It may not be a core "conservative" belief, but it seems to be a core "Republican" belief.

 

And Im not saying Republican's are conservative, that depends on how you define conservative.

Much like your view of the tea party, this is all just so wrong. A core of the election strategy? Really? First, it's not a 100% republican only issue. And second, it still only involves a minority of the party, not the majority. It might grab more headlines than others, but that doesn't make it a "core" to the conservative belief.

In 2004, GOTV operations based on anti-gay amendments was flat out at the top of the GOP list of election strategies, just like protesting Mosques is there this year.

Much like your view of the tea party, this is all just so wrong. A core of the election strategy? Really? First, it's not a 100% republican only issue. And second, it still only involves a minority of the party, not the majority. It might grab more headlines than others, but that doesn't make it a "core" to the conservative belief.

 

If you don't think Gay Marriage amendments had anything to do with Bush winning reelection in 2004, you're sadly mistaken. Those amendments rally support from Christianists who may have otherwise stayed home, and frankly - I think the Ohio ballot, alone, question probably brought enough extremist voters out there to give Bush the edge in Ohio, and therefore reelection.

 

These marriage amendments magically made it to the ballot on what was seen as a difficult reelection year in the following states.

 

Michigan

Ohio

Mississippi

Montana

Oregon

Arkansas

Georgia

Kentucky

Louisiana

North Dakota

Oklahoma

Utah

 

Elections don't happen in a vacuum. This was a concerted effort, IMO.

If you don't think Gay Marriage amendments had anything to do with Bush winning reelection in 2004, you're sadly mistaken. Those amendments rally support from Christianists who may have otherwise stayed home, and frankly - I think the Ohio ballot, alone, question probably brought enough extremist voters out there to give Bush the edge in Ohio, and therefore reelection.

 

These marriage amendments magically made it to the ballot on what was seen as a difficult reelection year in the following states.

 

Michigan

Ohio

Mississippi

Montana

Oregon

Arkansas

Georgia

Kentucky

Louisiana

North Dakota

Oklahoma

Utah

 

Elections don't happen in a vacuum. This was a concerted effort, IMO.

 

ANYTHING to do with it? OR a CORE of the reason? No, i don't think that. I think it might have moved a single digit percent of the base, max. You're alleging it's basically a core belief of the party, which is just ridiculous. It might be one issue that's important to a small percent of people, but it's not a CORE issue.

 

California just passed a ban on gay marriage. California is heavily liberal. Stop saying it's all republicans when it's clearly not all republicans. It's independents and even some liberals too.

ANYTHING to do with it? OR a CORE of the reason? No, i don't think that. I think it might have moved a single digit percent of the base, max. You're alleging it's basically a core belief of the party, which is just ridiculous. It might be one issue that's important to a small percent of people, but it's not a CORE issue.

 

California just passed a ban on gay marriage. California is heavily liberal. Stop saying it's all republicans when it's clearly not all republicans. It's independents and even some liberals too.

While I don't agree with Rex about it being issue number 1, I also disagree that its only important to a small % of people. I'd bet a solid 50% of those who label themselves Republicans would say its important.

 

While I don't agree with Rex about it being issue number 1, I also disagree that its only important to a small % of people. I'd bet a solid 50% of those who label themselves Republicans would say its important.

 

If it's that high then why don't people run on that platform alone? It's never a main talking point. It might, on occasion, be thrown in at the last minute for no other reason than to get the religious right out to the voting booth.

If it's that high then why don't people run on that platform alone? It's never a main talking point. It might, on occasion, be thrown in at the last minute for no other reason than to get the religious right out to the voting booth.

Because the nation is turning against those people quite rapidly. In 2004, it was a serious matter.

Because the nation is turning against those people quite rapidly. In 2004, it was a serious matter.

 

ugh. it was not a serious matter. it was a last minute matter. if the nation is turning against those people why did more than 50% of a liberal state just decide to ban gay marriage?

ugh. it was not a serious matter. it was a last minute matter. if the nation is turning against those people why did more than 50% of a liberal state just decide to ban gay marriage?

 

That was two years ago.

 

 

2004 looked like a nice year for an anti-gay platform.

That was two years ago.

 

 

2004 looked like a nice year for an anti-gay platform.

 

I think that this debate will finally end since the poll results turned out to be a huge penis when plotted on a graph.

I think that this debate will finally end since the poll results turned out to be a huge penis when plotted on a graph.

The reason it's not circumcised is the 2004 Mehlman led campaign.

The reason it's not circumcised is the 2004 Mehlman led campaign.

dude's got the herp.

The last 4 posts just made my day.

The reason it's not circumcised is the 2004 Mehlman led campaign.

If there's a way I can, I would like to nominate this for Post of the Year, and then close the thread.

 

This thread just got greasy!

Ireland is a case in point about how slashing government budgets in a hurry during a recession isn't necessarily a good idea. Cutting government spending = higher unemployment = lower GDP = lower revenue

 

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-inves...article1622863/

ANYTHING to do with it? OR a CORE of the reason? No, i don't think that. I think it might have moved a single digit percent of the base, max. You're alleging it's basically a core belief of the party, which is just ridiculous. It might be one issue that's important to a small percent of people, but it's not a CORE issue.

 

California just passed a ban on gay marriage. California is heavily liberal. Stop saying it's all republicans when it's clearly not all republicans. It's independents and even some liberals too.

 

Notice that in states where a high turnout of Democratic voters who would support same sex marriage amendments but vote Democrat (high minority voting population) did not get an initiative movement in 2004.

If it's that high then why don't people run on that platform alone? It's never a main talking point. It might, on occasion, be thrown in at the last minute for no other reason than to get the religious right out to the voting booth.

 

You just made my point for me. The Presidential election in 2004 turned on about 110,000 voters in Ohio.

I love how Democrats always get to define what a Republican is, and what they need to do. Whatever.

You just made my point for me. The Presidential election in 2004 turned on about 110,000 voters in Ohio.

 

No, I didn't. Your point is that being anti-gay is a "core" of the Republican party. It's not a "core." Did they talk about it during the presidential debates? It's a fringe, last minute "oh my god we need votes we'll try to get the religious sect out to vote" issue.

 

I love how Democrats always get to define what a Republican is, and what they need to do. Whatever.

 

Sorta like how Republicans can call every Democrat socialist? One thing I can say about Republicans, they are experts at playing the victim.

How many people even consider themselves actually a member of the party.

 

Just because I vote for candidates of one party, doesnt mean I have any affiliation with the party. It just means that some one has to be the shortest midget.

No, I didn't. Your point is that being anti-gay is a "core" of the Republican party. It's not a "core." Did they talk about it during the presidential debates? It's a fringe, last minute "oh my god we need votes we'll try to get the religious sect out to vote" issue.

 

Well, listen, we can all bring up coincidences, but isn't a coincidence that there tend to be a bunch of anti-gay ballots during congressional seasons when Republicans need seats? Isn't a coincidence that we bring up "oh my god the Mexicans are raiding our borders for their drug wars" during the congressional seats? Isn't it a coincidence that the culture wars routinely get brought up around election time? What a coincidence.

Ireland is a case in point about how slashing government budgets in a hurry during a recession isn't necessarily a good idea. Cutting government spending = higher unemployment = lower GDP = lower revenue

 

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-inves...article1622863/

 

isn't it shocking that so many teachers and policeman are losing their jobs? WHY IS THIS GOVERNMENT MONEY GOING TO PLUGGING STATE BUDGETS! THAT DOESN'T GO BACK TO THE PEOPLE!!!