Is It Time for the GOP to Abandon Social Conservatism?
Editor’s note: We’ll be discussing this story and all the day’s political news on our live BlazeCast at 1:30pm ET:
Is it time for the Republican Party to abandon social conservatism?
That question likely creates knots in the stomachs of pro-life individuals who also believe ardently in the defense of traditional marriage. But in the wake of President Barack Obama’s victory, an ongoing search has commenced for the basis of defeat and, simultaneously, for the heart and soul of the Republican Party. Naturally, some are certainly wondering where social issues fit into the mix.
And who could overlook the anxious excitement among some who’d like nothing more than to gleefully scribble an obituary for the nation’s so-called “religious right.” But are these detractors drawing conclusions too quickly — or are they correct in their assertions? With less than 72 hours passing since the conclusion of the electoral race, it’s hard to tell.
Before we get into the specifics and explore these claims, let’s examine where the general public falls on the two, key social issues of importance: abortion and same-sex marriage. To do this, we can look closely at FOX News’ exit polling data, which provides information about how voters view these issues.
WHERE AMERICANS STAND ON ABORTION
When asked to provide an assessment of whether abortion should be permitted, 59 percent of the 5,131 voters consulted said that the procedure should be “legal,” with 36 percent choosing “illegal.” Now, it’s important to note that people are only being given two options here — something that pigeonholes voters into choosing extremes, despite having potentially mixed views on the multifaceted subject.
When a separate question was asked — one that allowed voters to choose between different, more specified options, the results were fascinating. Only 29 percent of the nation said that abortion should be “legal in all cases,” although a combined 59 percent said that in should at least be “legal in some cases.” But on the flip side, 23 percent said that it should be “illegal in most cases,” with an additional 13 percent calling for it not to be allowed in any case. Here’s the table:
Photo Credit: FOX News
From a policy standpoint, there’s no doubt here that the current schema is more favorable to the pro-choice movement (and that, if we’re strictly speaking about policy, pro-choice candidates may resonate with more voters). But, as stated, abortion is a complex subject — one that can’t be measured by one, or even two, polling questions.
In May, TheBlaze highlighted some of the ideological transformations that may be afoot when it comes to the issue of abortion. Among Gallup’s fascinating findings at the time, the proportion of Americans calling themselves pro-choice is at a record low — a decline that is seen among all three U.S. political groups (Democrat, Republican and Independent).
Overall, the 2012 results showed that 50 percent of the nation calls itself “pro-life,” with only 41 percent claiming to be “pro-choice.” In 2011, 49 percent of the nation called itself pro-choice, with an additional 45 percent claiming that they were pro-life. In 2010, the results were similar, as 45 percent were pro-choice and 47 percent were pro-life.
The 2012 number clearly show a shift in personal perspective away from abortion. But — let’s not forget the important difference between the Gallup question and the information being explored in the exit poll. While Gallup was asking for personal perspective, the exit poll focused upon policy. The point here: It’s entirely possible to call oneself pro-life, but to still favor laws that give women “choice” on the abortion front.
WHERE AMERICANS STAND ON GAY MARRIAGE
Same-sex marriage is another highly-controversial issue that social conservatives have overwhelmingly rejected. While politically-flammable, it’s also a subject that is seemingly easier to measure — and one on which Americans are firmly divided.
According to FOX News’ exit polls, 49 percent of the nation believe that their state should “legally recognize same-sex marriage.” An additional 46 percent, however, do not agree with this sentiment. On yet another issue, America is divided (however, the nation is more equally split on the policy perspective associated with this issue than it is on abortion).
According to Gallup’s 2012 findings, 50 percent of the nation supports gay marriage and 48 percent does not believe that nuptials for same-sex couples should be legally affirmed. In the past, The Blaze also analyzed the 2011 numbers, which found for the first time since Gallup began asking questions about same-sex marriage, that more than 50 percent of the American public supported legalizing gay unions (53 percent to be exact).
While the 2012 numbers showed somewhat of a decline in support when compared to the previous year, the affirmative proportion stands firm, at least for now, at 50 percent. The nation remains divided, but over the past few years there has been an intense effort to push for equal rights in relation to homosexual marriage — actions that may be paying off for proponents.
In 1996, only 27 percent of the nation supported gay marriage. By 2004, this proportion had grown to 42 percent. This year, despite the 2011 versus 2012 disparity, the situation is evolving. Normally, allowing constituents to vote on gay marriage has had disastrous results for those hoping to see the institution legalized.
But this electoral cycle, three states — Washington, Maryland and Maine — legalized same-sex unions (and with the population voting in favor of these rights). Previously, 32 similar attempts across the nation failed, with North Carolina’s earlier this year serving as the latest example.
And, as The Christian Post reported, “While voters in Washington, Maine and Maryland voted to allow same-sex marriage, voters in Minnesota turned back a proposed constitutional amendment that would have prohibited same-sex marriage if it were approved by law.” Plainly stated: One cannot help but wonder if the legalities are taking a turn in favor of gay nuptials.
All things considered, while abortion appears to be evolving based on new technologies and a slight pro-life tilt, gay marriage is moving in a much more rapid direction (one that is unfavorable to those who fervently espouse traditional marriage).
ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION & THE AMERICAN PUBLIC
Another issue, immigration, based on exit polls, warrants a quick look. Overwhelmingly, Americans said that illegals who are already in the United States (65 percent agreed) should be granted “a chance to apply for legal status.”
Only 28 percent of the nation embraces the notion that these individuals should be deported back “to the country they came from” (on the whole, Romney voters overwhelmingly embraced deportation). Here’s the table showcasing these results (once again, respondents weren’t given many options and were forced to choose two extremes):
Clearly, both parties need to come up with palatable methods for protecting the borders to prevent further permeation. However, it appears that, for those who already reside here, a path to citizenship is the will of the people (at least according to this exit poll).
Perhaps Romney’s views on “self-deportation” did harm him on this issue, especially among Latinos (however, immigration was not one of the most pressing issues this cycle in voters’ minds). In a column this week, commentator Charles Krauthammer proclaimed that the GOP must embrace “amnesty” if it wishes to reform itself.
“The problem is hardly structural. It requires but a single policy change: Border fence plus amnesty. Yes, amnesty,” he wrote. “Use the word. Shock and awe — full legal normalization (just short of citizenship) in return for full border enforcement.”
HOW SOCIAL ISSUES PLAYED INTO THE 2012 ELECTION
Gay marriage, abortion and immigration, aside, there are many other social issues that emerge in the American political schema. However, it the first two issues that stand out as the most relevant, controversial and, arguably, the most talked about.
Based on Romney’s electoral loss, numerous outlets are questioning whether the “religious right,” a group that is monumentally pro-life and anti-gay marriage — and the cohort that helped George W. Bush win his 2004 election — is beginning to implode and lose its relevance.
“On multiple levels, Tuesday’s election results raised questions about the Christian right’s agenda on American politics, eight years after the movement helped sweep President George W. Bush into a second term and opened the era of state bans on same-sex marriage,” CNN’s Dan Gilgoff wrote.
Religion News Service, like CNN, framed the electoral losses and their impact on religious conservatives in the following terms:
Instead of the promised victories, the religious right encountered defeat at almost every turn. Not only did Obama win convincingly, but Democrats held onto the Senate – and the power to confirm judges – and Wisconsin elected the nation’s first openly gay senator, Tammy Baldwin.
Meanwhile, Republican senate candidates Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock went down to unanticipated defeat in large part because of their strongly anti-abortion views, and an effort in Florida to restrict abortion failed. For the first time ever, same-sex marriage proponents won on ballots in four out of four states, while marijuana for recreational use was legalized in two out of three states where the question was on the ballot.
Even Michele Bachmann, an icon among Christian conservatives, barely held onto her House seat in Minnesota while Tea Party favorite Allen West lost his congressional district in Florida.
Considering that Obama, a president who is staunchly pro-choice and who is actively advocating for same-sex marriage, was able to win, in the minds of some, showcases that the Christian right’s influence may be waning. However, such a standpoint fails to take into account other issues going on in America. Elections are multifaceted. Even within a voting bloc, there are intervening issues to consider that have a profound impact on turnout and candidate selection.
The Catholic vote, for instance, has also been a focus of discussion in the wake of the election. Despite Obama’s marriage and abortion views, which run contrary to Catholic teaching, he still won the Catholic cohort. This development was particularly troubling to some conservatives, especially following the Obama administration’s controversial contraceptive mandate, which was widely seen as an assault on religious liberty. However, numerous intervening factors, including views on immigration, economics and ethnicity, may have swayed the Catholic vote.
“Maybe Hispanic Catholics were not as moved by religious liberty-type arguments as by immigration and economics,” John Green, a religion and politics expert at the University of Akron, told CNN, thus emphasizing the role that Latinos played in Obama’s re-election.
This is, of course, just a mere snapshot into the presidential race. When considering how much social issues played into the campaign, it’s essential that one must, after exploring where the American people stand on these fronts, also assess which issues, overall, were on voters’ minds when they headed into the polls.
While strong opinions abound over social issues in the U.S., when exploring the subjects of most importance to the voting public, abortion and gay marriage barely registered. In essence, this makes sense. After all, everyone knew that the economy was the number one issue this election cycle.
CNN’s early exit poll results the day of the election found that, by far, economic conditions were on voters’ minds, followed by health care, the deficit and foreign policy. So, while abortion and gay marriage likely shaped, to a lesser degree, how people decided to vote, they weren’t highly motivating factors (or issues that were at the forefront of peoples’ minds).
Considering voters’ priorities, it’s no wonder social conservatism seemingly played a small role in the election.
IS SOCIAL CONSERVATISM TO BLAME FOR ROMNEY’S LOSS?
So, considering these issues, was social conservatism at the center of Romney’s loss? There are, of course, one-issue voters who will reject or even accept a candidate based on a solitary social stance. When it comes to gay marriage and abortion, in fact, this dynamic is prevalent. Currently, conservatives and liberals, alike, are jockeying over whether the party is too right-of-center or – not conservative enough.
Still, looking beyond this debate and focusing more on strategy, others recognize that the Republican Party’s future likely hinges upon reaching out to groups that have not traditionally, at least in recent decades, embraced the GOP — young people, the religiously-unaffiliated (a fast-growing group) and minorities (the latter of which tends, depending on the sub group, to be highly religious).
“Defeat can be a very clarifying moment,” Faith and Freedom Coalition president Ralph Reed told The Wall Street Journal. “We need to find a way to combine core principles with an outreach strategy that is more welcome to voters who haven’t always been reached out to.”
While this ideal is certainly true, especially when looking at ongoing demographic changes, it’s impossible not to miss out on the overwhelming theme that this election was all about the economy. Building upon this notion, but with additional framing, lawyer and blogger John Hinderaker noted his belief that America, despite what the right has conventionally contended, is not, economically-speaking, a center-right nation.
“This belief is one that we conservatives have cherished for a long time, but as of today, I think we have to admit that it is false. America is a deeply divided country with a center-left plurality,” Hinderaker wrote. “This plurality includes a vast number of citizens who describe themselves as moderates, but whose views on the issues are identical or similar to those that have historically been deemed liberal.”
The blogger continued, providing a framing of the American public’s purportedly troubling reliance upon and penchant for government subsidies:
Put bluntly, the takers outnumber the makers. The polls in this election cycle diverged in a number of ways, but in one respect they were remarkably consistent: every poll I saw, including those that forecast an Obama victory, found that most people believed Mitt Romney would do a better job than Barack Obama on the economy. So with the economy the dominant issue in the campaign, why did that consensus not assure a Romney victory? Because a great many people live outside the real, competitive economy. Over 100 million receive means tested benefits from the federal government, many more from the states. And, of course, a great many more are public employees. To many millions of Americans, the economy is mostly an abstraction.
Then there is the fact that relatively few Americans actually pay for the government they consume. To a greater extent than any other developed nation, we rely on upper-income people to finance our federal government. When that is combined with the fact that around 40% of our federal spending isn’t paid for at all–it is borrowed–it is small wonder that many self-interested voters are happy to vote themselves more government. Mitt Romney proclaimed that Barack Obama was the candidate of “free stuff,” and voters took him at his word.
It is quite possible that the economic uncertainties, teamed with the aforementioned sentiments, played a major role in Romney’s loss. But — as for social issues, there doesn’t seem to be any evidence at the moment that they were central to the candidate’s fall.
A FINAL NOTE ON SOCIAL ISSUES
It’s far too early to proclaim that the religious right is losing its influence. After all, different election cycles call for renewed and divergent focuses. In 2004, national security was on everyone’s minds; in 2012, it was the economy.
We do know that religion is slightly declining in American society and that, of course, has a potential impact on electoral prospects. However, the obituary-writing and dismissive nature of social conservatism seems pre-mature. While a continued exploration is warranted, so is a look into government policy and its impact on dependency — and how these elements translate into votes for and against the nation’s major political parties.
All this in mind, keeping an eye on social issues is important, especially considering the trajectory that gay marriage is on. While it is entirely possible that social issues didn’t hamper Romney’s chances, if the nation continues to be more accepting of gay marriage, the party’s adherence to traditional unions (or, at least the sometimes tough, though principled, words on the issue) may harm future GOP candidates at the polls.
As for abortion, the issue remains complex. From a policy standpoint, the nation continues to favor pro-choice policy. But personal views seem to be trending in a pro-life direction.
Considering these elements, it would benefit the Republican Party to consider its messaging and how it markets its social — and economic — policies. Very few issues in this world are black and white in practice. Considering the grey areas and finding balance, while remaining true to conviction can be a difficult practice. However, it’s something that both parties should regularly be doing, as social change comes to fruition.
Remember, while Obama captured the majority of the votes, the election was somewhat close. Obama won over 50 percent of the nation and Romney resonated with 48 percent of voters. Thus, an embrace of conservative values hasn’t yet diminished to dangerously-low levels or else the disparity between the candidates would have been greater.
In the Washington Post, Michael Gerson wrote the following about the GOP’s challenge in the coming years — words that are certainly fascinating (but ideals that not all conservatives will embrace):
This is the conservative task over the next few years: not to preserve a rigid ideology but to reconstruct a political appeal along improved but principled lines.
Some of the most important intellectual groundwork is needed on the role of government. Mitt Romney had a five-part plan to encourage job creation. He lacked a public philosophy that explained government’s valid role in meeting human needs. Suburban women heard little about improved public education. Single women, particularly single mothers, heard little about their struggles, apart from an off-putting Republican critique of food stamps. Blue-collar workers in, say, Ohio heard little about the unique challenges that face declining industrial communities. Latinos heard little from Republicans about promoting equal opportunity and economic mobility.
In the end, rather than abandoning social conservatism, it seems that the GOP has two major tasks at hand moving forward: Heed Reed’s advice to refine an outreach strategy that reaches new populations, while remaining true to values, and figure out how to tackle and address the pitfalls of government dependency.
Benghazi, IRS, AP...What's next? Only TheBlaze TV offers the truth from Glenn Beck, Andrew Wilkow, and Real News from TheBlaze. Get instant access and a free trial here.
Popular Stories
Obama Doesn’t Return Marine’s Salute, Shakes Hand Instead — Is This a Protocol Misstep? 444 Comments
Game-Changing Bombshell? There’s a Major Twist in the Story About a High School Student’s Lesbian Relationship With a Minor 398 Comments
Is the Boy Scouts’ Gay Amendment the ‘Beginning of the End’ for the Group? (Plus: Tell Us Where You Stand) 356 Comments
Church vs. State Complaint Leads City to Remove Christian Crosses on Water Tower — Now See What They’ve Been Replaced With 320 Comments
This Could Be the Most Haunting Statistic You’ll Ever See 275 Comments
Faith
-
Priest Gunned Down by Italian Mobsters Now Beatified
Read More
-
Game-Changing Bombshell? There’s a Major Twist in the Story About a High School Student’s Lesbian Relationship With a Minor
398 Comments
- Is the Boy Scouts’ Gay Amendment the ‘Beginning of the End’ for the Group? (Plus: Tell Us Where You Stand) 356 Comments
-
MSNBC Hosts Martin Bashir and Chris Hayes Claim London Machete Killers Aren’t Terrorists: ‘These Are Just Murderers’
168 Comments
-
Did You Catch the Possibly Policy-Changing Ft. Hood Reference in Obama’s Terror Speech?
102 Comments
Business
-
Have You Had Scotch at a NJ TGI Friday’s Lately? You Might Have Been Drinking Rubbing Alcohol
Read More
-
Venezuelan President Blames Toilet Paper Shortage on the Rich
105 Comments
-
This Terrible Chart Shows the Change in Food Stamp Participation Over the Last 10 Years
Read More
- Disney Makes Absolutely Mortifying Photoshop Mistake Read More
-
Trey Gowdy at It Again — This Time with a Jack Bauer Reference!
121 Comments
Technology
-
‘My Life Is Full of Blessings’: Flesh-Eating Bacteria Victim Who Lost All Limbs Smiles as She Shows Off New Bionic Hands
Read More
-
LOOK: Woman Claims to Have Photographed UFO in California
129 Comments
-
Lion Named ‘Bonedigger’ and Small Dog Make Most Unlikely Companions
Read More
-
Rocket Bike Sets Land Speed Record — and Uses a Fuel You Wouldn’t Expect
Read More
-
How 3D Printing Technology Created a Special Part for Baby’s Windpipe and Saved His Life
Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (489)
Rowgue
Posted on November 9, 2012 at 12:32pmMost conservative social values aren’t extreme or unpopular. Liberals just do a really good job at perverting the perception of those values.
If you do a poll and ask the question, do you think women ought to be able to kill their unborn babies just because they want to, you’ll get about 10% support. The only thing that makes it even remotely controversial is because liberals are successful (because they control the media) in depicting abortion as something that is almost exclusively used to abort babies resulting from incest or rape. When in fact those abortions represent about 1% of all the abortions performed, and the vast majority of those are on the incest side.
Report this comment
EqualJustice
Posted on November 9, 2012 at 12:26pmHow can you just ABANDON your beliefs? I’m not saying to REGULATE behavior, I’m saying let people live and let live! If I don’t want to pay for an ABORTION I do not believe in, then why should I? I don’t WANT a liberal agenda SHOVED down my throat, including all the “diversity” indoctrination in grade schools being preached at the children. Teach reading, writing, arithmetic, science and technology. PERIOD! I will stay with the Republicans and hope they start countering all the bogus ATTACKS against them. The public is so gullible and they sound like little parrots when they defend Obama. It’s never about Obama or his policies; it’s ALWAYS about name calling and emotions of fear and hate against anyone who disagrees with them! Equal rights for ALL U.S. citizens, NOT special rights for some!
Report this comment
qpwo
Posted on November 9, 2012 at 12:24pmYes, drop the social issues. The constitution doesn’t attempt to replicate the bible. You cannot hit two birds with this one stone. Why do you think the left harps on these social issues? WE didn’t make this election about social issues, but as long as we allow ourselves to be defined by social issues we’ll never win. Let it be known that from now on, our stance on social issues is a private matter and not a party platform. Separate out this issue and we’ll have a chance to compete for the younger voters. It doesn’t mean evangelicals still can’t fight that fight, but fight it outside of the world of politics. Hand out flyers on the sidewalk, preach in and out of your churches, but do not attempt to get that done politically. If you can’t agree to disagree within our own party, if it’s got to be all or nothing, then our chances are going to continue to shrink because the population is becoming less religious, not more so.
Report this comment
Rowgue
Posted on November 9, 2012 at 12:43pmExcept the left is ALL about legislating social issues and they win on it. They are all about forcing their social beliefs on the entire country.
You MUST recognize gay marriage, you MUST hire x many minorities, you MUST spend more than your business is worth making it handicap accessible, you MUST provide helathcare for your workers that covers contraceptives even if it violates your religious beliefs, you MUST artificially create equal participation of women on athletic teams, even if girls simply aren’t interested you MUST then eliminate boys sports.
The list goes on and on. And they don’t win because they are on the winning side of those issues. They win because the media and the education system are complicit in brainwashing people into think both the liberal and conservative arguments are something other than what they actually are.
Report this comment
Tommy_Republic
Posted on November 9, 2012 at 12:24pmI don’t think we should compromise on principles. I feel we lost this election because instead of backing a candidate for the republican party the party decided instead to either not vote or vote another choice.
You had Conservatives and Libertarians that would not vote for Romney because they say he spends to much or is to much like Obama. I think there are plenty differences between Obama and Romney and even though I cannot say how Romney would have ran the country I do see what Obama has done. I certainly do not think he deserved another 4 years. Many Evangelicals would not vote because Romney was a Mormon or backed Obama because he claims to be a Christian.
It was not hard to see which Candidate has more Christian like values, nor was it hard to see which Candidate believes in American Values and principles and which does not. Not voting or voting another party to be spiteful really did not work out to well now did it? We claim democrats and liberals are self-centered but then we can’t bring ourselves to support a party because we don’t get our way.
I am a Christian and I respect and agree with the Libertarians and am thinking of switching my party. I do however understand you have to pick your battles and even though Romney would not have been my first choice, he was a much better choice then Obama.
Report this comment
YourVoiceMatters
Posted on November 9, 2012 at 12:23pmDon’t send your kids to liberal/commie indoctrination camps (colleges)…
Have your churches teach about good government and all the things our liberal education fails to do. Make up the gap with extra cirricular activities at your church ie.
make your church building a 7 day a week outreach center.
Become relevant, alive, and focused on all the lost spiritually, morally and politically !
Take the temperature of your community, see where you have the most need,
increase your volunteer staff, and make a difference and
let them see your values and your social awareness up close and personal…
you have to get out of the four walls of the building and draw them into your 4 walls to see
why and how you are different than all the rest!
Work together and teach these things to other churches and
you will make a difference
keep your first love souls and all the rest will fall in line!
Want things different ~ make a difference!
Report this comment
TheCalmOne
Posted on November 9, 2012 at 4:49pmDo you know what a Madrassa is?
Report this comment
RaydocX
Posted on November 9, 2012 at 12:19pmSocial Conservatism is a GREAT personal belief system.
It is a HORRIBLE plank to wield like a judgemental hammer politically…
especially for a party that espouses SMALL GOVERNMENT.
until the GOP recognizes that the religious right (whatever the denomination) has no other party to spport, and focuses a la the tea party originators, on FISCAL CONSERVATISM, we are doomed to lose support of the independents… our far right positions are great to hold as personal beliefs, AND i believe independents support not spending funds on social causes that are contrary to some people’s morals.
Beyond that, pushing our agenda on others is no more appropriate than accepting the Left’s attitudes about redistribution, unconditional acceptance of all belief systems and behaviors.
Stop trying to convince people who will not agree with you that you are right and they are wrong.
Instead point out where you agree, where the other side adversely impacts everyones’ lives, and agree to disagree about the social issues that government SHOULD NOT BE INVOLVED IN ANYWAY.
Abortion- don’t get it if you don’t want it
Gay Marriage- governments dont ‘protect’ marriage anyway (no fault divorce, anyone)
Marijuana- don’t use it if you don’t want it. tax it regulate it
Prostitution- as Marij
Tax- flat tax, no loop holes, VAT to protect businesses (modern tariff)
National ID- voter ID, free to all
Immigration- accept those here WITH Fees/ penalties… no more free lunch
Report this comment
GhostOfJefferson
Posted on November 9, 2012 at 2:08pmI would like to also add that the Dems are just as socially controlling as the social conservatives. They cannot regulate fast enough your cigarettes, what you say, and they adore telling you how to eat, drink and even how much water you’re allowed to have in your toilet.
Both sides are full of people with severe insecurities that manifest itself as impulses to control others.
Report this comment
TheCalmOne
Posted on November 9, 2012 at 4:53pmTo be fair, there is an economic argument for regulating cigarettes – the fewer people smoke the less strain there is on our health system, fewer hospital beds occupied by cancer sufferers, plus more people live useful productive lives so society in general benefits through their individual wealth generation.
Report this comment
hslusher
Posted on November 9, 2012 at 12:19pmSimply put in a nation of children you cant beat Santa Clause.
Report this comment
Evileye
Posted on November 9, 2012 at 12:17pmI am a Life long Republican 80 years old(old White guy)
Seen many President Come and Go.But I truthfully believe the Republican party has reached the end of it viability. How can a party promise more government hand outs than the democrats do.
This country is not the richest country on earth, it the most financial burdened one.(16 Trillion and Counting Rapidly)
There are no more freebies to give we are BROKE.
So for a party to promise more Is financial imposable. how can any party out do Santa Claus.
I live in Western WA State and vetoing Is a total waste of time.The big city Liberal will control the vote every time. If they come close to losing they have a recount. 2500 dead people voted to swing the election for Governor a few years back.Miracles do happen a County Commissioner a republican just won a seat here. The first one in 80 years.
As time passes more people Colored,Mexican,Asian will dominate the electorate making it imposable for anyone with a conservative agenda to win. Welcome to a one party system like China or Russia.They may have a opposition party but it is only for window dressing.( some One to Villafie)
A nation that Will vote some one back into office, Like Jackson from Illinois that is Mayo Clinic mental ward is a Defunct one. We are a nation that has lost the will for self endurance.We expect the Government to coddle us from cradle to grave.This is not the type of people that created this nation,This is a nation or mindless sheep
Report this comment
Dscriptboy
Posted on November 9, 2012 at 12:15pmAbadon social issues… abortion, gay marraiage… these should not not be federal issues… these are personal issues.
But immigration… lock the fracking door and kick out every one who is illegal. GET OUT. You are turning the freeest nation on earth into a third world coountry. get out.
Report this comment
Matt
Posted on November 9, 2012 at 12:14pmAlso, the GOP should not abandon social conservatism because you should not create your platform based on what will get you elected, but based on proper principles, and you should adhere to those principles even in trying times. After Obama gets done raping our economy he will have done irreparable damage to the reputation of democrats everywhere. For years afterwards people will see them for what they are, a vile parasite on this nation. There is no way for Obama to excuse a decimated economy after 8 years in office, which he will be faced with.
Report this comment
justangry
Posted on November 9, 2012 at 7:27pmThey shouldn’t abandon social conservatism because it will get them elected. They should abandon them because there is not constitutional authority for them.
Report this comment
Matt
Posted on November 9, 2012 at 12:12pmOf course the GOP shouldn’t abandon religious conservatism as that is not why they lost. They lost because of ignorance and because of wickedness. Most Obama voters were ignorant, they had no idea what they were voting for. He is really charming, he talks a good game, and he’s black. So all of the black people voted for him since hes black. And this may sound insensitive, but it’s true: A majority of women voted for him because women make their decisions primarily based off of emotions, not based off of logic. Now, since they are people too they should probably have the right to vote, but, such a right, considering how they make decisions, is bad for society as a whole. (but in this country we are concerned primarily about individual rights, not utilitarianism, so whether their having a right to vote is beneficial for society or not doesnt matter much, but it does explain why the GOP lost). Finally, on the ignorance note, most young people are horribly ignorant and truly SHOULD NOT have the right to vote. Dying for your country requires no special amount of wisdom, so it is fitting that they should be permitted to do that, but because voting requires education, experience, and wisdom, it is not fitting for young people to have that right. Voting rights should begin at 30 (I’m 24 btw). Finally Obama won because of wickedness. I think that there should be a law; if you are on welfare, you cannot vote. Also, many people wickedly support abortion and gay marriage.
Report this comment
RSHLUVER
Posted on November 9, 2012 at 12:11pmPresently unborn fetuses are not considered human beings. Once in our history slaves were not considered human being but property. I used to wonder what it was like for people to live with slavery in America. In order for me to understand the mindset of the average slave owner in colonial America I’d like to replace the word abortion with slavery. It took hundreds of years of struggle and a constitutional amendment for slavery to be abolished in the United States. Maybe in a hundred years with a viable pro life movement, the unborn will finally have the same rights as free slaves and be tread as human beings.
Report this comment
GoodStuff
Posted on November 9, 2012 at 12:09pmWe didn’t lose this election because of social conservatism. That’s got nothing to do with it.
We lost because too many Americans get free stuff from the government. Period!
Report this comment
BacktotheFounders
Posted on November 9, 2012 at 12:07pmHow about a poll that asks the question, “Do you think that the voters in your state should make the decisions for your state in regard to these questions?” I predict that the response would be at least 80% positive. Then the people who are pro-licentiousness could choose which states they would live in so as to be able to practice their beliefs. The taxpayers of these states then would also have to pay for the consequences of this behavior, and the God-fearing of the other states would not be punished.
The people who are considering this are not concerned with the well-being of our beloved country, but are instead willing to do anything to get their hands into the treasury. They are no different from the greedy, Godless, Democrats.
Report this comment
BlackCrow
Posted on November 9, 2012 at 12:05pmThe one thing that needs to be realized is Roe v. Wade will only be reversed by a constitutional amendment and until we have 2/3s of the House, 2/3s of the Senate and 2/3s of the state legislatures, it is not going to happen any time soon. Drop it till that time comes.
Report this comment
modelmax
Posted on November 9, 2012 at 12:05pmSimple answer to this. No! No! No!
Report this comment
CDT
Posted on November 9, 2012 at 12:04pmI for one would have voted for Romney if it wasn’t for the extreme views on gay marriage and abortion.
Report this comment
Nancys Red Diaper Doper Babies
Posted on November 9, 2012 at 12:05pmCan’t tell if you’re serious. What exactly are his extreme views on abortion or gay marriage?
Report this comment
khadijahbintmuhammad
Posted on November 9, 2012 at 12:03pmIn a word: Yes.
Social conservativism was never conservativism. It is a statist belief (not conservative) grounded on religious beliefs (not constitutional).
The right approach, in my view: “As a party, we oppose . However, because of the size and scope of this great nation, and the 10th amendment, decisions on these matters should be left to the states. We will oppose national measures designed to force all americans to accept one view or another; likewise, we will not interfere with the states are they determine these issues of their own accord.”
Report this comment
YourVoiceMatters
Posted on November 9, 2012 at 12:01pmStop labeling Conservatism! I am socially and fiscally conservative….
Do a better job of making your point and stop the blame game altogether!
I am done with this garbage…
You are going to turn yourself inside out to justify yourself to a liberal media?
the liberal candidates?…It is better to stand for Truth
of who you are, than to become a twisty pretzel like the sleazy, no value, dembots!
I wont apologize for having a belief system….i won’t become a lie…
If people choose a lie rather than the truth then we failed in getting the message out…
do not depend on the liberal media, think out of the box for a change!
Stop allowing the left to control the talking points,
you are playing second fiddle by your submissive positioning!
Truthfully, i am sick of watching it! I am done listening to you who do.
I am not inflexible, i just have standards
and the other side has the gutter!
Truthfully, that is what makes values look so stark in comparison!
It is time to stand for who we are and stop making excuses
or listening to the lefts suggestions as to what we are doing wrong…
stop allowing the fox in the hen house period! Or they will destroy us all!
Report this comment
TJexcite
Posted on November 9, 2012 at 12:00pmSocial Issues have to return to local and remove it from any federal push no matter how far the left push it on the federal level. That is a lost cost for 30 years. The faster this happens the faster the left can stop plausible smears of the right banning tampons, birth control and abortion. Because all social issues conservatives talk as they might and do not push back hard when that charge is issued.
Gay Marriage will be the issues that stop a wide spreed an American caliphate. Having a couple gays hung in Tahrir square Egypt under Sharia is what is needed to wake someone up so be it.
Report this comment
JUSTANOTHEROPINION
Posted on November 9, 2012 at 11:57amThe correct question is not “should the GOP abandon Social Conservatism?”, the correct question is “should Conservatism abandon the established parties?” My answer is hell yes! I’m supporting the formation of a third party.
Report this comment
resme
Posted on November 9, 2012 at 11:57amGood riddance. Barry Goldwater’s conservatism is 1050235928352385% better than rick santorum’s make believe fascism conservatism
Report this comment
GhostOfJefferson
Posted on November 9, 2012 at 2:11pmA-freaking-men, brother. I could not agree more. That man openly and frequently states that he despises the libertarian impulse in his party. Him and his ilk are revolting. He may be a nice guy, but his politics are a horror story writ large.
Report this comment
Government_Goodies
Posted on November 9, 2012 at 11:56amWhat a dumb question. It’s as if you’re on the Titanic at the bottom of the ocean and wondering if you should begin bailing water.
Report this comment
FightingBear
Posted on November 9, 2012 at 11:55amThe GOP can do whatever the hell they want to. I will never vote for a liberal again. Romney was the 1st main stream candidate I voted for since Jimmy Carter.
Carter I can write off to being young and dumb….Romney was because I bought the Republican contention that a write in vote was essentially a vote for Obama.
I should have voted my conscience and written in Herman Cain. (The results would have been the same.)
If the GOP puts up a true conservative like Cain….they will have my support….if they give us yet another RINO ala McCain and Romney…they will never get my vote again, I am finished voting for damned liberals with an “R” behind their name.
Report this comment
inblack
Posted on November 9, 2012 at 11:55amSocial issues is too vague:
What issues would you add or drop from the Republican position?
What would you shut up about?
What do you believe is right or wrong, but will not press through the govt?
Report this comment