.

Never forget.

 

[Link]

I call that "The Tipping Point."

 

[TacticalFox88]

My theory is that He needed to flush out all the corporate semen from his mouth.

Sucking a corporation's dick on the regular tend to leave you in a sticky situation.

 

[The Librarian]

The Post is moving to a paywall...which means WonkBlog is too: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/06/05/its-paywall-time/.

Welp. Guess that means I'm forking over a monthly fee.

 

[Gotchaye]

Remember that Rubio doesn't want immigration reform to pass. If it passes and Republicans don't start polling a whole lot better among Hispanics, he'll have nothing to offer in a presidential primary. The case for Rubio-for-president is that the party needs to appeal to Hispanics, and Rubio in particular is committed to something like the idea that passing immigration reform will let the Republicans win elections again without moderating on anything else. It's an appealing case because it's a relatively minor change and doesn't require the establishment to give on taxes or the base to give on women and gays. But it won't work, and Rubio's done if immigration reform gets passed and Republicans see that it's not working. At that point Hispanics become just another minority on the liberals' plantation.

Edit: And of course any actual immigration bill will be hated by the Republican base. There are just all kinds of reasons why Rubio needs to be for "immigration reform" but against every specific method of doing it that has a chance of passing.

 

[KingGondo]

Why is it that half the country really has NO IDEA what the fuck "Tyranny" really is? Jesus fuck.

Oklahoma's politicians are almost uniformly embarrassing.

 

[el retorno]

It appears immigration reform talks in the House have collapsed because of the GOP's hatred for Obamacare.

reform was never gonna come out of the house. if it happens it will be forced upon them in a haster rule breaking vote on the senates bill.

The more significant thing is rubio signaling he doesn't actually want immigration reform to pass.

Didn't see PD's post

At that point Hispanics become just another minority on the liberals' plantation.

wut

How much of that younger vote will swing Republican when they get older though? I'm not sure how the trend typically looks.

Is there any data out there showing the voting patterns of age during say the 1980s?

if the gop doesn't change? none. a lot of that younger vote are minorities and if the GOP keeps up the racist crap they're not even going to give them a chance

peoples voting patterns are established in their first few elections.

all the republican voters came of age during the reagan revolution

 

[Gotchaye]

wut

You haven't heard that sort of talk? Here's something from a few weeks ago:
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/conte...o-promote-liberal-plantation-psychological-bo

He said he intends to ask black voters why they are “allowing the Tea Party to be made into your enemy and the radical homosexual rights people to be made into your friends and allies when they reject everything you believe and most of the Tea Party activists embrace everything you believe.” Jackson urged African Americans to “come out of that indoctrination, what I call a liberal plantation of psychological bondage.”

 

[el retorno]

You haven't heard that sort of talk? Here's something from a few weeks ago:
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/conte...o-promote-liberal-plantation-psychological-bo

ok, you were making a joke. I remember that quote just wasn't sure if it just was a poor choice of words

 

[speculawyer]

Has there ever been a candidate anointed as the Chosen One, then went down in flames as quickly as Rubio? The guy's a complete joke at this point.

I think of a few.

Rick Perry was going to be the savior of the 2012 GOP presidential ticket and then when he finally jumped in he flamed out so fast. It was pretty funny too because he had amassed a pretty big campaign chest by then too.

Bobby Jindahl was rising fast and then he did his Kenneth the page imitation.

 

[speculawyer]

It appears immigration reform talks in the House have collapsed because of the GOP's hatred for Obamacare.

There is really no point in talking about politics for the next 3 years is there? Nothing of substance is going to pass through that House. And they'll hold it in 2014 for another 2 years of obstructionism.

Our government is static. Nothing is going to change for years.


But on the bright side, at least no pointless wars are going be started and at least no more deficit-busting tax cuts will be passed.

The more significant thing is rubio signaling he doesn't actually want immigration reform to pass.

Yeah, that profile in courage is running as fast as he can from the immigration bill now so he can look like the rest of the 2015 hopefuls. It is kinda crazy though . . . absolutely none of them can win 2016 on such divisive politics unless there is an economic meltdown.

 

[TacticalFox88]

There is really no point in talking about politics for the next 3 years is there? Nothing of substance is going to pass through that House. And they'll hold it in 2014 for another 2 years of obstructionism.

Our government is static. Nothing is going to change for years.


But on the bright side, at least no pointless wars are going be started and at least no more deficit-busting tax cuts will be passed.

Amazing what hatred of one man can hold a country back.

 

[CharlieDigital]

There is really no point in talking about politics for the next 3 years is there? Nothing of substance is going to pass through that House. And they'll hold it in 2014 for another 2 years of obstructionism.

Our government is static. Nothing is going to change for years.

But on the bright side, at least no pointless wars are going be started and at least no more deficit-busting tax cuts will be passed.

Pretty much where I'm at now with politics.

 

[Mike M]

I call that "The Tipping Point."

I would have gone with "The Sipping Point."

 

[Link]

The Post is moving to a paywall...which means WonkBlog is too: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/06/05/its-paywall-time/.

Welp. Guess that means I'm forking over a monthly fee.

Thanks, Obama!

I think of a few.

Rick Perry was going to be the savior of the 2012 GOP presidential ticket and then when he finally jumped in he flamed out so fast. It was pretty funny too because he had amassed a pretty big campaign chest by then too.

Bobby Jindahl was rising fast and then he did his Kenneth the page imitation.

To add to my own thoughts, I suppose Ben Carson was taken seriously as a candidate for about a minute there.

I would have gone with "The Sipping Point."

Nice.

 

[rocketknight]

The Post is moving to a paywall...which means WonkBlog is too: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/06/05/its-paywall-time/.

Welp. Guess that means I'm forking over a monthly fee.

If there's anything worth chipping in for it's Wonkblog, but ten bucks a month is pretty steep. Also, just - goddammit.

 

[Avon Barksdale]

I remember when Rick Perry entered the race, he started with a double digit lead on all of the other candidates and the media was ready to hand him to nomination.

 

[el retorno]

Yeah, that profile in courage is running as fast as he can from the immigration bill now so he can look like the rest of the 2015 hopefuls. It is kinda crazy though . . . absolutely none of them can win 2016 on such divisive politics unless there is an economic meltdown.

Which is why Christie has got a shot. The money will back him and money wins GOP primaries. Money will erase their memory.

Democrats should be scared of whenever republicans voice their displeasure at Christie as thats something that will play really well in the general.

 

[HylianTom]

Pretty much where I'm at now with politics.

All of that, plus the idea that it's Obama who has the power to name court appointees. Just knowing that there's no chance of Scalia clones being considered provides me with a base level of comfort.

 

[Avon Barksdale]

Which is why Christie has got a shot. The money will back him and money wins GOP primaries. Money will erase their memory.

Democrats should be scared of whenever republicans voice their displeasure at Christie as thats something that will play really well in the general.

That's what people said about Romney.

 

[Link]

All of that, plus the idea that it's Obama who has the power to name court appointees. Just knowing that there's no chance of Scalia clones being considered provides me with a base level of comfort.

Except they keep filibustering all of his appointments. The circuit courts have a ton of vacancies at the moment.

 

[el retorno]

That's what people said about Romney.

Romney made stupid comments in the primary (self deportation, 47 percent), he lost the race (Obama didn't win). He would have won if he'd gone only negative instead of trying to go further right than his opponents

 

[PhoenixDark]

ok, you were making a joke. I remember that quote just wasn't sure if it just was a poor choice of words

Honestly it's not a joke, they really believe that. And I definitely agree we're moving quite close to a point where many on the far right say "ok maybe they aren't so hard working and god fearing as advertised. Fuck them."

Rubio is stuck between a rock and a hard place. It seemed like the right was going to tolerate the immigration bill initially; Rubio was going on various far right shows and faced very little resistance. Now we're starting to see a redux of the health care fight: getting closer to that summer recess while the far right boils and festers over a bill that will destroy America. Tom Price is saying the bill is DOA in the House, far right commentators are rebelling against Rubio, the Weekly Standard is attacking him, etc.

Seems like this will boil down to what Boehner wants to do. Will he allow the House to create their own ridiculous bill that no one in the senate and White House supports, or will he bring the senate bill to the floor.

BTW I look forward to conservative commentators in 2015/2016 arguing that the bill failed because Obama's "culture of corruption and scandals" clouded the legislative process, thus dooming the bill.

 

[el retorno]

Honestly it's not a joke, they really believe that. And I definitely agree we're moving quite close to a point where many on the far right say "ok maybe they aren't so hard working and god fearing as advertised. Fuck them."

Rubio is stuck between a rock and a hard place. It seemed like the right was going to tolerate the immigration bill initially; Rubio was going on various far right shows and faced very little resistance. Now we're starting to see a redux of the health care fight: getting closer to that summer recess while the far right boils and festers over a bill that will destroy America. Tom Price is saying the bill is DOA in the House, far right commentators are rebelling against Rubio, the Weekly Standard is attacking him, etc.

Seems like this will boil down to what Boehner wants to do. Will he allow the House to create their own ridiculous bill that no one in the senate and White House supports, or will he bring the senate bill to the floor.

BTW I look forward to conservative commentators in 2015/2016 arguing that the bill failed because Obama's "culture of corruption and scandals" clouded the legislative process, thus dooming the bill.

If the bill gets out of the senate he'll bring it to a vote but he could kill it with amendments if he wants.

 

[gcubed]

That's what people said about Romney.

Romney ran away from his background when he was going for the nomination, we shall see what Christie does when it gets closer. The reaction to him is weird... He's conservative but doesn't belittle the President, so he's hated. The GOP is screwed by that contingent of their base.

 

[speculawyer]

All of that, plus the idea that it's Obama who has the power to name court appointees. Just knowing that there's no chance of Scalia clones being considered provides me with a base level of comfort.

Oh yeah, I forgot about that. That is big. A supreme court death would be one of the few things that could happen in the next 3 years.

Why is the GOP wasting their time on these faux scandals? It is not like Obama can do much anyway.

 

[Black Mamba]

How much of that younger vote will swing Republican when they get older though? I'm not sure how the trend typically looks.

Is there any data out there showing the voting patterns of age during say the 1980s?

People become more liberal as they age: http://www.livescience.com/2360-busting-myth-people-turn-liberal-age.html
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/15/getting-more-liberal-with-age/

The reason people think it's the opposite is that older people are conservative. But the reason that's true is because as youths, they were even more conservative and as they age became more liberal, but not nearly like their kids.

It's not that our old people are conservative because they got older, it's that they were born in a more conservative era and they were more liberal for that era but conservative for ours (and now they're less so).

So yes, the GOP is fucked.

 

[GaimeGuy]

Except they keep filibustering all of his appointments. The circuit courts have a ton of vacancies at the moment.

IIRC at the end of his first term over 10% of federal judgeships were vacant.

 

[Ignatz Mouse]

People become more liberal as they age: http://www.livescience.com/2360-busting-myth-people-turn-liberal-age.html
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/15/getting-more-liberal-with-age/

The reason people think it's the opposite is that older people are conservative. But the reason that's true is because as youths, they were even more conservative and as they age became more liberal, but not nearly like their kids.

It's not that our old people are conservative because they got older, it's that they were born in a more conservative era and they were more liberal for that era but conservative for ours (and now they're less so).

So yes, the GOP is fucked.

Interesting, and certainly matches my experience. I was a young conservative (moderate, but I still wince at some of my beliefs) and lived in a bastion of Reaganism. And on FB, those friends who haven't gone all Christ-y are all much more liberal now.

 

[Black Mamba]

Interesting, and certainly matches my experience. I was a young conservative (moderate, but I still wince at some of my beliefs) and lived in a bastion of Reaganism. And on FB, those friends who haven't gone all Christ-y are all much more liberal now.

It makes sense, paticularly on social issues. The more you live, the more exposed you are and thus the more tolerant you become.

Maybe when you're 18 you're all HELL NO ABORTION but then you're 26 and you and your girlfriend are struggling just to pay the rent and she gets pregnant and your perspective changes.

Or you move into a metropolitan city.

Anecdotally, I know older people who have switched on gay marriage, including my parents.

 

[Dominican Power]

http://stream.aljazeera.com/story/201306042350-0022805

Oh Egypt.

 

[Ignatz Mouse]

Or you move into a metropolitan city.

First a college town, then a major city. Certainly played a role.

 

[Oblivion]

I always wonder about this as well. My suspicion is that it's based more on the background changing than on people's views changing--what seemed liberal when you were young might shift to seem standard or even conservative when you get older. Imagine that you were a young supporter of women's suffrage in the World War I era. You probably lived to see the early days of feminism, and it probably shocked you and seemed like a nutty overturning of the social order. Things change, things move along without you.

Alex Pareene on Salon made a good point the other day:

All stories on the Republicans’ “youth vote” troubles mention that Reagan handily won young voters in 1984. Though back then, the youth vote was people (mostly white people) born in the 1950s and early 1960s, whose only adult experience with a Democratic president was Jimmy Carter. (Our current young people are much more likely to remember the relative prosperity of the Clinton years, and, more important, everything about the Bush years.) 1984 and 1988 were the only election cycles since the voting age was lowered to 18 that Republicans won young voters. The GOP has been on a steady decline with voters under 30 since 1988. Not coincidentally, voters under 30 are much more likely to be non-white now than in 1984 or 1988.

http://www.salon.com/2013/06/03/college_republicans_help_out_with_gop_rebanding_effort/

 

[Black Mamba]

Close to a third of the advocacy groups named by the Internal Revenue Service as recipients of special scrutiny during tax-exempt application reviews were liberal or neutral in political outlook, a leading nonpartisan tax newsletter reported after conducting an independent analysis of data released by the agency.

All told, around 470 groups were flagged as "potential political cases" between 2010 and 2012, including 298 whose experiences were analyzed in a Treasury Department inspector general's report. Because the IRS by law must not name groups that have not yet been approved or which were rejected, only a subset of their names was made public in May by the agency -- 176 cases.

Of these, "the majority of the groups selected for extra scrutiny probably matched the political criteria the IRS used and backed conservative causes, the Tea Party, or limited government generally," wrote Martin A. Sullivan in a June 3 piece in Tax Notes, a newsletter published by the Tax Analysts group. "But a substantial minority -- almost one third of the subset -- did not fit that description."

Non-conservative advocacy groups given special scrutiny by the IRS in or after 2010 included the Coffee Party USA, the alternative to the Tea Party movement that got a bunch of press in 2010, as well as such explicitly progressive groups as the Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada; Rebuild the Dream, founded by former Obama administration official Van Jones; and Progressives United Inc., which was founded by former Wisconsin senator Russ Feingold.

Also included in the special scrutiny were Progress Texas and Progress Missouri Inc.; Tie the Knot, which sells bow ties to raise money to promote same-sex marriage; and ProgressNow, which describes itself as "a year-round never-ending progressive campaign."

The targeting also rolled up centrist groups, such as the Across the Aisle Foundation -- the educational and cultural arm of No Labels, which worked to build momentum for an independent ticket for the presidency -- and politically neutral ones, such as The East Hampton Group for Good Government Inc., formed to encourage better leadership and management of the New York vacation town, and the League of Women Voters of Hawaii.

All of these groups were flagged by the IRS along with the Tea Party class of groups as "potential political cases" and were part of the 31 percent of groups given special scrutiny that were not clearly conservative.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics...e-irs-didnt-just-target-conservatives/276536/

Post this when someone says no one "progressive" was flagged.

 

[el retorno]

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/hecklers-disrupt-muslim-groups-event-in-tennessee-video

A public discussion held on the Muslim faith and the First Amendment in Manchester, Tennessee turned to chaos on Tuesday after several hundred people in attendance jeered and heckled a U.S. attorney and an FBI official who spoke about constitutional protections for various forms of speech.

“I came here because I wanted to learn something … but I couldn’t hear because the audience was so disrespectful,” one attendee complained to the Tenneseean. “I cried when I got here. It makes me really sad especially because these people say they’re Christians. The God I worship doesn’t teach hate.”

The event, sponsored by the American Muslim Advisory Council, also drew scores of protesters outside who began to yell “communist,” “socialist” and “Muslim” at law enforcement officials after the venue reached full capacity.

One protester in attendance disagreed with the two federal officials.

“I feel like (these) men are attempting to intimidate people with the freedom of speech and that bothers me,” he said, according to the Tennesean. “I would like to say that Muslims have a right to live here and worship freely, but I do not think they have the right to change American law to fit Sharia law. Violence no matter where it comes from bothers me.”

 

[rocketknight]

Remember that College Republican study from last week? Remember how they said the GOP needs to shut up on social issues?

Yeah, about that ...

But it turns out the College Republican National Committee is sponsoring the “Road to the Majority Conference,” hosted by Ralph Reed’s far-right Faith & Freedom Coalition, along with other anti-gay groups like Concerned Women for America, the Manhattan Declaration, the American Civil Rights Union and televangelist Pat Robertson’s Regent University.

In fact, some of the GOP’s most stringently anti-gay leaders like Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry and Rick Santorum are scheduled to address the conference, and Robertson will receive Lifetime Achievement Award.​

 

[besada]

Interesting, and certainly matches my experience. I was a young conservative (moderate, but I still wince at some of my beliefs) and lived in a bastion of Reaganism. And on FB, those friends who haven't gone all Christ-y are all much more liberal now.

Me too, although I was pretty liberal to begin with.

 

[Rhomega Beta]

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/hecklers-disrupt-muslim-groups-event-in-tennessee-video

I wonder if it has to do with this? Just found it posted on Facebook. http://www.libertynews.com/2013/05/...hold-muslim-sharia-anti-blasphemy-laws-in-tn/

The first Holder Department of Justice push to publicly defend Islamic Shari’a’s anti-blasphemy laws is scheduled for June, 4, 2013, in TN.

Brian Justice, the City Editor for a local TN paper, Tullahoma News, reported that Bill Killian, U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Tennessee, and Kenneth Moore, special agent in charge of the FBI’s Knoxville Division will be giving a community talk on the DOJ’s new effort to curtail potential offensive speech to Muslims in social media next week.

Tullahoma News reported that the speech will be called, “Public Disclosure in a Diverse Society [and] will be held from 6:30 to 8:30 p.m. on Tuesday, June 4, at the Manchester-Coffee County Conference Center, 147 Hospitality Blvd.”

bill killian us attorneyKillian says that the meeting is supposed to be, “an educational effort with civil rights laws as they play into freedom of religion and exercising freedom of religion.”

The senior DOJ officer said that his “presentation will also focus on Muslim culture and how, that although terrorist acts have been committed by some in the faith, they are no different from those in other religions.”

He also told local reporters that the DOJ and FBI would be working hand in hand with a pro-Shari’a Law Muslim civic group, called, American Muslim Advisory Council of Tennessee, to sponsor the event next week.

UK Muslim terroristKillian said that the event will focus heavily on “educating” local citizens about the Muslim culture with the goal of making the citizens aware of the perspective that Islam is a religion of peace, that happens to have a few radicals, who happen to, on occasion, pervert the religion into justification for terrorist attacks on people of other faiths.

Killian said that the DOJ would be prosecuting people who make posts in social media that violate Muslim people’s “civil rights.” He said that “people need to understand” that “that is what the law is.”

If you need any more evidence that the strict construction approach to interpreting the First Amendment is all but dead in Eric Holder’s Justice Department, Killian explained that his view of why the settlers came to America was that they were fleeing an oppressive Christian government in London.

He said, “It’s why we came here in the first place. In England, they were using Christianity to further their power in government. That’s why the First Amendment is there.”

It is important to note that Killian never once said that DOJ would defend American Christian’s rights to express their theological position on why they believe Islam and the facts surrounding historical patterns of Islamist terrorism are being misrepresented by Killian and the event’s Muslim organizers.

 

[thefro]

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics...e-irs-didnt-just-target-conservatives/276536/

Post this when someone says no one "progressive" was flagged.

Yep, and considering I bet Republican groups being created probably outnumbered Democratic groups by 2 to 1....

 

[Oblivion]

I always wonder about this as well. My suspicion is that it's based more on the background changing than on people's views changing--what seemed liberal when you were young might shift to seem standard or even conservative when you get older. Imagine that you were a young supporter of women's suffrage in the World War I era. You probably lived to see the early days of feminism, and it probably shocked you and seemed like a nutty overturning of the social order. Things change, things move along without you.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics...e-irs-didnt-just-target-conservatives/276536/

Post this when someone says no one "progressive" was flagged.

Nice "evidence" you got there.

The IRS flagged left wing groups as well merely to provide cover for them targeting right wing groups.

Oldest trick in the book.

 

[zero shift]

People become more liberal as they age: http://www.livescience.com/2360-busting-myth-people-turn-liberal-age.html
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/15/getting-more-liberal-with-age/

The reason people think it's the opposite is that older people are conservative. But the reason that's true is because as youths, they were even more conservative and as they age became more liberal, but not nearly like their kids.

It's not that our old people are conservative because they got older, it's that they were born in a more conservative era and they were more liberal for that era but conservative for ours (and now they're less so).

So yes, the GOP is fucked.

Good point. I do wonder this. My mother has become MUCH more liberal as time has gone on. Ten years ago she was very homophobic, ranted about black people and illegals, religious, and hated social loffers taking the money of hardworking Americans. She didn't vote Republican, but those things did bother her. Today she's likely for gay marriage (probably due to my sister being bi-sexual, that was an event for the family), is sympathetic toward Mexican immigrants ("they just want to look for a better life here because their country sucks"), practically an atheist (I introduced her to Bill Maher), and favors wealth distribution.

I just wonder why we are so much more stingy now when it comes to say welfare or nationalization than 30 years ago?

 

[el retorno]

I just wonder why we are so much more stingy now when it comes to say welfare or nationalization than 30 years ago?

Racism. Dog-Whistle Politics. We don't want to give to "undeserving people" which has be conflated in the media to mean blacks and other minorities

Read this. http://www.amazon.com/dp/0226293653/?tag=neogaf0e-20

 

[TacticalFox88]

Good point. I do wonder this. My mother has become MUCH more liberal as time has gone on. Ten years ago she was very homophobic, ranted about black people and illegals, religious, and hated social loffers taking the money of hardworking Americans. She didn't vote Republican, but those things did bother her. Today she's likely for gay marriage (probably due to my sister being bi-sexual, that was an event for the family), is sympathetic toward Mexican immigrants ("they just want to look for a better life here because their country sucks"), practically an atheist (I introduced her to Bill Maher), and favors wealth distribution.

I just wonder why we are so much more stingy now when it comes to say welfare or nationalization than 30 years ago?

We're not stingy at ALL. Period. Americans LOVE welfare and and public works.....until minorities start receiving benefits.

 

[el retorno]

We're not stingy at ALL. Period. Americans LOVE welfare and and public works.....until minorities start receiving benefits.

Its not overt and intentional most of the time (for the vast majority) its the fact they've been feed stereotypes that are racist. Most people don't sit there and think I hate blacks to be fair