Cruz wins New Hampshire

[roo_ster]

Maybe it's time for "socons" to stop supporting a losing agenda like "fiscal conservatism" and work with people who are truly concerned about the direction our country is headed.

That tonic was as harsh going down as it was true. 

When is the last time we saw this kind of turnout for the "March for More Cap Gains Tax Cuts"
https://www.google.com/search?q=2015+march+for+life&num=50&safe=active&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjkl9im2-3KAhUEmIMKHSPqAuwQsAQILw&biw=957&bih=635&dpr=1.25

Getting kicked in the dick repeatedly IS better than getting shot in the dick repeatedly

Ayup.

Without correcting our moral failings, we will not correct the fiscal issues. Those are a symptom of the real problem. The real problem is the country has grown more and more short-sighted and selfish.

Pretty much.

Biology > Culture > Politics > (Things policritters do)

We have a chicken / predecessor disagreement.  I assert that it is possible for someone to want fiscal sanity, and be pro-... Fill in whatever you hate.  If you can't make common cause with this, call it libertarian person, then both the socon and the libertarian will wind up in the same squalid predicament, with neither economic freedom nor a morally upright government.  A more libertarian government may not halt the spread of all that icky pro-gay crap, but they also won't jail or fine the baker who refuses to serve a gay wedding cake.  They may not obstruct the building of a mosque in your community, but they won't jail you for putting a nativity scene in view of a public street.

Is having to promote your cultural norms without .gov enforcement worth accepting a smothering nanny-state that is both antithetical to your beliefs AND hellbent on monetary, fiscal, and economic suicide?

1. Again:  Biology > Culture > Politics > (Things policritters do).  Not chicken/egg conundrum.

2. Common cause between socons and libertarians was due to the existential threat of communism during the Cold War.  Not interested in another one of those, thanks.

3. Put simply, there are a heap more votes to be had from working class whites currently languishing in the Dem party than there will ever be in the libertarian wing of...anything. 

4. Socon policritters have more fiscally conservative records than solib/fiscon policritters in any case.

5. Libertarians were fine with using the gov't to get their ends and did not give a hoot about religious liberty as long as they got their pseudomarriage.  Not seeing where socons owe libertarians the time of day.  Actions have consequences.  From my perspective, libertarians screwed the pooch on on the fiscal side of the house by allying with the cultural marxists and breaking the socon/libertarian compact. 

[Ron]

...

5. Libertarians were fine with using the gov't to get their ends and did not give a hoot about religious liberty as long as they got their pseudomarriage.  Not seeing where socons owe libertarians the time of day.  Actions have consequences.  From my perspective, libertarians screwed the pooch on on the fiscal side of the house by allying with the cultural marxists and breaking the socon/libertarian compact.  

While there has been some movement on the issue libertarians are by and large open borders advocates also. Free movement of people and capital across the borders.

I have found their arguments to be sound in theory but a total disaster wherever implemented.

We are not the world, we are the United States of America

[Hutch]

Rooster, this is an honest, as opposed to "leading" or "rhetorical", question.  Do you really see no difference between "mind your own business" and "Cultural Marxism"?

[roo_ster]

Rooster, this is an honest, as opposed to "leading" or "rhetorical", question.  Do you really see no difference between "mind your own business" and "Cultural Marxism"?

Irrelevant regarding libertarinaism.

The libertarians have not been pushing "mind your own business" for quite some time, now.  They are not a "mind your own business" movement anymore. 

[makattak]

We have a chicken / predecessor disagreement.  I assert that it is possible for someone to want fiscal sanity, and be pro-... Fill in whatever you hate.  If you can't make common cause with this, call it libertarian person, then both the socon and the libertarian will wind up in the same squalid predicament, with neither economic freedom nor a morally upright government.  A more libertarian government may not halt the spread of all that icky pro-gay crap, but they also won't jail or fine the baker who refuses to serve a gay wedding cake.  They may not obstruct the building of a mosque in your community, but they won't jail you for putting a nativity scene in view of a public street.

Is having to promote your cultural norms without .gov enforcement worth accepting a smothering nanny-state that is both antithetical to your beliefs AND hellbent on monetary, fiscal, and economic suicide?

I've never suggested it is impossible to want fiscal conservatism while wanting licentiousness. I'm arguing it's been clear that allying with people like that has not produced fiscal conservatism.

Addtionally, I'm more interested in preventing the government from promoting OTHER social norms and stopping it from discouraging moral behaviour.

Further, so far, this is not a fully serious idea. I'm just sick of getting told that my erstwhile allies are not only ashamed of me but are certain they'd be better off without being allied with me.

This tells me I ought to be looking for other allies since they are signalling they are not trustworthy.

Your post suggests a naivety as well. We have the pro-gay enforcement arm of the state that extends to schooling and, as you noted, bakeries, venues, etc... Just how, exactly, am I to expect the libertarians who gleefully support those outcomes as "well, that's what happens when you oppose gay marriage!" will suddenly become interested in actual liberty?

Libertarians were MORE than happy to ally with the leftists who supported oppressing dissenters in order to get their preferred outcome of government enforced recognition of gay unions.

This is just like when the problems of open borders are noted (e.g. a welfare state with open borders CANNOT survive), libertarians ignore them and push ahead with the open borders arguments. Clearly the "fiscal conservatism" isn't all that big of a concern here, either.

[brimic]

I can't believe we're rehashing the conservative vs libertarian divide.  Right wingers want to equate "minding your own business" with "crushing all moral rectitude".  It ain't so.

I'm all about 'doing my own thing' and others 'doing their own thing', but inevitably people expect payout for their bad choices.

[AJ Dual]

I'm all about 'doing my own thing' and others 'doing their own thing', but inevitably people expect payout for their bad choices.

That's the thing with the Libertarians. They really DO have a "Well, too bad. You're going to die in the gutter then."-plank in the party platform. Of course, in reality it's "Department XYZ is eliminated." And when you're actually told to FOAD and figure it out for yourself, a heartening number of human beings actually do just that instead of dying in the gutter...

Can't blame them for leading with their best stuff, pot, gayz0r marriage, RKBA/gunz etc. first though, can you?  

If Micro were still here, he'd scold me for it, but I do agree you'll never see a Libertarian revolution in America. People are far too "Whud about muh ROADS?" on both the left and right to ever really go for it IMO. If we're lucky, Libertarians and Cons will just be able to "go Galt" by sidestepping the state through tech, Bitcoin, 3D printing or whatever etc. But I'm consistently told that being a crypto-libertarian is futile. (shrug)

[brimic]

That's the thing with the Libertarians. They really DO have a "Well, too bad. You're going to die in the gutter then."-plank in the party platform. Of course, in reality it's "Department XYZ is eliminated." And when you're actually told to FOAD and figure it out for yourself, a heartening number of human beings actually do just that instead of dying in the gutter...

If they led with that and were able to make good on such promises, I'd back them 100%. As it is, .gov infantilizes grown ass adults to the point that enough of them are unwilling to take responsibility for their own actions that it threatens to bankrupt our country.

The fatal flaw in the libertarian philosophy is the non-aggression principal. They are far less likely line up and shoot the oxygen thieves who would rob them at gunpoint than be lined up and shot themselves.

[Hutch]

Irrelevant regarding libertarinaism.

The libertarians have not been pushing "mind your own business" for quite some time, now.  They are not a "mind your own business" movement anymore. 

I guess that, just like the TEA party movement got hijacked by SoCons, the small "l" libertarian crowd has to go find someplace else to sit in the lunchroom, since the SJW's have swamped our table.

Bye, Felicia.

[lee n. field]

Cruz wins New Hampster

Vermin Supreme has a solid fourth place showing.

[Ron]

I guess Trump is like Obamacare.

Obamacare had to be passed to find out what was in it and now we have to elect Donald to find out how he will govern.

Immigration and trade barriers. Even if he doesn't sell us out on those issues how is he going to be on all the others?

Seems appropriate that we're being asked to spin the wheel and play a game of chance and elect a casino owner.

[Perd Hapley]

I guess Trump is like Obamacare.

Obamacare had to be passed to find out what was in it and now we have to elect Donald to find out how he will govern.

Immigration and trade barriers. Even if he doesn't sell us out on those issues how is he going to be on all the others?

Seems appropriate that we're being asked to spin the wheel and play a game of chance and elect a casino owner.

You just won the internet.

The whole, dang internet.

I guess that, just like the TEA party movement got hijacked by SoCons,

I suspect the Tea Party was always composed largely of so-cons.

[Fitz]

I guess that, just like the TEA party movement got hijacked by SoCons, the small "l" libertarian crowd has to go find someplace else to sit in the lunchroom, since the SJW's have swamped our table.

Bye, Felicia.

and when small 'l' libertarians vote Libertarian this general election, then it'll be "WAAAAH, HILLARY WON BECAUSE OF THOSE DAMNED LIBERTARIANS"

[Hawkmoon]

As I understand it, all of the early primaries/caucuses must allocate proportionally. They aren't allowed to be all or nothing until later in the year.

Well, I guess there's proportionally, and then there's "proportionally."

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/268935-clinton-likely-to-leave-nh-with-same-number-of-delegates

[Fly320s]

Well, I guess there's proportionally, and then there's "proportionally."

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/268935-clinton-likely-to-leave-nh-with-same-number-of-delegates

And people think have a democracy.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

My impression is Trump would seek to make the bureaucracy efficient before ever considering removing it.  Mostly that is judging by his response about Obamacare a while back.

Trump is still a national Healthcare shill

This week anyway

Curse you for beating me to the joke!

Honestly, I had hoped Cruz might take second, but it wasn't Kasich I thought he'd be battling with. That was surprising. (And here's hoping Chris Christie beats Kasich in South Carolina!)

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

[Ron]

Trump is still a national Healthcare shill

This week anyway

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

Ran across this quote regarding Trump. I think it speaks to his appeal.

If his only purpose today is to be the human wrecking ball that destroys the useless GOP and Trotskyite political correctness both, he will be remembered by history as a great man.

[MechAg94]

I heard Trump credited with being the main reason Jeb Bush has little or no support.  For that alone I appreciate him. 

[Perd Hapley]

I agree with the last two posts. I very much appreciate what Trump has done in those respects. Ideally, he would accomplish all of that, and Cruz would go on to win the nomination and the general. And make Trump ambassador to Mexico. 

[Hutch]

You just won the internet.

The whole, dang internet.




I suspect the Tea Party was always composed largely of so-cons.

I am a so-con, by personal inclination.  And I was thrilled, literally, by the rapid rise of the TEA party.  It was kinda libertarian, without the wookie suits.  The entire reason for its formation was to reign in spending and taxes.  Period flippin' dot.  No commentary was offered on the SJW causes of the day.  But noooooooo, we get a bunch of pisswits, who, having seen the parade marching just haaaaad to race out in front of it to see if they could viewed as the leaders.  My hand to God, I don't see how any left wing statist cabal could have castrated the movement any better than the Palin, Santorum et al did.

[Perd Hapley]

I am a so-con, by personal inclination.  And I was thrilled, literally, by the rapid rise of the TEA party.  It was kinda libertarian, without the wookie suits.  The entire reason for its formation was to reign in spending and taxes.  Period flippin' dot.  No commentary was offered on the SJW causes of the day.  But noooooooo, we get a bunch of pisswits, who, having seen the parade marching just haaaaad to race out in front of it to see if they could viewed as the leaders.  My hand to God, I don't see how any left wing statist cabal could have castrated the movement any better than the Palin, Santorum et al did.

Do you have any more information on how that all occurred? There must be a lot of internet ink spilled on that subject. I suppose I should look into it. All I remember about the rise and decline of the Tea Party was that we got a bunch of Republicans elected to the House in 2010, and then the Occupiers began to get a lot of press, and the Tea Party was no longer such a big story. Or maybe people were just done protesting, thinking they had accomplished the goal by "winning" the House.

Another glaring lacuna in my fund of knowledge, that I ought to fill.

[AJ Dual]

Do you have any more information on how that all occurred? There must be a lot of internet ink spilled on that subject. I suppose I should look into it. All I remember about the rise and decline of the Tea Party was that we got a bunch of Republicans elected to the House in 2010, and then the Occupiers began to get a lot of press, and the Tea Party was no longer such a big story. Or maybe people were just done protesting, thinking they had accomplished the goal by "winning" the House.

Another glaring lacuna in my fund of knowledge, that I ought to fill.

It's power was also it's weakness.

The Tea Party was so genuinely grassroots, it had no leadership or any mechanism to say who or what was "Tea Party" and who and what was not. There was no central comitte or leader to declare something genuine Tea Party or a pretender.

All sorts of GOPe, big-gov "We just spend 5% less than Democrats"-type socons were able to try and co-opt it with any sort of "outsider" status in any election, or position of punditry where their ability to pose as such wasn't completely laughable. And worse, the Left was able to also do the same, and define whatever boogeyman they wanted to as being "Tea Party" as well.

And it's to the point that the entire concept of what was "Tea Party" got so muddied and diluted at the same time, it kind of fell apart.

I even know a lot of more liberty-cons, moderate-cons and others who turn up their nose at "Tea Party" now because both the confusion, and the demonization have penetrated to the point they believe it's Lyndon LaRouche, Family Research Council, and John Bircher stuff now. 

Hell, Rubio WAS one of the biggest Tea Party movement candidates, where he challenged Christ, and ousted him. Now a bunch of the electorate views him like he's almost as GOPe as Jeb!

Further, I think you're right. The grassroots Tea Party kind of faded out at the same time after '12, once Obama won his second term and the GOP primary process failed to bend to Tea Party desires and chose Romney. And yeah, as the GOP got control of Congress, there just wasn't that much to fight over anymore until now. And some of that angst, what was left has been sucked up by Trump.

That's at least my gut-level impressions of how it devolved.

[roo_ster]

Tea party got coopted by the establishment.  Though socons were in it from the getgo it was not a socon focused critter.  Focus was fiscal responsibility.  Tea party had outsized influence in 2010 and 2014 races but could not overcome romneys lack of appeal to the base in 2012.  Tea party even endorsed the senator scott brown from mass who was in no way a socon.

[Hutch]

Fistful, your question to me was answered better by others than I could.  I think the only real blow thrown at it from the left was the scurrilous, possibly slanderous remark made by some black congressman who claimed to have been spit on by some folks at a TEA party rally.  No evidence was offered, and contemporaneous video of his march past them never revealed it.

Upon reflection, it seems a bit like the story line from Braveheart.  Infighting, backstabbing and envy among the nominal allies did what the true adversary could never do.