Handwriting On The Wall?


I’ll be very brief.

We have NOT had anyone close to being a conservative in the White House since Reagan.

This year will be no exception - it will mark more than 3 decades since Reagan was elected.

The Republican Party is NOT undertaking a shift to the Right - not at all. As successful as Reagan was, the Republican Party/voters learned nothing.

Should Clinton be elected odds are hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, of illegal aliens will be granted a path to citizenship - in other words, the invasion of ready-made Democrats will have born fruit for the Left.

If such a massive demographic shift were to take place, I see absolutely no way in hell a Conservative ever ascends to the presidency again. No way, no how.

Couple this prospect with the drastic Left-Wing shift on the SCOTUS that will without any doubt take place under Hillary and one can see the handwriting on the wall.

Not a pretty picture - but an accurate one. IMHO


Your accessment is accurate, but you should also recognize that there has not been a conservative for his time, other than Reagan, since Calvin Coolidge left office in 1929. All of the other Republican presidents have been moderates. In fact the party nominees have been moderates, with the exceptions of Goldwater and Reagan.

A lot of Republicans in the early 1950s who supported Robert Taft felt the same way as the Cruz people feel today. When you came right down to it the truly conservative forces have not won the GOP presidential nomination very many times since Coolidge. Since the New Deal, it has been very hard for any presidential candidate to say “no” to people’s demands for free stuff.


Yep. Too many Republicans don’t seem to understand that immigration is the single most important issue. Because if we keep things going like it is now, they have no chance of ever winning another national election in the future. 2020, 2024, slight, slight chance(requires luck). But beyond that, it’s over. And that’s without amnesty. With it, it’s already over.


You’re talking as if RINOs are this country. Once they get to DC they lose all perspective. THIS COUNTRY IS conservative by and large. You have a dishonest media and the prospect of money, lots of money and power that influences these guys. We have elected who we thought WERE conservatives and they screwed us to the wall. SURPRISE. Rene Ellmers…and Scott Brown just to name a couple. Some appointed…supreme court comes to mind.

We have rammed this through…with no leader, no organizing committee, NOTHING. All the while everyone said, Trump won’t make it to the…fill in the blank. AND HE DID. HE is not the leader of this movement…he is the chosen figure head. He has the guts to say what we think. How do you not support that. We have a 50/50 chance. With Hillary you have a 100% chance it is gonna get worse.

You know what Hillary stands for. Are you REALLY gonna go that way? Don Trump is a citizen, not a politician. He doesn’t know politi-speech. He is OUR choice …for good or ill. He has the potential to take this country back or begin the task. Seeing what my alternative is, I’m with Trump.


You’re talking as if RINOs are this country. Once they get to DC they lose all perspective. THIS COUNTRY IS conservative by and large.

This country is not conservative any more. We are an insular group. We listen to each other and think that much of the rest of the company thinks like us. They don’t. The schools have indoctrinated the young people from kindergarten to college. Many of them now think that socialism is the way to go. Many of them are buried in mountains of college debt with degrees that can’t get them a job. They want relief and expect the government to give it to them. Why do you think that Bernie Sanders got so many of their votes?

Minorities are addicted to welfare and food stamps. Lyndon Johnson, with a push from the 1964 Goldwater campaign, which opposed the Civil Rights Act of that year, changed a huge number of them into Democrats. Now amnesty for illegal aliens presents us with a no-win situation. If we approve of it, we say that our country has no borders, and we don’t get their vote any way. If we oppose it, we are labeled as 'bigots."

The people who “pull the wagon” in this country - the small business owners, the people to go to work every day, the inventors and innovators - are all getting squeezed and screwed. We are out voted and have no say because the establishment Republican Party has failed us. Those guys get to Washington and the system buys them out if they ever had any interest in changing things in the first place.

I wish I could be more optimistic. There are many old guys of my generation who hope that our money holds out. On paper I might look “rich,” but if the Democrats start attacking our capital and savings as well as our income, all of that could change.

The only saving grace might be that the rich Democrats don’t want to have their savings taken away from them either. Some of them really make me angry. Their attitude is, “I made my money and now I want to change the world by making it socialist. YOU don’t deserve have a chance to do what I did because that’s not fair.” Screw them! I hate that attitude.


THIS COUNTRY IS conservative by and large.
SendGop made my point but I’ll resay it. The fact is that in the last 2 elections conservatives lost out. It was close but a loss is a loss. And conservatives need to realize that they are now out numbered & adapt new ways to win voters.


It really depends on how you’re defining liberal and conservative. Most people in the country have pretty similar interests. I’d say at least %75-80 of people agree on the vast majority of things. They may have variation in scale, but have matching directions. The reason everyone feels like it’s so polarized is because the media(and sites like this) tend to focus on every single difference. And even the differences tend to be strategic differences, rather than different goals.

People on the Right generally oppose welfare because they think it disempowers people, and is an unfair burden on people who are working and making a living income. People on the Left focus on the “helping people” angle, because they believe without the assistance, people would potentially become homeless, or if no safety nets existed at all, could even die. Now fundamentally, they both have the same goal. Nobody wants large portions of the population to be starving under a bridge. It’s just that conservatives focus on the inaction caused by the system, while the liberals focus on the imagined rescuing of the person in plight.

I know I frequently see conservatives try and typecast it as liberals trying to “make everyone dependent” but it’s not a sinister goal. They’re trying to help people, even if that’s making the problem worse. Similarly I see liberals typecast the conservative position as being heartless and not caring how much people suffer. Which is just as false. Conservatives believe that by removing welfare, a person is empowered to work, and leads a more dignified life as a result. Neither side is actually intending to do evil. But I tend to see each side accuse the other of doing so. It’s not correct.

So even when there are substantive differences in approach, both sides actually have the same goal. Liberals and Conservatives both want everyone to be able to eat and take care of themselves, they just have two different ways of going about it. It’s difficult to deal with problems though when you consider the person with similar goals but different tactics to be evil. That’s not helpful, but it’s all too common.


I can believe everything you say. But here’s the problem. Liberals want to help people with my money. If they want to help people then why can’t they just do it and leave me out of it. I have my own interests that I prefer to fund and most of them are at odds with the democrat party platform.


That is only if you think that Hispanics are permanently ~70% or higher Democrat. Republicans won at least 40% of the Hispanic vote in 2004 and that demographic has very low turnout rates.


Actually Caroline, I think it would be more accurate to say, Liberals want to buy people’s votes with your money.


The new breed of Democrat is out for the power and the money. Hillary represents the worst of the lot. She wants power and money and really does not care whom she steps upon to get it. To her people at just tools to be used or discarded or defeated if they don’t conform to her ambitions. That’s why she is the most dangerous major party nominee in history.

Sanders on the other hand is a true socialist believer. He thinks that an all powerful state can fix every woe and make has perfect as possible. He’s wrong because even the most benevolent of dictators can not gather, plan, process and implement all of that information properly. As a more practical matter the power corrupts those who hold it.


[quote=“Lord_Brennus, post:9, topic:49161”]
That is only if you think that Hispanics are permanently ~70% or higher Democrat. Republicans won at least 40% of the Hispanic vote in 2004 and that demographic has very low turnout rates.
[/quote]You can’t use the outlier result and expect it to resemble the new normal. Even if they turn out at only a 50% rate, legalizing 20+ million people who skew 30-70% Dem is going to tilt the overall electorate by 4 million votes. Last time, Obama beat Romney by 5 million votes. It would take a 3.5% win and run it up to 7%. What candidate do you think is going to be able to beat a natural -7(or more) point spread?


The GOP is saturated with Anti Conservatives at every level and the same is true of the Democrat Party, enough where both Party’s can be confident that no Conservative will ever win their nomination to run for President.

But these Anti Conservatives are only a plurality in the GOP and in the Democrat rank and file they still have to buy their own votes precisely because their own members are not on board philosophically with their agenda.

Together these two Party’s have about 70 percent of the registered voters in the United States and less than half of each Party’s membership is Anti Conservative, because of the Party structures a Conservative can’t win a nomination in these two Party’s but I still believe that a majority of Americans is disgusted at the horrific choices they keep getting in National elections every 4 years.

If a political Party existed that embraced Conservative Principles and made Conservative arguments and was then rejected by the people, I would be on board with the “A Conservative can never win” mantra. But as long as the two Party’s that remain the biggest are the Trump GOP and the Clinton Democrat Party we will never hear a Conservative message or get to see how the American people would respond to a Conservative message in a general election.

The GOP and the Democrat Party want no no part of Conservatism, they clearly want Trump/Clinton Statism; but that is not the same thing as saying that America has now abandoned Conservatism.


Franklin at the Constitutional convention:

“In these sentiments, Sir, I agree to this Constitution, with all its faults—if they are such; because I think a general Government necessary for us, and there is no form of government but what may be a blessing to the people, if well administered; and I believe, farther, that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in despotism, as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as to need despotic government, being incapable of any other.