What is next for the GOP?

[Salient]

Interesting stat: around 40% of American voters regard themselves as Independent. This is in Gallup Stats going back to 2004

https://news.gallup.com/poll/15370/part ... ation.aspx

This doesn't mean they will vote for Independent candidates but that they will vote for the candidate, regardless of party, that addresses their concerns

40% spins a bit high, wonder what the margin for error in the poll was.

[UncleFB]

The House became more Republican in the 2020 election.

It was a really good election for the GOP as at Nov 3. Remove Trump, hold their position in the House and Senate.

Trump and Co then done f**ked that up really badly with their stolen election nonsense and lost the Georgia seats.

So it was a really good election for the Republicans until the Republicans fucked it up for themselves.

[Zakar]

Haley/Kelly 2024.

Heard it here first. They'll win in a landslide.

[Sonny Blount]

The House became more Republican in the 2020 election.

It was a really good election for the GOP as at Nov 3. Remove Trump, hold their position in the House and Senate.

Trump and Co then done f**ked that up really badly with their stolen election nonsense and lost the Georgia seats.

So it was a really good election for the Republicans until the Republicans fucked it up for themselves.

Yep.

If a certain number of them had shut the fudge up or quieted Donald's rantings, they wouldn't have been sitting too bad to have got rid of Trump and retain the Senate.

[CrazyIslander]

Quite clear from the impeachment debate they'd move Right with Trumpism. Don't think it's just Trump's influence, I think they were already thinking like that and Trump just gave a voice to their outrage. Take Donald's misbehavior out of the picture, his rhetoric and policies is acceptable to the GOP.

[CrazyIslander]

Interesting stat: around 40% of American voters regard themselves as Independent. This is in Gallup Stats going back to 2004

https://news.gallup.com/poll/15370/part ... ation.aspx

This doesn't mean they will vote for Independent candidates but that they will vote for the candidate, regardless of party, that addresses their concerns

40% spins a bit high, wonder what the margin for error in the poll was.

It's probably just QANON follower's just saying "they think for themselves and do their own research.

[Sonny Blount]

Quite clear from the impeachment debate they'd move Right with Trumpism. Don't think it's just Trump's influence, I think they were already thinking like that and Trump just gave a voice to their outrage. Take Donald's misbehavior out of the picture, his rhetoric and policies is acceptable to the GOP.

Trump isn't right wing, he is populist, delusional, and dumb.

Right wing is pro-free trade and pro-immigration.

[flaggETERNAL]

Quite clear from the impeachment debate they'd move Right with Trumpism. Don't think it's just Trump's influence, I think they were already thinking like that and Trump just gave a voice to their outrage. Take Donald's misbehavior out of the picture, his rhetoric and policies is acceptable to the GOP.

Trump isn't right wing, he is populist, delusional, and dumb.

Right wing is pro-free trade and pro-immigration.

So, centrist Dems?

[fonzeee]

Quite clear from the impeachment debate they'd move Right with Trumpism. Don't think it's just Trump's influence, I think they were already thinking like that and Trump just gave a voice to their outrage. Take Donald's misbehavior out of the picture, his rhetoric and policies is acceptable to the GOP.

Trump isn't right wing, he is populist, delusional, and dumb.

Right wing is pro-free trade and pro-immigration.

There truly is nothing more tedious than a debate about political definitions and distinctions, but that is at the very least an outdated view of things.

(though I do basically agree with your appraisal of Trump)

[Ali's Choice]

The House became more Republican in the 2020 election.

It was a really good election for the GOP as at Nov 3. Remove Trump, hold their position in the House and Senate.

Trump and Co then done f**ked that up really badly with their stolen election nonsense and lost the Georgia seats.

So it was a really good election for the Republicans until the Republicans fucked it up for themselves.

Yep.

If a certain number of them had shut the fudge up or quieted Donald's rantings, they wouldn't have been sitting too bad to have got rid of Trump and retain the Senate.

They lost the White House, lost control of the Senate and lost the popular vote by 8 million votes. I hope everyone involved with the GOP shares your sentiment, and sits back over the next few years congratulating themselves over how well they did in the 2020 election.

[Sonny Blount]

Quite clear from the impeachment debate they'd move Right with Trumpism. Don't think it's just Trump's influence, I think they were already thinking like that and Trump just gave a voice to their outrage. Take Donald's misbehavior out of the picture, his rhetoric and policies is acceptable to the GOP.

Trump isn't right wing, he is populist, delusional, and dumb.

Right wing is pro-free trade and pro-immigration.

There truly is nothing more tedious than a debate about political definitions and distinctions, but that is at the very least an outdated view of things.

(though I do basically agree with your appraisal of Trump)

The principles don't date. If you think free individuals create wealth and a flourishing society (ie are right wing), then it follows to be pro-free trade and pro-immigration.

Smith, Hayek, and Friedman have held those principles for the past 200 years, and the principles will hold for the next 200 years.

[towny]

Quite clear from the impeachment debate they'd move Right with Trumpism. Don't think it's just Trump's influence, I think they were already thinking like that and Trump just gave a voice to their outrage. Take Donald's misbehavior out of the picture, his rhetoric and policies is acceptable to the GOP.

Trump isn't right wing, he is populist, delusional, and dumb.

Right wing is pro-free trade and pro-immigration.

Right v left is bad to use to discuss economic ideology, because that’s not what it’s about.

The left were the Jacobins - they wanted to string up the nobility and give the power to the third estate - the people.
The right were the royalists, who wanted to persevere with something close to absolute monarchy.

This is what left v right is about.

The left wants to shift power and wealth from those that have traditionally had it to the ‘people’ in a society. The right wants to keep the power and wealth where it’s traditionally been. This is the ideological struggle, and everyone sits somewhere on this spectrum. As one side make gains that are accepted by the other side. the parameters are reset. For example, now even the most conservative person wouldn’t want to return to slavery or absolute monarchy. Likewise, no one on the right is calling for privatization of fire brigades or police.

Industry with few regulations is associated with capitalism, so capitalism is presumed to be right wing. But when capitalism negatively impacts the balance of power, the political right moves fast to introduce tariffs to protect the status quo. Things like immigration and trade are viewed by individuals in line with what they value. Conservatives fervently believe in capitalism until its effects threaten the power of those that wield it. It also changes things in every day life - they don’t look or sound the same and that’s threatening to those that don’t want change. That’s why the GOP is anti-immigration all of a sudden. If a higher percentage of Latinos voted GOP they would be far more receptive.

Likewise, once they’ve gained power, militant Stalinists become conservative and appear almost identical to their rivals from across the spectrum. Once they have power, they often want to maintain this status quo. It’s no different. That’s why authoritarianism is associated with the extreme right and left - both have all the power controlled by a small cadre of zealots who use the full weight of the state to maintain it from those that would challenge them. In the Maoist/Stalinist systems, the progressives are those that try to introduce liberalism and capitalism.

So, it’s all about political power and economic wealth. Conservatives (the right), regardless of what they claim is their ideology, want power to stay where it is, or even better, return to the days when they had more. While progressives want to distribute that power and wealth to the people.

Trump is very much right wing.

[Sonny Blount]

Quite clear from the impeachment debate they'd move Right with Trumpism. Don't think it's just Trump's influence, I think they were already thinking like that and Trump just gave a voice to their outrage. Take Donald's misbehavior out of the picture, his rhetoric and policies is acceptable to the GOP.

Trump isn't right wing, he is populist, delusional, and dumb.

Right wing is pro-free trade and pro-immigration.

Right v left is bad to use to discuss economic ideology, because that’s not what it’s about.

The left were the Jacobins - they wanted to string up the nobility and give the power to the third estate - the people.
The right were the royalists, who wanted to persevere with something close to absolute monarchy.

This is what left v right is about.

The left wants to shift power and wealth from those that have traditionally had it to the ‘people’ in a society. The right wants to keep the power and wealth where it’s traditionally been. This is the ideological struggle, and everyone sits somewhere on this spectrum. As one side make gains that are accepted by the other side. the parameters are reset. For example, now even the most conservative person wouldn’t want to return to slavery or absolute monarchy. Likewise, no one on the right is calling for privatization of fire brigades or police.

Industry with few regulations is associated with capitalism, so capitalism is presumed to be right wing. But when capitalism negatively impacts the balance of power, the political right moves fast to introduce tariffs to protect the status quo. Things like immigration and trade are viewed by individuals in line with what they value. Conservatives fervently believe in capitalism until its effects threaten the power of those that wield it. It also changes things in every day life - they don’t look or sound the same and that’s threatening to those that don’t want change. That’s why the GOP is anti-immigration all of a sudden. If a higher percentage of Latinos voted GOP they would be far more receptive.

Likewise, once they’ve gained power, militant Stalinists become conservative and appear almost identical to their rivals from across the spectrum. Once they have power, they often want to maintain this status quo. It’s no different. That’s why authoritarianism is associated with the extreme right and left - both have all the power controlled by a small cadre of zealots who use the full weight of the state to maintain it from those that would challenge them. In the Maoist/Stalinist systems, the progressives are those that try to introduce liberalism and capitalism.

So, it’s all about political power and economic wealth. Conservatives (the right), regardless of what they claim is their ideology, want power to stay where it is, or even better, return to the days when they had more. While progressives want to distribute that power and wealth to the people.

Trump is very much right wing.

Complete nonsense.

People like to hold on to many different ideas of what right and left mean to them.

Many people on the right do not think how you describe and do not vote based on what you say. Go and read The Road to Serfdom, The Use of Knowledge in Society, The Constitution of Liberty (Thatcher's 'This is what we believe') or watch Free to Choose and you will learn how many on the right think.

[towny]

Nice strawman.

Which of the political right or the left supports the Queen throughout the Commonwealth?

Which of the political right or left supports higher immigration in the Commonwealth countries?

Which of the political right or left supports higher taxation for the wealthy?

Which of the political right or left opposes increase civil rights to minorities?

I can go on for days.

[towny]

Which of the right or left gives more in subsidies to industries and land owners to support them? The Australian govt passed regulations that internet companies must donate money to old media companies.

This is very much is opposition to the tenants of capitalism; however capitalism isn’t really left or right.

[Sonny Blount]

Which of the right or left gives more in subsidies to industries and land owners to support them? The Australian govt passed regulations that internet companies must donate money to old media companies.

This is very much is opposition to the tenants of capitalism; however capitalism isn’t really left or right.

If you hold right wing beliefs then you expect right wing politicians will give kickbacks to their interest groups just like left wing politicians will.

We expect politicians to offer subsidies hence we want to give less money and power to them from both sides.

[Sonny Blount]

Nice strawman.

Which of the political right or the left supports the Queen throughout the Commonwealth?

Which of the political right or left supports higher immigration in the Commonwealth countries?

Those that want wages for workers to rise are anti-immigration (unions)
Those that want business to grow want access to the widest market for workers and skills (free-marketeers)

Which of the political right or left supports higher taxation for the wealthy?

The left likes higher taxes, which is more money in the hands of the powerful few

The left likes lower taxes, which is more money in the hands of the people

Which of the political right or left opposes increase civil rights to minorities?

Easy, the right.

Private property rights and rule of law are fundamental to a free society.

I can go on for days.

[Ali's Choice]

Sonny Blount, you're talking absolute shit and making zero sense. The 'right' are pro immigration? Wtaf? They are definitely pro cheap labour, but immigration is a completely different thing.

[Sonny Blount]

Sonny Blount, you're talking absolute shit and making zero sense. The 'right' are pro immigration? Wtaf? They are definitely pro cheap labour, but immigration is a completely different thing.

Well, unfortunately politics is a matter of building coalitions, and the number of economic right wing voters is pretty small. So right wing coalitions try to add some left wing economic voters to their ranks with social conservatism.

[flaggETERNAL]

Bernie Sanders himself made the point some years ago that open borders are something the Right would love. He mentioned the Koch brothers specifically. It makes sense in a weird way. Maybe the whole Left Right thing doesnt make sense anymore?

[CrazyIslander]

Quite clear from the impeachment debate they'd move Right with Trumpism. Don't think it's just Trump's influence, I think they were already thinking like that and Trump just gave a voice to their outrage. Take Donald's misbehavior out of the picture, his rhetoric and policies is acceptable to the GOP.

Trump isn't right wing, he is populist, delusional, and dumb.

Right wing is pro-free trade and pro-immigration.

Right v left is bad to use to discuss economic ideology, because that’s not what it’s about.

The left were the Jacobins - they wanted to string up the nobility and give the power to the third estate - the people.
The right were the royalists, who wanted to persevere with something close to absolute monarchy.

This is what left v right is about.

The left wants to shift power and wealth from those that have traditionally had it to the ‘people’ in a society. The right wants to keep the power and wealth where it’s traditionally been. This is the ideological struggle, and everyone sits somewhere on this spectrum. As one side make gains that are accepted by the other side. the parameters are reset. For example, now even the most conservative person wouldn’t want to return to slavery or absolute monarchy. Likewise, no one on the right is calling for privatization of fire brigades or police.

Industry with few regulations is associated with capitalism, so capitalism is presumed to be right wing. But when capitalism negatively impacts the balance of power, the political right moves fast to introduce tariffs to protect the status quo. Things like immigration and trade are viewed by individuals in line with what they value. Conservatives fervently believe in capitalism until its effects threaten the power of those that wield it. It also changes things in every day life - they don’t look or sound the same and that’s threatening to those that don’t want change. That’s why the GOP is anti-immigration all of a sudden. If a higher percentage of Latinos voted GOP they would be far more receptive.

Likewise, once they’ve gained power, militant Stalinists become conservative and appear almost identical to their rivals from across the spectrum. Once they have power, they often want to maintain this status quo. It’s no different. That’s why authoritarianism is associated with the extreme right and left - both have all the power controlled by a small cadre of zealots who use the full weight of the state to maintain it from those that would challenge them. In the Maoist/Stalinist systems, the progressives are those that try to introduce liberalism and capitalism.

So, it’s all about political power and economic wealth. Conservatives (the right), regardless of what they claim is their ideology, want power to stay where it is, or even better, return to the days when they had more. While progressives want to distribute that power and wealth to the people.

Trump is very much right wing.

Good post.

That's how I see it. It's about keeping power thus wealth with those who already have it, mainly white. In America, it's about having the ability to bend the laws/environment to serve their needs whilst denying the same privilege to minorities. Religious freedom for Christians but restricted for other religions. That's what Trump was about and GOP majority already wanted that. Take away Trump's irrational behaviour, you'd have what the GOP all stand for. They're comfortably Right.

[CrazyIslander]

Bernie Sanders himself made the point some years ago that open borders are something the Right would love. He mentioned the Koch brothers specifically. It makes sense in a weird way. Maybe the whole Left Right thing doesnt make sense anymore?

If you compare the Rich Right and Poor Right.

Rich Right - I'll do anything to make myself richer

Poor Right: I'm happy poor as long as coloured people are worse off. Give all the money to the Rich so black people can't have any.

[Blake]

What logistics would be involved in Trump establishing a new, far right political party? He already has a half a billion dollars in a personal slush fund, and access to as much further money as he could ever want. Would he be better starting a new party that he can mould into his own likely, or does he undertake a hostile takeover of the GOP from outside the party?

I don't think he would want to start a political party to be honest. Too many eyeballs on his comings-and-goings and too many regulations.

He wants to be a GOP Kingmaker....build an empire of endorsing candidates that kiss the ring, and destroying those that were disloyal to him, for a fee. He wants to grift, he doesn't want to govern.

And the GOP will let him do this, because it will give them deniability when things inevitably go violent. They can enjoy the protection while the Dems and DOJ try in vain to keep the lid on the boiling pot.

[towny]

Nice strawman.

Which of the political right or the left supports the Queen throughout the Commonwealth?

Which of the political right or left supports higher immigration in the Commonwealth countries?

Those that want wages for workers to rise are anti-immigration (unions)
Those that want business to grow want access to the widest market for workers and skills (free-marketeers)

Which of the political right or left supports higher taxation for the wealthy?

The left likes higher taxes, which is more money in the hands of the powerful few

The left likes lower taxes, which is more money in the hands of the people

Which of the political right or left opposes increase civil rights to minorities?

Easy, the right.

Private property rights and rule of law are fundamental to a free society.

I can go on for days.

You should have said so if you didn’t want to discuss this seriously.

[towny]

Bernie Sanders himself made the point some years ago that open borders are something the Right would love. He mentioned the Koch brothers specifically. It makes sense in a weird way. Maybe the whole Left Right thing doesnt make sense anymore?

If you compare the Rich Right and Poor Right.

Rich Right - I'll do anything to make myself richer

Poor Right: I'm happy poor as long as coloured people are worse off. Give all the money to the Rich so black people can't have any.

Poor whites want to retain their social power. They see gays and blacks gaining rights as a net loss. Maybe their prejudice is fueled by a need to feel powerful?

Too deep?

[towny]

It’s all in the word ‘conservative’. What are they wanting to conserve? What’s are synonyms of ‘conserve’?
Keep
Retain
Horde
Preserve
Safeguard

What are they trying to safeguard, retain, horde, keep and preserve?

When the stockmarket crashes - who gets the big govt bucks?

It seems the passion for the free market and the miracle of the ‘invisible hand’ doesn’t come in to it when those with power are the ones at risk. It’s not just the US either. This is everywhere. Every country allows families of means to set up trusts to protect their wealth through the generations. Why?

Why do most countries let individuals work through Ltd companies and avoid taxation? It’s outrageous that they get to play by different rules.

Conservatives don’t actually think this. They believe that they do believe in the free market and the many allowances and exceptions are just that - exceptions to their staunch ideology. But what they really believe is that power and wealth is a zero sum game - if someone else gets some it means they lost it.

Think about why it’s conservatives that love the monarchy, why it was conservatives that wanted Brexit, why it was conservatives that cheer when Trump says they should take Iraqi oil....

The founding fathers were political radicals that overthrew the king, but they weren’t liberals or progressives. They had power and didn’t want to share it with the English king. But none gave up their slaves. Liberty was reserved for white men of means - they wanted more power and it was a zero sum game.

It’s been like this for thousands of years. The Roman social wars are a great example. Civilization has been one long struggle for power and wealth - those that have it and those that are oppressed, or have empathy for those oppressed. It’s not capitalism snd communism. It’s the haves vs the have nots.

[CrazyIslander]

Bernie Sanders himself made the point some years ago that open borders are something the Right would love. He mentioned the Koch brothers specifically. It makes sense in a weird way. Maybe the whole Left Right thing doesnt make sense anymore?

If you compare the Rich Right and Poor Right.

Rich Right - I'll do anything to make myself richer

Poor Right: I'm happy poor as long as coloured people are worse off. Give all the money to the Rich so black people can't have any.

Poor whites want to retain their social power. They see gays and blacks gaining rights as a net loss. Maybe their prejudice is fueled by a need to feel powerful?

Too deep?

Agree but it's probably borne out of tribalism and the need to belong to something greater than one's self or be greater than others. Its very base instincts people can grow out of in the right environment. However, the Rich Right like to perpetuate those instincts and stir anger, then attach taxations, socialism to it. This way it'll have enough of an army to defend their wealth should shit hit the fan.

The Poor Right are just happy to be associated with the Rich Right in some way. Makes them more special than the coloured people.

The Rich Right on the otherhand would take it up the ass from a big black cock if it meant they have enough money to live far away from all the poor people, black or white, Left or Right.

[flaggETERNAL]

The most infuriating this is the GOP don't have change much. They will remain the party of the batshit insane and most likely win the midterms and the next presidency.

[wamberal]

Pages of deep discourse about politics, and not a single mention of the biggest single existential threat we face: global warming and the general devastation of the natural environment, everywhere the eye can see, not to mention under our oceans.


Is this a right wing or left wing concern? Apparently not.

[DOB]

Quite clear from the impeachment debate they'd move Right with Trumpism. Don't think it's just Trump's influence, I think they were already thinking like that and Trump just gave a voice to their outrage. Take Donald's misbehavior out of the picture, his rhetoric and policies is acceptable to the GOP.

Trump isn't right wing, he is populist, delusional, and dumb.

Right wing is pro-free trade and pro-immigration.

Trump governed as an American conservative. Pro-free trade for Americans, anti-immigration into America, pro gun, pro life, pro-wall, etc etc. He did give his voters everything they wanted, except a 2nd term.

[DOB]

Pages of deep discourse about politics, and not a single mention of the biggest single existential threat we face: global warming and the general devastation of the natural environment, everywhere the eye can see, not to mention under our oceans.


Is this a right wing or left wing concern? Apparently not.

Nixon signed the EPA into existence.

Republicans have been pushing back on it ever since.

[iarmhiman]

GOP used to be the party of elites and business.

Dems used to be the party of the worker.

The white working class who have been pissed off by de-industrialisation of America have turned to a fringe of the GOP who make them feel nostalgic .

The dems have gone educated upper middle class while liberal at the same time. They're a bit smug

If the dems want the white working class vote they have to change their policies which is still too globalist.

They need to find a way of getting jobs into areas of big unemployment. It doesn't have to be heavy industry. If they could get green businesses going and put them into those areas, they may get that support back. Meat and potatoes is what they want.

[Sonny Blount]

It’s all in the word ‘conservative’. What are they wanting to conserve? What’s are synonyms of ‘conserve’?
Keep
Retain
Horde
Preserve
Safeguard

What are they trying to safeguard, retain, horde, keep and preserve?

Conservative comes from 'Burkean Conservative', the ideas of Edmond Burke.

That is institutions and traditions have hidden structures and values tied up in them, and therefore change should happen iteratively rather than destroying existing institutions and rebuilding from scratch.

Conservatism is a bit like agile software development in that regard.

When the stockmarket crashes - who gets the big govt bucks?

It seems the passion for the free market and the miracle of the ‘invisible hand’ doesn’t come in to it when those with power are the ones at risk. It’s not just the US either. This is everywhere. Every country allows families of means to set up trusts to protect their wealth through the generations. Why?

Why do most countries let individuals work through Ltd companies and avoid taxation? It’s outrageous that they get to play by different rules.

Conservatives don’t actually think this. They believe that they do believe in the free market and the many allowances and exceptions are just that - exceptions to their staunch ideology. But what they really believe is that power and wealth is a zero sum game - if someone else gets some it means they lost it.

Right wing economics explicitly believes in a non zero game, it says if taxes are kept in check then the pie grows and there is more for all. It believes everyone in society top to bottom can grow their wealth at the same time.

Think about why it’s conservatives that love the monarchy, why it was conservatives that wanted Brexit, why it was conservatives that cheer when Trump says they should take Iraqi oil....

The founding fathers were political radicals that overthrew the king, but they weren’t liberals or progressives. They had power and didn’t want to share it with the English king. But none gave up their slaves. Liberty was reserved for white men of means - they wanted more power and it was a zero sum game.

It’s been like this for thousands of years. The Roman social wars are a great example. Civilization has been one long struggle for power and wealth - those that have it and those that are oppressed, or have empathy for those oppressed. It’s not capitalism snd communism. It’s the haves vs the have nots.

[Sonny Blount]

Pages of deep discourse about politics, and not a single mention of the biggest single existential threat we face: global warming and the general devastation of the natural environment, everywhere the eye can see, not to mention under our oceans.


Is this a right wing or left wing concern? Apparently not.

Pandemics are a greater risk than climate change. That's what we told you 2 decades ago.

[Farva]

Pages of deep discourse about politics, and not a single mention of the biggest single existential threat we face: global warming and the general devastation of the natural environment, everywhere the eye can see, not to mention under our oceans.


Is this a right wing or left wing concern? Apparently not.

Pandemics are a greater risk than climate change. That's what we told you 2 decades ago.

That really isnt the case.

[Flyin Ryan]

There might be a split of some kind, although I'll believe it when I see it. Forming a splinter party in the American political spectrum is a sign of failure - what you want to do is take control of the established group and kick the other side out or make them weak and powerless, which is what Trump accomplished from 2016 to '18. That and the Democrats and Republicans have worked in concert for decades to make it damn near impossible in ballot access and election law to form any kind of opposition to them outside of the two party system. The 10 Republicans that voted for impeachment have been predictably lambasted by their own state parties. Cheney's probably never getting elected in Wyoming again unless she goes independent, and probably still not.

My party the Libertarians - it's a great time to go grab some people and make our party larger.

[towny]

Pages of deep discourse about politics, and not a single mention of the biggest single existential threat we face: global warming and the general devastation of the natural environment, everywhere the eye can see, not to mention under our oceans.


Is this a right wing or left wing concern? Apparently not.

We also didn’t mention the plight of Australia’s indigenous populations or the millions that die each year from unclean water either. Not sure why you didn’t specifically mention these crises that don’t affect you.

[Flyin Ryan]

GOP used to be the party of elites and business.

Dems used to be the party of the worker.

The white working class who have been pissed off by de-industrialisation of America have turned to a fringe of the GOP who make them feel nostalgic .

The dems have gone educated upper middle class while liberal at the same time. They're a bit smug

If the dems want the white working class vote they have to change their policies which is still too globalist.

They need to find a way of getting jobs into areas of big unemployment. It doesn't have to be heavy industry. If they could get green businesses going and put them into those areas, they may get that support back. Meat and potatoes is what they want.

Democrats are dead in rural America. Combination of what you say, all Democratic policies are geared toward big cities which means they have no policy to actively help the economic wellbeing of those areas (imagine in the UK a Labour Party that had nothing but contempt for Wales ex-Cardiff, how would they perform there? Scotland in the past decade has told them the gig is up), and that increasingly most Democrats think most to all whites lived these privileged lives. fudge, get in a car and start driving around to look at all this "privilege". They base everything around identity politics, policies be damned. I'm waiting for the Latino and Asian revolt because yes, the white share of the population is going down, the black share is not going up though. Trump was pretty anti-Latino as far as immigration and yet his performance with them went UP. The Rio Grande Valley went pretty right this election downballot and that was in spite of Trump. Marco Rubio in the end turned out to not be the best candidate in 2016 and was exposed by Chris Christie, but flaws aside, imagine him at the top. (It actually looks like he does do some good work in the Senate as far as writing bills and getting them passed.)

[towny]

It’s all in the word ‘conservative’. What are they wanting to conserve? What’s are synonyms of ‘conserve’?
Keep
Retain
Horde
Preserve
Safeguard

What are they trying to safeguard, retain, horde, keep and preserve?

Conservative comes from 'Burkean Conservative', the ideas of Edmond Burke.

That is institutions and traditions have hidden structures and values tied up in them, and therefore change should happen iteratively rather than destroying existing institutions and rebuilding from scratch.

Conservatism is a bit like agile software development in that regard.

When the stockmarket crashes - who gets the big govt bucks?

It seems the passion for the free market and the miracle of the ‘invisible hand’ doesn’t come in to it when those with power are the ones at risk. It’s not just the US either. This is everywhere. Every country allows families of means to set up trusts to protect their wealth through the generations. Why?

Why do most countries let individuals work through Ltd companies and avoid taxation? It’s outrageous that they get to play by different rules.

Conservatives don’t actually think this. They believe that they do believe in the free market and the many allowances and exceptions are just that - exceptions to their staunch ideology. But what they really believe is that power and wealth is a zero sum game - if someone else gets some it means they lost it.

Right wing economics explicitly believes in a non zero game, it says if taxes are kept in check then the pie grows and there is more for all. It believes everyone in society top to bottom can grow their wealth at the same time.

Think about why it’s conservatives that love the monarchy, why it was conservatives that wanted Brexit, why it was conservatives that cheer when Trump says they should take Iraqi oil....

The founding fathers were political radicals that overthrew the king, but they weren’t liberals or progressives. They had power and didn’t want to share it with the English king. But none gave up their slaves. Liberty was reserved for white men of means - they wanted more power and it was a zero sum game.

It’s been like this for thousands of years. The Roman social wars are a great example. Civilization has been one long struggle for power and wealth - those that have it and those that are oppressed, or have empathy for those oppressed. It’s not capitalism snd communism. It’s the haves vs the have nots.

Are you agreeing with me? Seems like it. My bet is that you googled ‘conservatism’ and likely saw terms like ‘preserve natural moral order’ and ‘inherent authority’ and realised that conservatism really is about keeping social structures in place and mentioned nothing about capitalism, which is what you previously mentioned was at the core of ‘right-wing’ politics.

Conservativism can exist in many economic systems; including communism because they do not go hand in hand, which is why a right-wing party can passionately champion the power of free trade one year and protectionism the next, and hardly lose a voter. Their voters simply don’t care about such things - they just think they do. These are reasons they’re given, but they actually care about preserving and/or reasserting the structures of power that believe as natural and inherent.

[Flyin Ryan]

It’s all in the word ‘conservative’. What are they wanting to conserve? What’s are synonyms of ‘conserve’?
Keep
Retain
Horde
Preserve
Safeguard

What are they trying to safeguard, retain, horde, keep and preserve?

Conservative comes from 'Burkean Conservative', the ideas of Edmond Burke.

That is institutions and traditions have hidden structures and values tied up in them, and therefore change should happen iteratively rather than destroying existing institutions and rebuilding from scratch.

Conservatism is a bit like agile software development in that regard.

When the stockmarket crashes - who gets the big govt bucks?

It seems the passion for the free market and the miracle of the ‘invisible hand’ doesn’t come in to it when those with power are the ones at risk. It’s not just the US either. This is everywhere. Every country allows families of means to set up trusts to protect their wealth through the generations. Why?

Why do most countries let individuals work through Ltd companies and avoid taxation? It’s outrageous that they get to play by different rules.

Conservatives don’t actually think this. They believe that they do believe in the free market and the many allowances and exceptions are just that - exceptions to their staunch ideology. But what they really believe is that power and wealth is a zero sum game - if someone else gets some it means they lost it.

Right wing economics explicitly believes in a non zero game, it says if taxes are kept in check then the pie grows and there is more for all. It believes everyone in society top to bottom can grow their wealth at the same time.

Think about why it’s conservatives that love the monarchy, why it was conservatives that wanted Brexit, why it was conservatives that cheer when Trump says they should take Iraqi oil....

The founding fathers were political radicals that overthrew the king, but they weren’t liberals or progressives. They had power and didn’t want to share it with the English king. But none gave up their slaves. Liberty was reserved for white men of means - they wanted more power and it was a zero sum game.

It’s been like this for thousands of years. The Roman social wars are a great example. Civilization has been one long struggle for power and wealth - those that have it and those that are oppressed, or have empathy for those oppressed. It’s not capitalism snd communism. It’s the haves vs the have nots.

Are you agreeing with me? Seems like it. My bet is that you googled ‘conservatism’ and likely saw terms like ‘preserve natural moral order’ and ‘inherent authority’ and realised that conservatism really is about keeping social structures in place and mentioned nothing about capitalism, which is what you previously mentioned was at the core of ‘right-wing’ politics.

Conservativism can exist in many economic systems; including communism because they do not go hand in hand, which is why a right-wing party can passionately champion the power of free trade one year and protectionism the next, and hardly lose a voter. Their voters simply don’t care about such things - they just think they do. These are reasons they’re given, but they actually care about preserving and/or reasserting the structures of power that believe as natural and inherent.

There's "conservative" in the sense of what Edmund Burke stood for and there's "conservative" in the sense of that's a label a person chose but they couldn't define the word if you asked them beyond "I'm not a liberal". It's why liberal in an American context is different from what liberal is in a European context, and it's why the word "progressive" has 50 different political meanings.

So are we talking Edmund Burke-style movement conservatism of say a Bill Kristol or are we talking about people that call themselves conservatives but don't know Edmund Burke from Karl Marx?