(08-25-2018 04:03 PM)Zombiewoof Wrote: [ -> ] (08-25-2018 10:19 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: [ -> ] (08-25-2018 10:09 AM)Kronke Wrote: [ -> ]Rand is the best, and who I support for 2024 at this point in time.
I couldn’t care less about the max boot, bill kristol segment of the party, they’re free to become dems. Their brand is so cringeworthy and toxic, and they are so few in numbers, that I don’t think it will make a difference.
Remember, neocons were dems until they got turned off by the antiwar, sex-and-drugs pop culture of the 1960s. Folks like Irving Kristol (Bill's father), Norman Podhoretz, and Daniel Patrick Moynihan were democrats, at least until the late 60s/early 70s.
Just FYI, Moynihan was always a liberal Democrat, but worked in key positions under Nixon and Ford.
I know, but he was definitely a neocon. He mainly reinforces my point about democrat origins. You know who might have been the quintessential neocon?
Harry Truman. Liberal (for his day but not by modern standards) social policy, strong anti-communist.
And many of FDR's inner circle, particularly those in the war cabinet, might be considered neocons. I'd probably agree more with some of them than with where neocons have gone now.
Quote:The neo-cons are at the heart of what has gone wrong with the Republican party. After the emergence of the Tea Party, neo-cons simultaneously were gaining power positions within the GOP or converting people within the Tea Party groups to their way of thinking. Traditional conservatism gave way within the GOP to interventionist foreign policy. But there was enough common ground (especially on social issues) between the old Tea Party groups, which were largely party independent economic conservatives, and the neo-cons that they had become almost indistinguishable.
When George W. Bush ran for president, he had just enough neo-cons among his inner circle that they took a foothold in his administration and were the primary decision-makers of his two terms. The more that neo-cons have driven policy within the Republican Party, the more dissatisfaction you have seen from true conservatives about the direction the party has taken.
At least in part, that is why you have so many Republicans and people with conservative principles rejecting much of what they have seen the party becoming under Trump. It seems to be becoming the party of whatever Trump says or wants, leaving little remaining of the old conservative Republican Party.
To some of us, that party isn't rooted in principles as much as whim. It isn't a party that you can point to and hope to suggest to an independent or political neophyte that he should want to be part of it. Because political parties should stand based on philosophies of principles, not a particular issue of the day. For example, a party can have a principle of reasoned immigration and protection of our nation's borders. That is a general statement of philosophy. The wisdom of building a wall to achieve that goal can be debated without changing the underlying philosophy. But to those who worship at the feet of Trump, any disagreement with his proposals must mean that you are an MSNBC watching, Clinton loving, social justice warrior. Any challenge to his methods, manner or policy proposals makes you a closet Democrat and "the enemy."
So be it. I remain a conservative, even if the party I chose as a child no longer wants to include me. I was elected to office as a Republican, but no longer recognize what was my party for almost 60 years. I will never be a Democrat, a liberal, an SJW, a libertarian or a neo-con. The values of true conservatism is IMO what many of us celebrate and hold dear as Americans. Sadly, I just don't see much of it in the GOP anymore and Trump is the final nail in that coffin.
I see it only slightly differently. I think neocons gained the ascendancy with GWB, particularly Cheney and Rummy. I think the TEA Party was kind of a populist, fiscal conservative, anti-neocon group at its beginnings. But after the debacle of 2008, it was about the only positive thing republicans had going for them, so the neocons kind of co-opted the Tea Party label (maybe the proper term for those neocons is teabaggers, as in carpetbaggers).
I think of Trump as more populist than anything else. Populists usually arise when people are dissatisfied with the options before them, and I think many republicans were totally disgusted with what the party had morphed into. Populists do surprisingly well as candidates (Huey Long, Edwin Edwards, Juan Peron) but are usually horrible running governments. They can be left or right. Usually their policies are fairly shallow, it's more with me or against me stuff.
Like you, the Republican Party has left me, at least nationally. I don't see anywhere to go. I can't go for the socialist/communist SJW democrats. I counted on republicans to be my barrier against that, but they have pretty well screwed the pooch on that. I would like to see a party based on principle. Newt tried running on issues in 1994, and that worked pretty well, but they then abandoned that to play personality politics with Monicagate and have not recovered since. I think they have to run on principle, because democrats will win personality contests (their hip-pocket MSM friends will see to it).
Here's what I'd like to see as lynchpin ideas:
1) Balanced budget (without at least a serious effort in this, we are kidding ourselves)
2) Social welfare system (you have to have one) based on a safety net principle rather than wholesale redistribution of income and wealth
3) Broader, flatter, and lower taxes, like the rest of the world, including a consumption tax (to be more competitive in the global economy)
4) Strongest military in the world, by far, and never use it, because nobody dares pick on us, and we don't go meddling in their business
5) Reasonable immigration and strong border protection
6) Bismarck universal private health care instead of single-payer (like Canada) or single-provider (like UK)
Yes, Trump is a populist and with populism, you don't need depth of principles or thought. You just need angry or generally dissatisfied people, play to their fears and howl at the moon.