I think it's fair to say that, for the most part, America can be characterized as Center Right. It seems like they are repudiating some of the things the Democrats have tried to do...(Or at least the loud vocal populist right would make us think this is the case....which it probably is unless there's some strong, silent majority lurking) and it looks like things may shift back.

But, with the Tea Party movements and the staunch opposition to nearly all measures proposed by the Democrats, it seems like Conservatives and Republicans are moving more to the right and away from the center.

The concept of "True Conservative" and "RINO" has never been so apparent. If a Republican compromises in any way, shape or form with a democratic proposal, they risk being labeled "not a true conservative"

And, overall, although I think America may not want what is going on in Congress now, I'm not so sure most Americans want the strong, iron clad, don't budge Conservativism either.

So what do you think? Are conservatives shifting too far to the right to counter Obama-Pelosi-Reid only to cause themselves trouble in the future?

I believe most Americans are center-right on most things -- and this is particularly true where economics are concerned.

That is why you're seeing most of the grassroots opposition to Obama-Reid-Pelosi. The core principles of that trio are rooted in big government and more government intervention/regulations. That is not how most people in this country believe.

Obama sold himself as a centrist during the campaign and too many gullible folks believed it, rather than looking at his background and his record (what there was of it). Had they looked more closely, they would have clearly seen he was pretty far left on most economic issues; far more liberal than most Americans are.

When the Democrats got such a huge majority because of the anti-Bush/Republican sentiment of the country, Obama, Pelosi and Reid saw this as an opportunity to push through a bunch of stuff they believed in, even if the majority of Americans did not agree.

It was a case of both misreading the electorate and presuming their majority meant far more than it did.

Most of what you're seeing from Tea Party folks is a clear reaction to that -- and I don't believe it's going too far to the right. It's what is necessary at this time to counter the power that exists in Washington.

You don't win by moving to the center. You win by moving the center to you.

President Obama told us exactly what he wanted to do and what he was going to propose. A rather healthy majority of the American Electorate chose him over John McCain. Where are we getting this idea that a vast number of Americans disagree with the Obama positions? Is this wishful thinking for the 2010-2012 Elections coming up? If we say it often enough will people start to believe it? Sure, Obama has taken some heat for his programs, but when a President chooses to take action to attempt to correct serious economic conditions rather than sitting back and doing virtually nothing to head disaster off, he will be criticized (Does the name Roosevelt ring a bell?). He has been criticized. Not everyone loves Obama. Not everyone loved Bush. I maintain that if the economy continues to show gains and employment continues to increase, the Elections in 2010 will come out about even and the President will be re-elected in 2012. His numbers aren't what they were when he took office, but George H Bush had astronomical numbers when he was standing on top of the rubble that was the World Trade Center and when he left office, his numbers were Hooveresque. Obama was leading by a fairly comfortable margin a week or two ago although, again, not as impressive as earlier. Barring any severe reversions to economic hard times, I think that he will win. I still believe that the negativity of the Conservative position regarding anything Obama does will ultimately backfire. There are a ton of Democrats out there who like Barack, and a lot of ethnic groups who will vote for the man they perceive will support programs that will help them. We'll see. It should, if nothing else, be very interesting. I also know at least two or three Republicans that will support Obama as well. (slightly understated in case you're wondering.)

"Where are we getting this idea that a vast number of Americans disagree with the Obama positions?"

Let's see...

A majority of Americans opposed/oppose the stimulus package.
A majority of Americans oppose health care reform.
A majority of Americans oppose cap & steal.
A majority of Americans oppose turning to "green" technologies over drilling for oil/natural gas.
A majority of Americans oppose putting terrorists on trial in US courtrooms.
A majority of Americans oppose granting Miranda rights to terrorists.

In just about every poll of late, a vast majority of Americans believe the country is HEADED IN THE WRONG DIRECTION.

I'd say it's fair to say that most Americans oppose Obama's policies -- at least the major stuff he hopes to accomplish.

Yes

Not really.

Although I do think that when they return to power they are going to get the same sense of frustration the Democrats have now in being able to get absolutely nothing done when the Minority Democrats turn the obstruction game around on them.

^^^

Turn about's fair game

according to this, the country is center-left...

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/02/republicans-not-obama-more-often-on.html

I don't think so. Now, it is a vocal wing, but I believe the country is still largely center.

I equate the tea party movement to the anti-war movement in 2006-2007. Very vocal, but very diverse and decentralized.

'forgive me for characterizing the U.S. as "center-right" without a source...I suppose it probably varies from issue to issue and it may be ill-advised to paint such a broad brush.

Well, let's take for instance the proposed tax credit for small businesses that hire new workers. From what I've seen, economists from all sides tend to think this is at the very least, a decent idea and is largely in line with conservative core values...suppose a Republican gets and board and votes for this...if recent history is any guide....she will be crucified.

I feel like the GOP is backing themselves into a corner wherein they aren't able to vote for anything even tangentially supported by by the unholy marx-engels worshipping trinity of Pelosi-Reid-Obama.

ptown_trojans_1 wrote: I don't think so. Now, it is a vocal wing, but I believe the country is still largely center.

I equate the tea party movement to the anti-war movement in 2006-2007. Very vocal, but very diverse and decentralized.

Well, they got it together enough to hand Congress to the Dems. It'll be interesting to see how close the Tea Party can get the Pubs to returning the favor.

Boat: Most Republicans think that proposal has it backwards.

Give the small businesses a tax break NOW -- so they'll have an incentive to use the money to hire more workers. No business is going to spend money to get a tax break later. If they do, they won't be in business very long.

Yes, it seems that the Republican party is moving towards a style of marketing their position based on (more than is the norm) moral labeling and fear mongering. Anytime they dislike a proposition they shout about how it's marxist/communist/socialism/will lead to death panels. For some reason they won't use facts and reasoning to dispute the policies they don't like such as the health care bill which is disappointing because there are plenty of real reasons not to like it and none of them have anything to do with Obama trying to make America a communist nation.

It just seems that the GOP is quick to say "no that's socialism, it won't work" instead of "no, this (x) would work better because of x and x".

fish82 wrote:

ptown_trojans_1 wrote: I don't think so. Now, it is a vocal wing, but I believe the country is still largely center.

I equate the tea party movement to the anti-war movement in 2006-2007. Very vocal, but very diverse and decentralized.

Well, they got it together enough to hand Congress to the Dems. It'll be interesting to see how close the Tea Party can get the Pubs to returning the favor.

Ehh, I wouldn't say that was the anti-war movement as much as the "the country is sick of Republicans and W" movement. The anti-war folks were part of that, but it was the center that voted the R's out of office in 2006.

Now, perhaps that center will swing back to the Right and the R's will regain the House and/ or Senate. We'll see.

ptown_trojans_1 wrote:

fish82 wrote:

ptown_trojans_1 wrote: I don't think so. Now, it is a vocal wing, but I believe the country is still largely center.

I equate the tea party movement to the anti-war movement in 2006-2007. Very vocal, but very diverse and decentralized.

Well, they got it together enough to hand Congress to the Dems. It'll be interesting to see how close the Tea Party can get the Pubs to returning the favor.

Ehh, I wouldn't say that was the anti-war movement as much as the "the country is sick of Republicans and W" movement. The anti-war folks were part of that, but it was the center that voted the R's out of office in 2006.

Now, perhaps that center will swing back to the Right and the R's will regain the House and/ or Senate. We'll see.

In the fall of 2006, the unemployment rate was 4.5%, and the Stock market was at 12,000. People were tired of the war...that's all. The center turned on the war, and Nancy & Harry's ability to nationalize the election.

Neither of them mentioned any economic issues during the campaign, since every poll out there put the War as the #1 issue that fall.

IggyPride00 wrote: Not really.

Although I do think that when they return to power they are going to get the same sense of frustration the Democrats have now in being able to get absolutely nothing done when the Minority Democrats turn the obstruction game around on them.

The Dems had absolute power for a year. If they accomplished nothing, they have only themseleves to blame.

For the record, I HATE that the neocons stole the Tea Party Movement from us true conservatives. The movement started with Ron Paul in 2007, not dumbass Sarah Palin in 2009.

bigmanbt wrote: For the record, I HATE that the neocons stole the Tea Party Movement from us true conservatives. The movement started with Ron Paul in 2007, not dumbass Sarah Palin in 2009.

Bingo.

bigmanbt wrote: For the record, I HATE that the neocons stole the Tea Party Movement from us true conservatives. The movement started with Ron Paul in 2007, not dumbass Sarah Palin in 2009.

The neos haven't "stolen" diddly. Are they trying to hitch their wagon to it? Sure...with varying degrees of success. But to say they've "hijacked" or "stolen" it is pure drama queen bullshit. 99% of that talk is from the left trying to discredit the movement while on break from cleaning out their pants.

I Wear Pants wrote: Yes, it seems that the Republican party is moving towards a style of marketing their position based on (more than is the norm) moral labeling and fear mongering. Anytime they dislike a proposition they shout about how it's marxist/communist/socialism/will lead to death panels. For some reason they won't use facts and reasoning to dispute the policies they don't like such as the health care bill which is disappointing because there are plenty of real reasons not to like it and none of them have anything to do with Obama trying to make America a communist nation.

It just seems that the GOP is quick to say "no that's socialism, it won't work" instead of "no, this (x) would work better because of x and x".

BS.

In the case of the health care bill -- there were LOTS of examples given, including how bureaucrats would end up making critical health care decisions that could lead to someone's death.

It wasn't all hyperbole, even if the name (death panels) was a bit over the top.

In all the other cases where there was extreme government interference, people pointed out exactly what they were opposed to. Once again, FACTS were provided. It was not all hyperbole.

You want hyperbole? How about in just about every election where you've got Democrats going around screaming how Republicans are going to take away Social Security from seniors or let poor people starve on the streets.

That schtick has been going on for decades.

bigmanbt wrote: For the record, I HATE that the neocons stole the Tea Party Movement from us true conservatives. The movement started with Ron Paul in 2007, not dumbass Sarah Palin in 2009.

I cant stand Sarah Palin, I can't wait to see her get her ass whooped in the primary debates

Writerbuckeye wrote:

I Wear Pants wrote: Yes, it seems that the Republican party is moving towards a style of marketing their position based on (more than is the norm) moral labeling and fear mongering. Anytime they dislike a proposition they shout about how it's marxist/communist/socialism/will lead to death panels. For some reason they won't use facts and reasoning to dispute the policies they don't like such as the health care bill which is disappointing because there are plenty of real reasons not to like it and none of them have anything to do with Obama trying to make America a communist nation.

It just seems that the GOP is quick to say "no that's socialism, it won't work" instead of "no, this (x) would work better because of x and x".

BS.

In the case of the health care bill -- there were LOTS of examples given, including how bureaucrats would end up making critical health care decisions that could lead to someone's death.

It wasn't all hyperbole, even if the name (death panels) was a bit over the top.

In all the other cases where there was extreme government interference, people pointed out exactly what they were opposed to. Once again, FACTS were provided. It was not all hyperbole.

You want hyperbole? How about in just about every election where you've got Democrats going around screaming how Republicans are going to take away Social Security from seniors or let poor people starve on the streets.

That schtick has been going on for decades.

But the hyperbole is what they allowed to be the focus of their arguments.

The democrats using the Social Security thing is lame too.

I Wear Pants wrote:

Writerbuckeye wrote:

I Wear Pants wrote: Yes, it seems that the Republican party is moving towards a style of marketing their position based on (more than is the norm) moral labeling and fear mongering. Anytime they dislike a proposition they shout about how it's marxist/communist/socialism/will lead to death panels. For some reason they won't use facts and reasoning to dispute the policies they don't like such as the health care bill which is disappointing because there are plenty of real reasons not to like it and none of them have anything to do with Obama trying to make America a communist nation.

It just seems that the GOP is quick to say "no that's socialism, it won't work" instead of "no, this (x) would work better because of x and x".

BS.

In the case of the health care bill -- there were LOTS of examples given, including how bureaucrats would end up making critical health care decisions that could lead to someone's death.

It wasn't all hyperbole, even if the name (death panels) was a bit over the top.

In all the other cases where there was extreme government interference, people pointed out exactly what they were opposed to. Once again, FACTS were provided. It was not all hyperbole.

You want hyperbole? How about in just about every election where you've got Democrats going around screaming how Republicans are going to take away Social Security from seniors or let poor people starve on the streets.

That schtick has been going on for decades.

But the hyperbole is what they allowed to be the focus of their arguments.

The democrats using the Social Security thing is lame too.

Wait a minute -- you clearly said there were NO facts given to support what was being said. That's not true. Object to the hyperbole all you like, but don't say no fact were provided when, in fact, tons of facts were put out there when all this was going on.

Fact of the matter is this: those who were trying to ram this through focused MORE on the term "death panels" and were all worked up about the terminology and IGNORED it when facts were provided that backed up the basic objection, that bureaucrats were, in fact, going to be making decisions regarding health care for Americans.