Bloggingheads Community

Bloggingheads Community (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/index.php)
-   Diavlog comments (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=9)
-   -   The Week in Blog: Supporting Nuance (Bill Scher & Matt Lewis) (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?t=6597)

bjkeefe 03-26-2011 01:32 PM

Re: I think Matt was wrong ...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by DenvilleSteve (Post 202135)
the republican base wants the budget to be balanced. It wants America to be economically self reliant. Speaking that message to the base would not scare off centrist voters.

As kezboard notes, there is a world of difference between speaking to the general public and running in the GOP primaries. It appears to be unanimously agreed upon among virtually everyone who runs for the Republican nomination that letting anyone outrun you to your right is an unacceptable risk. Additionally, there are specific boxes (Muslins=existential threat, AGW=false, abortion=unambiguously evil, taxes=ditto, Jeebus+US=exceptional without qualification, etc.) that, again, no one running for the Republican nomination dares to leave unchecked.

As far as anyone who has any clout in these campaigns believes, it's a two-stage process: first you win the primaries by hurling more red meat and poison than everyone else, then you spend the general election pretending you spent the previous six months tossing little wrapped candies that no one could possible dislike.

eeeeeeeli 03-26-2011 05:57 PM

Re: I think Matt was wrong ...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bjkeefe (Post 202150)
As kezboard notes, there is a world of difference between speaking to the general public and running in the GOP primaries. It appears to be unanimously agreed upon among virtually everyone who runs for the Republican nomination that letting anyone outrun you to your right is an unacceptable risk. Additionally, there are specific boxes (Muslins=existential threat, AGW=false, abortion=unambiguously evil, taxes=ditto, Jeebus+US=exceptional without qualification, etc.) that, again, no one running for the Republican nomination dares to leave unchecked.

As far as anyone who has any clout in these campaigns believes, it's a two-stage process: first you win the primaries by hurling more red meat and poison than everyone else, then you spend the general election pretending you spent the previous six months tossing little wrapped candies that no one could possible dislike.

Just once, I'd like to see a version of this rabidity on the left. The closest we may have come was, what, Kucinich?

But he's a relative square. I want some serious uber-Michael Moore, 9-11 truther, atheist, anti-God, pro-masturbation, bicycle-riding, organic farming, pot smoking lesbian chick with hairy armpits.

You know what's funny, is that there are so many ways you can go with leftists. Yet on the right it's always been these sort of clean cut golf and brandy types. I do like the relative diversity you're seeing with the Tea Party though. You got your bikers, your hunters, your 32nd level John Galt space marines. Here's to the 'Nuge headlining CPAC 2015.

Ocean 03-26-2011 07:00 PM

Re: I think Matt was wrong ...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by eeeeeeeli (Post 202166)
I want some serious uber-Michael Moore, 9-11 truther, atheist, anti-God, pro-masturbation, bicycle-riding, organic farming, pot smoking lesbian chick with hairy armpits.

You're so three decades ago.

DenvilleSteve 03-27-2011 10:29 AM

Re: I think Matt was wrong ...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bjkeefe (Post 202150)
As kezboard notes, there is a world of difference between speaking to the general public and running in the GOP primaries. It appears to be unanimously agreed upon among virtually everyone who runs for the Republican nomination that letting anyone outrun you to your right is an unacceptable risk. Additionally, there are specific boxes (Muslins=existential threat, AGW=false, abortion=unambiguously evil, taxes=ditto, Jeebus+US=exceptional without qualification, etc.) that, again, no one running for the Republican nomination dares to leave unchecked.

how does this line of thinking explain actual republican party nominees for the last 50 years? Ford defeated Reagan. George Bush, Bob Dole, John McCain. GWB ran on open borders immigration. Pat Buchanan lost. A current favorite, Chris Christie is not a social conservative.

Checkout Michele Bachmann. I like her a lot. http://www.mediaite.com/tv/rep-miche...-back-in-2012/

eeeeeeeli 03-27-2011 11:03 AM

Re: I think Matt was wrong ...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by DenvilleSteve (Post 202221)
how does this line of thinking explain actual republican party nominees for the last 50 years? Ford defeated Reagan. George Bush, Bob Dole, John McCain. GWB ran on open borders immigration. Pat Buchanan lost. A current favorite, Chris Christie is not a social conservative.

Checkout Michele Bachmann. I like her a lot. http://www.mediaite.com/tv/rep-miche...-back-in-2012/

It's all in the messaging. There's a difference between running on ideas that appeal to your base in the primary and running in the national election and governing. All parties do it. A smart candidate can appear all things to all people.

Ocean 03-27-2011 11:15 AM

Re: I think Matt was wrong ...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by DenvilleSteve (Post 202221)
A current favorite, Chris Christie is not a social conservative.

You've got to believe the man. It would cause his death, one way or the other.

Quote:

Checkout Michele Bachmann. I like her a lot. http://www.mediaite.com/tv/rep-miche...-back-in-2012/
Not in a million years.

handle 03-28-2011 02:51 PM

Re: The Week in Blog: Supporting Nuance (Bill Scher & Matt Lewis)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by badhatharry (Post 202054)

Quote:

Originally Posted by harkin (Post 201971)
Watching Anthony Weiner become the new Alan Grayson has been something to see.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bjkeefe (Post 202011)
I wonder why harkin has this sudden interest in Congressman Weiner.

Quote:

Originally Posted by handle (Post 202014)
OMG! The talking points based on misinformation have been debunked! It's subject changin' time!

Quote:

Originally Posted by badhatharry (Post 202020)
Does this mean a new government agency? The United States Department of Waivers. Maybe they can get someone from the IRS to manage it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by handle (Post 202021)
You don't have to do everything I say. But thanks for verifying my behavioral foresight.

Done holding your hand BH. FYI, glasses do make you look smart, but you still have to back it up with , ... oh ... I don't know... uh... smartness?


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:17 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.