Republicans Used to be So Much Nicer. What Happened?

[Buttercup]

In a land far, far away and a time long time ago (when I was young), my political affiliation aligned with Republican party values. I voted for George HW Bush. The Reds are no longer the same party they used to be. In the days when I could tolerate them, they were so much nicer. What happened?

Check out this video and see the difference today in regard to attitude and empathy concerning illegal immigration.

 

[Mindmaster]

My honest opinion is just that the same verbal and philosophical brawl that used to take years to work to a resolution and make a President now is exponentially larger. The tweets, the social media, the constant Internet battle, and numbers of other factors mean that honestly you have 1000% more information that a voter did twenty years ago. Also, in that same vein the candidates must quickly and assertively deal with commentary or they will get behind it and be wiped out. They can't even afford to wait hours -- hours of tweets with no redress could be devastating.

That's why it has changed... In a nutshell, it only takes hours to go from hero to zero. In the old days, outside of formal debates candidates never even had the ability to really talk to one another.

 

[Revoltingest]

In a land far, far away and a time long time ago (when I was young), my political affiliation aligned with Republican party values. I voted for George HW Bush. The Reds are no longer the same party they used to be. In the days when I could tolerate them, they were so much nicer. What happened?

Check out this video and see the difference today in regard to attitude and empathy concerning illegal immigration.

Niceness comes & goes.
I remember the Pubs being meaner.
(Dems have been meaner too. Oh, the way they treated Lincoln!)
But verily, I am much older than thou art.

Reagan was an exemplary pol (other than that heinous Iraq v Iran travesty).
But he was too much the big government liberal for me, so I voted against him both times.

 

[Quetzal]

I think it is because that is what people want. People want to see their super hero of choice stick it to em! Drama sells views, views equal dollars.

 

[metis]

I think the big difference today is that they treat each other more like enemies than opposite bedfellows. The kiss of death in the Republican Party is for one of them to actually cooperate or even publicly agree with Obama, Pelosi, etc. I don't see as much of the opposite being true though.

Even during the Reagan presidency they could argue like hell and then go out and have a beer together. Not today.

 

[George-ananda]

I do like the more Republican concept that stoking private companies growth and success as the key to helping the middle and lower classes. However these current Republican presidential front-runners are so disappointing to me that I may have to go Hillary this time.

 

[esmith]

I do like the more Republican concept that stoking private companies growth and success as the key to helping the middle and lower classes. However these current Republican presidential front-runners are so disappointing to me that I may have to go Hillary this time.

Each to their own devil I guess.

 

[Twilight Hue]

I think both parties have undergone changes for the worst compared with the past with some exception.

Too bad you can't just merge the best ideals from the Republicans and the Democrats and form a completely new party that's genuinely worthwhile, rather than the defacto formations bearing a different name which basically at the core, remain carbon copies ripped off the same rotton ole branch.

 

[Wirey]

I think it's just that we're all getting dumber. I remember Carson saying when he first got on the Tonight Show he could mention any governmental Secretary and the audience would know who they were. By the end, he had to explain who the Secretary of State was. TV and an education system that's more interested in passing kids than teaching them have pretty much wiped out linear thought, not just in the US but here in Canada too. Real quick, can you name:

Secretary of the Treasury
Secretary of the Interior
US Ambassador to Russia

See?

 

[Quetzal]

I think it's just that we're all getting dumber. I remember Carson saying when he first got on the Tonight Show he could mention any governmental Secretary and the audience would know who they were. By the end, he had to explain who the Secretary of State was. TV and an education system that's more interested in passing kids than teaching them have pretty much wiped out linear thought, not just in the US but here in Canada too. Real quick, can you name:

Secretary of the Treasury
Secretary of the Interior
US Ambassador to Russia

See?

You mean it isn't the Kardashians?!

 

[Revoltingest]

I do like the more Republican concept that stoking private companies growth and success as the key to helping the middle and lower classes. However these current Republican presidential front-runners are so disappointing to me that I may have to go Hillary this time.

A problem with both parties is that they focus too much on large companies (the ones which make the most enticing campaign donations), while actually harming smaller businesses with many ill considered policies (eg, making it a crime to deposit cash in banks on a particular schedule). Moreover, growth is a fine goal at times, but it's not a sustainable model, ie, perpetual growth isn't sustainable (so long as we live on just 1 planet). A better approach is to encourage efficiency.

 

[Revoltingest]

I think it's just that we're all getting dumber. I remember Carson saying when he first got on the Tonight Show he could mention any governmental Secretary and the audience would know who they were. By the end, he had to explain who the Secretary of State was. TV and an education system that's more interested in passing kids than teaching them have pretty much wiped out linear thought, not just in the US but here in Canada too. Real quick, can you name:

Secretary of the Treasury
Secretary of the Interior
US Ambassador to Russia

See?

Larry
Moe
Curly.....or is it Shemp?

Actually, those facts don't really signify understanding issues.
They're the kinds of things you'd see on a high school civics test.

 

[Quetzal]

They're the kinds of things you'd see on a high school civics test.

And then quickly forgotten. I think encouragement to keep up with current events should be implemented (if it hasn't already). Trust me, keeping up with politics is much more important than looking at kitten pictures on facebo- AWWW HES SO ADORABLE... what was I saying?

 

[metis]

With one party, literally most who say they belong to it don't accept even the basic Theory of Evolution, do not accept the research on "climate change" (global warming), believe Obama is Muslim, believe Obama wasn't born in the U.S., etc.

Now, gee, which party would that be?

 

[Quetzal]

With one party, literally most who say

Careful, generalizations aren't too helpful. I would also argue that only the really loud, obnoxious ones subscribe to some of the topics you listed.

 

[Revoltingest]

And then quickly forgotten. I think encouragement to keep up with current events should be implemented (if it hasn't already). Trust me, keeping up with politics is much more important than looking at kitten pictures on facebo- AWWW HES SO ADORABLE... what was I saying?

Rather than current events, I recommend a taking longer view.
I encourage people to read up on fundamentals, exempli gratia.....
- Climate change causes & effects (all sides)
- History of all sorts
- The Constitution
Such general info illuminates the cromulence of agendas proffered by candidates.

Note:
Sometimes I like to look fancy by using the full words instead of the abbreviation.

 

[metis]

Careful, generalizations aren't too helpful. I would also argue that only the really loud, obnoxious ones subscribe to some of the topics you listed.

These really aren't generalizations because there are polls to confirm this. Over half, and sometimes as high as 2/3, of self-proclaimed Republicans believe as such. Do we run across similar numbers with those on the other side of the aisle? No.

 

[Underhill]

How nice they are in a debate seems irrelevant. It's how they actually work with those they disagree with that matters. On that front, things have reached epidemic proportions.

Arguing over a bill or idea on the floor is expected and I would say healthy but treating the opposition as the enemy instead of a well intentioned person you disagree with is destructive.

 

[Sunstone]

Among other reasons, the current state of the Republican Party might have something to do with the Conservative Echo Chamber. The Chamber seems to make all sorts of vile notions and behaviors seem normal to people. As in a circle jerk, folks in the Chamber cheer each other on and feed off each others excitement -- so it's not long in that heated environment before limits are met and broken.

 

[Buttercup]

How nice they are in a debate seems irrelevant.

The civility toward illegal immigrants shown by Reagan and Bush in this debate was followed up with the immigration law of 1986 and successive addenda to further protect these families. If I recall correctly, GHW Bush even signed executive orders concerning this issue in favor of illegals. With Trump's obvious xenophobia and blatant racist comments, being "nice" matters a lot. He said “We cannot let them into this country, period” concerning Syrian refugees. Ted Cruz is just as bad. He announced recently that he was introducing legislation to ban all Syrian refugees from entering the US. Both he and Jeb Bush basically said we should only allow Christian refugees to come here. You would have never heard the Republicans of 25-30 years ago say such outrageously xenophobic statements. And that's just the tip of the ice berg.

Arguing over a bill or idea on the floor is expected and I would say healthy but treating the opposition as the enemy instead of a well intentioned person you disagree with is destructive.

Agreed. However, if any of these extremist Repubs get elected and they have the majority in congress, some of these outrageous propositions have a much better chance of progressing toward law.