Republicans reject purity test

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Thomas Veil, Jan 31, 2010.

  1. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    OBJECTIVE reality
    #1
    For once there is something for which I can praise the RNC. This sounds like it was a naked power grab by the far right, and I'm glad it didn't work.

    Given the tenor of the loudest voices in the party, however, I'm kind of surprised that this failed.
     
  2. IntheNet macrumors regular

    IntheNet

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2009
    #2
    As a life-long conservative I don't like the idea of a "purity" test as it is called; but there again, there is validity toward assuring that a "Dierdre Scozzafava" type does not assume the title Republican. So too, RINOs of the Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins flavor should be counseled to vote their constituent representation rather than their liberal tendencies.
     
  3. jb1280 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2009
    #3
    Has it ever occurred to you that the Maine Senators are actually voting to the interests of their Republican constituents in Maine? I imagine the Maine party is quite a bit different from the Alabama Party.
     
  4. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #4
    Or a Scott Brown.


     
  5. Sydde macrumors 68020

    Sydde

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    #5
    Theodore Roosevelt, Herbert Hoover, Dwight D. Eisenhower, these people would not come close to fitting into the current definition of "Republican". Even Nixon would be kicked out of the party today for being too far to the left, and Reagan would barely make it.
     
  6. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
  7. Thomas Veil thread starter macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    OBJECTIVE reality
    #7
    Snowe and Collins are Republicans. It's most of the rest of the party that's assumed the name. I don't think anyone doubts that Dwight Eisenhower, Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford were Republicans, just as I'm sure those three presidents wouldn't even recognize most of the current bunch.

    Edit: Sydde beat me to almost exactly the same point. That'll teach me to fart around watching YouTube videos while I post.
     
  8. Sydde macrumors 68020

    Sydde

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    #8
    I thought you were supposed to have your iPhone do the farting for you.
     
  9. freeny macrumors 68020

    freeny

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2005
    Location:
    Location: Location:
    #9
    So now, no matter who the gop presents as a candidate, they will be exactly the same. Awesome :)
     
  10. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #10
    Nothing more then Party 1st, then the corporations 2nd, then the people it is suppose to represent somewhere at the bottom. Republicans have almost lost their minds and their seats.:D
     
  11. FrankieTDouglas macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    #11
    Maine is a liberal state, regardless of political affiliation. So it makes sense that their republican officials seem in accordance with the policies of the state. Much the same in how so many democrats from the south still seem rather conservative.
     
  12. Sydde macrumors 68020

    Sydde

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    #12
    Both US political parties have way too much control. When it comes down to what really matters, the difference between them can be summarized as "'Democrat' is a sneering perjorative, whereas 'Republican' is a vicious slur."
     
  13. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #13
    Good for the Republicans. But actually, I wished they'd all signed it. It would have been their death knell. ;)
     
  14. FrankieTDouglas macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    #15
    Shouldn't that be "Democrat's"?
     
  15. IntheNet macrumors regular

    IntheNet

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2009
    #16
    :rolleyes:

    There is room here for healthy debate...

    Wouldn't it be the plural possessive Democrats' ...?
     
  16. sysiphus macrumors 6502a

    sysiphus

    Joined:
    May 7, 2006
    #17
    No. It should be Democrats'

    Plural of Democrat is Democrats; you make it possessive by adding the apostrophe after the s.

    Not to pick on you, but I think that kids should have to pass (near ace) a test proving they can handle basic English grammar before they're allowed to graduate from high school. It's really rather sad--the rules for things like apostrophe usage just aren't that difficult. :(
     
  17. Rt&Dzine macrumors 6502a

    Rt&Dzine

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2008
    #18
    I may agree with your point, but for Pete's Sake . . . his infraction was so minor compared to most of the stuff that gets posted here!
     
  18. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #19
    Four all intensive purposes, I agree. Lets' not loose cite of all the eras that are maid hear.
     
  19. Rt&Dzine macrumors 6502a

    Rt&Dzine

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2008
    #20
    Your knot just whiseling dixie!
     
  20. nbs2 macrumors 68030

    nbs2

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2004
    Location:
    A geographical oddity
    #21
    Not necessarily. Perhaps the ad is in reference to Harry Reid, and the goal is to end his control of the Senate. In which case "Democrat's" would be correct. ;)
     

Share This Page