NationStates Jolt Archive

So there isn't much debate amongst my friends that the Dems are solwly losing most of their control on the government . . . but even with the single dominant Republican Party, the odds are it will fragment, with no external rival to compete with.

The splintering of the Republican Party
Here's how I call it:
*A number of Rep. politicans will remain just as such, but rejecting the neo-conservative influence
*Losing grip on the party, certain Republicans will shift towards the neo-conservative, and perhaps join the Constitution Party or something like that
*Some of the more moderate Republicans will help create a "centrist" party of sorts
*Other Republicans will go to bolster the Libertarian Party, or create a libertarian-esque party

If the Republican party were to remain the sole party. Then you would see a natural fragment of the party. that is because the majority of people would be in the "single" party. The majority of people do not think alike in many regards. So you would see this happen. It would be the same if the Democratic party were to become the sole party.

My hypothesis is the econonomic wing v. the religious maniacs.

My prediction is pretty close to Super-Power's. If the Republican Party were to split, I'd predict an authoritarian party versus a type of libertarian party.

In essence, the new two party system would be the Constitution Party versus the Libertarian Party.

Perhaps a New Left would emerge also, in the form of the Socialist Party.

One can only guess.

Other Republicans will go to bolster the Libertarian Party, or create a libertarian-esque party

:rolleyes:

Why do the so-callled Educated Southerners (Libertarians) turn into pussies whenever real life sets in? :p

Okay...


























I'm a dick. Admitted. So I posted on a DICK thread. :rolleyes:

I feel "out of touch"--

Do what you're best at!

I dont believe it will fragment any time soon. Neither do I believe the Democratic party is slipping into oblivion. As the consequences of republican control continue to build over time, people will go back to the opposition. I doubt the republicans will win the white house in 2008.

More than likely, given that most of the growth in the Republican party comes from disillusioned democrats (and has since Reagan), disenfrachised Libertarians, and other groups, you'd see a split along the lines of the Authoritarian/Big-Government vs. the Smaller-Government/Libertarian wings. You'd naturally find holy rollers in both camps-just like you find Southern Baptists voting Democrat not ten years ago.

You could say a split along the McCain/Nethercutt line, if you will. The Liberal republicans tend to be more of the old-school big-business types (which fits, oddly enough), they'd be your Authoritarian types- gun control is always popular among those who favour government by the Elite, as is restrictions of free speech (the McCain-Feingold act among other things).

It's sad to see how the Democratic party has degraded from a loyal-opposition that represented the working man, into a club for Federal Elites that navel-gazes to reach the same, unworkable answers over and over again, acting like a timeloop into the Radical Left of the 1960's, at the same time, it's also a shame that the Republicans have managed to co-opt the rhetoric of smaller government while doing the exact same things the Dems have been advocating for years.
It would be nice if there was an actual debate with two sides-I think there might actually be some change for the better-but that's not likely to happen in the real world.

The Republican party isn't going to fragment. However, there is a schism in the GOP that is currently being fought out, and it is basically bewten the moderates and the reactionaries.

The moderates tend to be relatively libertarian, altough fiscal liberalism is of course not unknown to them. The reactionaries tend to be very socially conservative, and run the gamut on fiscal issues, though tend more towards liberalism in that area as well. They also seem to use religion as part of their platform more often.

The recent Senate race in Pennsylvania, my home state, is a prime example of this. Arlen Specter is a very moderate Republican, but also part of the old establishment. He was challenged in the Republican primary by Pat Toomey, a neo-con reactionary; a very conservative politician. However, the GOP officially backed Specter, including Santorum and Bush, despite the fact that ideologically they aligned with Toomey, not Specter.

This conflict is mainly about elements of the GOP wanting the move farther right. The moderate establishment in the Republican Party is putting up a fight, but there is a strong Republican voter base for the reactionary forces in the party. Ironically, I think this fairly parallels the party politics of the Democrats right now as well.

It will be interesting to see who wins this internal tug-of-war: the moderates or the reactionaries.