• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

ConservativeGAF

Status
Not open for further replies.
Measley said:
Just to be clear; We only knock Republicans because people in your party are batshit insane.
Click to expand...



You say that like the left isn't full of insane people as well.


It's not like republicans are some small crazy minority of the population. Its like....half of the population. Maybe its being a little close minded to dismiss all republicans as crazy religious zealot bigots.



I always likened it to football. There could be two views on how to accomplish the same thing but two approaches.


Some coaches was a physical in your face ground and pound with strong focus on defense(Steelers bears ravens etc) while some think the best way to win is a finesse passing game that scores a lot but also has less focus on defense(manning colts pats cowboys).


They both have valid reasoning but some people just think different philosophies will work better overall.



That's the way I've always looked at politics. I don't think either side is 100% correct and most people aren't evil. Just vote who you think best represents your views and will provide strong leadership and shut the hell up about it unless you just like having a light conversation with friends and family at the dinner table.
 
TommyT said:
I've seriously thought about it multiple times. However I just imagine it's like most of the other threads where most attempts at a discussion or the slightest difference in opinion is immediately ostracized and taken to an extreme before any genuine discussion can be had.
Click to expand...

People say this a lot, but you don't give GAF enough credit.

Yes, there will be people who jump on you, but fuck... there is also a lot of productive discussion had among two people with opposing views. When you can stay calm and really discuss something without falling into "lol, I can't believe you just said that" rhetoric, the discussions get REALLY good.
 
Scott32020 said:
4IIgy.png
Click to expand...

What point is this trying to make?
 
heliosRAzi said:
I think this is why a lot of people equate Republicans/Conservatives with all of the bad stereotypes: they are electing people who don't get science, who think slavery wasn't bad, etc to be their representatives. Or they have delegates who throw peanuts at black people and call them animals.
Click to expand...

Exactly. This is clearly not what conservatism should be about and it should be conservatives shouting at them to tell them to go away or not voting for them. Because they give what can be thoughtful and sensible a bad name.
 
Measley said:
Or they believe that someone who was raped wasn't really raped if their rapist gets them pregnant.

And btw, before someone says that isn't a mainstream Republican idea, the Vice presidential candidate supported the concept.
Click to expand...
And here comes the hyperbole that everyone is talking about. I mean, there's actually a legitimate talking point in there for liberals, what exactly is the need for hyperbole?
.
 
Measley said:
Or like Paul Ryan actually believing that a Medicare voucher program is a good idea for seniors....
Click to expand...

It's not a good idea for seniors. However, it is a good idea for the debt and the country.

At some point people have to realize the interests of the two groups are opposed
 
Kinitari said:
People say this a lot, but you don't give GAF enough credit.

Yes, there will be people who jump on you, but fuck... there is also a lot of productive discussion had among two people with opposing views. When you can stay calm and really discuss something without falling into "lol, I can't believe you just said that" rhetoric, the discussions get REALLY good.
Click to expand...

Not really. Most of liberal gaf just falls back on the old cliches like "bootstraps" and 'you're being racist", not to mention using personal insults and attacks. I usually just roll my eyes and move on at that point.
 
HalcyonTB12 said:
You say that like the left isn't full of insane people as well.


It's not like republicans are some small crazy minority of the population. Its like....half of the population. Maybe its being a little close minded to dismiss all republicans as crazy religious zealot bigots.



I always likened it to football. There could be two views on how to accomplish the same thing but two approaches.


Some coaches was a physical in your face ground and pound with strong focus on defense(Steelers bears ravens etc) while some think the best way to win is a finesse passing game that scores a lot but also has less focus on defense(manning colts pats cowboys).


They both have valid reasoning but some people just think different philosophies will work better overall.



That's the way I've always looked at politics. I don't think either side is 100% correct and most people aren't evil. Just vote who you think best represents your views and will provide strong leadership and shut the hell up about it unless you just like having a light conversation with friends and family at the dinner table.
Click to expand...

Then please, give us some examples of Democrats saying similar things.

Don't worry, I'll wait.

ggnoobIGN said:
And here comes the hyperbole that everyone is talking about. I mean, there's actually a legitimate talking point in there for liberals, what exactly is the need for hyperbole?
Click to expand...

Where's the hyperbole? That's exactly what Congressmen Aiken and Ryan believe.
 
Kinitari said:
People say this a lot, but you don't give GAF enough credit.

Yes, there will be people who jump on you, but fuck... there is also a lot of productive discussion had among two people with opposing views. When you can stay calm and really discuss something without falling into "lol, I can't believe you just said that" rhetoric, the discussions get REALLY good.
Click to expand...

Yeah I wasn't meaning to imply there wasn't any productive discussion. I'm quite sure that there are plenty of people who would rationally approach a discussion or difference of opinion in a way that actively promotes such. Also, I haven't gone into the PoliGAF thread in quite some time so I don't know as to who is in there. My reasoning for avoiding it is because I imagine that those who actively say the rhetoric you're describing in many of the politically toned threads frequent that one. So if I knew I wasn't having to deal with "can't believe you don't think like I do and are clearly dumb" type of comments then I'd be more inclined to discuss politics with people.

FWIW, I give credit to people whom I know not only deserve it but also promote discussions rather than bait and troll (like you... the credit part, not the bait and troll part).
 
Kinitari said:
People say this a lot, but you don't give GAF enough credit.

Yes, there will be people who jump on you, but fuck... there is also a lot of productive discussion had among two people with opposing views. When you can stay calm and really discuss something without falling into "lol, I can't believe you just said that" rhetoric, the discussions get REALLY good.
Click to expand...


I don't disagree with your optimism but:

- a lot is subjective

- productive discussion between dichotomous views can be anything

- one person being calm does not guard against a failing discussion

How often does it happen in the most polarizing of topics? Just reading Evilore's cunt post made me realize how crazy people have been getting around here.
 
Still waiting for the true definition of social conservatism that us pinkos aren't privy to, the one that dispels the myth of them as a bigoted clowns who infringe on others rights.
 
RDreamer said:
If your views aren't bigoted, then you shouldn't have anything to worry about.
Click to expand...

I don't agree with this, only because if a contingent of people feel that certain viewpoints have to be seeded in bigotry/racism/sexism then they are going to argue with you much more vociferously. Eventually you're going to get trapped in a flame war situation that gets you banned because these people personally hate you so much.

If you keep your head down and your views to yourself you won't become a target for other commenters here and you won't end up in as many personal fights.

On the other hand you are much more likely to get away with inflammatory statements on the other side because there are simply fewer individuals here who will target you and take personal offense to things you've said. It's really just a numbers game. It's not some kind of conspiracy or persecution it's just the way things tend to go on Internet sites and forums.

There might be something to saying the mods lean one way or the other, but to be honest I don't pay close enough attention or care enough to focus on that. I think it's too easy to blame them, it's the entire communities responsibility to not let the piling on or harassment happen. I don't think it's easy to be a moderator and keep everyone happy.
 
sp3000 said:
It's not a good idea for seniors. However, it is a good idea for the debt and the country.

At some point people have to realize the interests of the two groups are opposed
Click to expand...

Seniors living in poverty from lack of health insurance and care isn't good for the nation, or our economy.

There's a reason we passed medicare in the first place. Before it was passed, a disproportionate amount of seniors lived in poverty because they couldn't afford medical care.

Romney wants to increase the military by 2 trillion dollars, but we can't afford to keep our seniors off the streets.

Gotta love Republicans.
 
Penguins&PolarBears said:
I don't agree with this, only because if a contingent of people feel that certain viewpoints have to be seeded in bigotry/racism/sexism then they are going to argue with you much more vociferously.
Click to expand...

stop beating around the bush and just tell us what your viewpoints are. they'll be yours, as well thought out as your other posts, and no one will ban you. people will disagree, people will agree but no one will ban you.

i don't like that people feel they can't say how they feel here. people shouldn't be afraid of a ban because they feel differently about supply side economics or foreign policy.

MidnightRider said:
Biden:" they gonna put yall back in chains"
Click to expand...

yep that is what the VP to a black president meant when he said that. totally the same thing as todd akin's ridiculous notions of women.
 
HalcyonTB12 said:
You say that like the left isn't full of insane people as well.
Click to expand...

Not to the point that the Republicans are.

Ok, here's the thing. I realize that not every republican out there is insane like these people are. There are some reasonable conservatives, I'll admit. That's fine. But where are their voices when all of these people are getting elected to office? And I'm not talking just about when some of those views come into mainstream views like Akin's did. That guy was an elected official writing terrible laws for a while. There was that other guy, too, on the science committee that practically thought a few schools of science were from the devil. There are countless threads on these people. All I'm saying is... where are these non-insane people when these insane ones are getting elected? Why is no one standing up and saying OK, this guy doesn't represent me. I feel like it only gets some attention from the right sometimes just because the mainstream found out about it, not that they're genuinely embarrassed that it's an actual view from their side.
 
aronnov reborn said:
Let's unite!

If serious? we do exist. usually as jesters to amuse the others but it's all worth it on days like Romneys - Obama's first debate.
Click to expand...

So are you guys all gonna crawl back into your respective holes when Obama wins, not to be heard from again for another four years?
 
One side is founded on the notion of small government with personal responsibility, the other is massive government with a welfare state system.

I think the right mixture is some balance of the two, but I am a fiscal conservative and that is enough for me to never vote Democrat. I really don't care about the gay marriage debate or many of the social debates between the two ideologies.

I don't know who will win the debate tonight, but Biden is horrible at debates and I don't know too many people who care for him or his personality. Ryan will come off as respectable and knowledgeable on very key issues. I wouldn't be surprised to see Ryan take this debate.
 
Penguins&PolarBears said:
I don't agree with this, only because if a contingent of people feel that certain viewpoints have to be seeded in bigotry/racism/sexism then they are going to argue with you much more vociferously. Eventually you're going to get trapped in a flame war situation that gets you banned because these people personally hate you so much.

If you keep your head down and your views to yourself you won't become a target for other commenters here and you won't end up in as many personal fights.

On the other hand you are much more likely to get away with inflammatory statements on the other side because there are simply fewer individuals here who will target you and take personal offense to things you've said. It's really just a numbers game. It's not some kind of conspiracy or persecution it's just the way things tend to go on Internet sites and forums.

There might be something to saying the mods lean one way or the other, but to be honest I don't pay close enough attention or care enough to focus on that. I think it's too easy to blame them, it's the entire communities responsibility to not let the piling on or harassment happen. I don't think it's easy to be a moderator and keep everyone happy.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone on GAF has ever been banned for holding a non-bigoted view thought to be a bigoted view :p
 
agrajag said:
So are you guys all gonna crawl back into your respective holes when Obama wins, not to be heard from again for another four years?
Click to expand...

Yes. But if he wins again you can cash America's check.

Hell a lot of people think we are already passed the point of no return.

Check out the traffic on any survival related website.
 
speedline said:
One side is founded on the notion of small government with personal responsibility, the other is massive government with a welfare state system.

I think the right mixture is some balance of the two, but I am a fiscal conservative and that is enough for me to never vote Democrat. I really don't care about the gay marriage debate or many of the social debates between the two ideologies.

I don't know who will win the debate tonight, but Biden is horrible at debates and I don't know too many people who care for him or his personality. Ryan will come off as respectable and knowledgeable on very key issues. I wouldn't be surprised to see Ryan take this debate.
Click to expand...

So wait... You don't believe in massive government or welfare, but you support Romney who wants to increase the military industrial complex by 2 trillion dollars, and hand out more corporate welfare to large businesses and companies?

How does that work out in a logical fashion?
 
I'm a moderately strong fiscal conservative. Though I'm Keynesian (idealist, spend on the right things Keynesian). I'm also a strong social liberal, so I'm one of those nutty center left libertarians that GAF denies existence of.

I can never vote for Republicans because they're such flamboyant fiscal liberals, and they spend on the exact opposite of things that I think are good for economic growth. I mean just look at Romney's plan for military spending, tax cuts, and covering it with mysterious unspecified deductibles that are totally not any of the ones we're aware of (ie increase spending, grow debt by 50% while not in a recession. Just like Bush 2 and Reagan did).
 
speedline said:
One side is founded on the notion of small government with personal responsibility, the other is massive government with a welfare state system.

I think the right mixture is some balance of the two, but I am a fiscal conservative and that is enough for me to never vote Democrat. I really don't care about the gay marriage debate or many of the social debates between the two ideologies.

I don't know who will win the debate tonight, but Biden is horrible at debates and I don't know too many people who care for him or his personality. Ryan will come off as respectable and knowledgeable on very key issues. I wouldn't be surprised to see Ryan take this debate.
Click to expand...

Modern Republicans are anything but fiscally conservative; cognitive dissonance much?
 
MidnightRider said:
Yes. But if he wins again you can cash America's check.

Hell a lot of people think we are already passed the point of no return.

Check out the traffic on any survival related website.
Click to expand...

Those guys ALWAYS think we're fucked though. If it's not Obama it would be something else, like gays in the military or PBS or whatever else gives them apocalypse boners.
 
Lmfao at the notion of GOP being fiscally conservative.
They are just as much for a big government and spending as the democrats, the key difference being that they want that money to go to businesses rather than poor plebbies :p
 
B-Dubs said:
Those guys ALWAYS think we're fucked though. If it's not Obama it would be something else, like gays in the military or PBS or whatever else gives them apocalypse boners.
Click to expand...

I wasn't applying those guys to Obama. I was applying them towards the "point of no return" part.

It's crazy to think that if the electrical grid went down how screwed we would be. Basically everything is electronic these days.

If you're a reader. Check out the book "Lights Out" which is a take on this very thing happening. It's a fun read.

On another note.... I've got a strong craving for Buffalo Wild Wings after reading your name.
 
SquiddyBiscuit said:
Lmfao at the notion of GOP being fiscally conservative.
They are just as much for a big government and spending as the democrats, the key difference being that they want that money to go to businesses rather than poor plebbies :p
Click to expand...

Yep. Basically there is no conservative party, just like there isn't a party for people like me. I choose Obama because in the 2D political belief plane he's much closer than the GOP, and probably about the same as the Libertarian party. I don't agree with probably 30% of what he does, but I think it's a plan that will result in sustainable moderate growth.

The GOP plan of piling on the debt so businesses can keep more cash to invest wherever (usually overseas because the middle class isn't skilled enough because lack of education/health/infrastructure) while claiming to be responsible just isn't appealing. That's ignoring all of the 1950s social views.
 
Trent Strong said:
People have been banned for using the word 'bitch'.
Click to expand...

That's not being banned for holding a bigoted view, but for using a semi-banned word.
Besides, Evilore has turned NeoGAF into a free-speech internet haven once again, so there's no worry of getting banned for "bitch" anymore unless you're aiming it at someone.
 
I'm wondering what the point of ConservativeGAF is really since half of are labeled as dingo-bat-shit-insane and hold wildly unrealistic expectations for the Republican party while a majority of us would love to vote 3rd party just to piss off the elephant vanguard.
 
Pctx said:
I'm wondering what the point of ConservativeGAF is really since half of are labeled as dingo-bat-shit-insane and hold wildly unrealistic expectations for the Republican party while a majority of us would love to vote 3rd party just to piss off the elephant vanguard.
Click to expand...

Ideally, the Democrats should continue to stay in their current middle-right position (even better if they were trully middle), the GOP should just rebrand themselves as the new social progressive/fiscal conservative option on the right, and the Green party should swoop in and fill up the obligatory left spot.

Change around the various election systems to enable proportional representation so it doesn't devolve into a two-party crap fest again, and US politics will be way better off than it is today.
 
The real problem is that most conservatives on this forum can't explain their views or back up anything. Then they get jumped on and evil liberal GAF comes swooping in. You'll learn a thing or two if you are forced to defend your views.
 
Chumly said:
The real problem is that most conservatives on this forum can't explain their views or back up anything. Then they get jumped on and evil liberal GAF comes swooping in. You'll learn a thing or two if you are forced to defend your views.
Click to expand...

That's easy... I usually just say "because...."
 
While it may not be the majority of "ConservativeGAF" I hear a lot of whining that GAF doesn't give equal time to conservative points of view.

Have any of you considered that GAF leans towards facts/justice? Global warming; equal rights for EVERYONE; decreasing tax revenue doesn't increase tax revenue; all citizen have the right to vote.

I've read a lot of posts in this thread about how GAF doesn't cater to conservatism; have any of you conservatives considered why that it is? Why an international forum of people from, Europe, Asia, North America, and South America all consider your views to be either lacking facts or otherwise ridiculous?
 
RustyNails said:
Can we welcome some of you folks to poligaf? All our moderate-conservative posters have been perma banned (for good reasons)/left. It's an echo chamber right now.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the invite, but seeing how this thread is going, I don't want to really discuss politics with much seriousness on NeoGAF. No offense - and I'm sure you're a fine person to speak with, but the overall tone isn't for me.
 
max_cool said:
While it may not be the majority of "ConservativeGAF" I hear a lot of whining that GAF doesn't give equal time to conservative points of view.

Have any of you considered that GAF leans towards facts/justice? Global warming; equal rights for EVERYONE; decreasing tax revenue doesn't increase tax revenue; all citizen have the right to vote.

I've read a lot of posts in this thread about how GAF doesn't cater to conservatism; have any of you conservatives considered why that it is? Why an international forum of people from, Europe, Asia, North America, and South America all consider your views to be either lacking facts or otherwise ridiculous?
Click to expand...

So it's pretty clear then that most of GAF doesn't welcome a faith based point of view no?

In light of that environment, why bother participating in discussion?
 
HalcyonTB12 said:
You say that like the left isn't full of insane people as well.


It's not like republicans are some small crazy minority of the population. Its like....half of the population. Maybe its being a little close minded to dismiss all republicans as crazy religious zealot bigots.
Click to expand...

This has been said before, not just on GAF:

A big reason people don't take seriously those who claim they're conservative, is because there's too many attempts at deflecting the insanity of the GOP with arguments of false equivalency.

"But liberals are just as crazy..."

That's an evasion.

It's not about whether you can find "crazy" people of any ideology. You can. If you make up a political party tomorrow and call it "The Fortified Mystic Pleotropes", and by the end of the day you recruit ten members... at least one of those people will be some f**king crazy who showed up because that's what crazy people do.

The real problem is that the GOP, in an effort to reinvent itself over the last 30 years, has invited the crazies to take center stage. It has brought the fringe into the spotlight and pandered to it... and is demonstrating that absolutely nothing is too insane for the GOP to bend over backwards to make room for. Though they may be reaching the practical limits of this now - witness Romney bouncing around out of control, literally being forced to tell every audience something diametrically opposed to the people at his previous stop in order to make everyone happy.

Add to this the fact that the modern GOP has enlisted an entire news corp to be its private propaganda wing, that distorts facts to the point it is comical, and we have a real problem.

There actually are some people, including here on GAF for instance, who say "I would be a conservative or used to be, but the GOP itself today has gone completely mad". They're being honest with themselves.

Sticking with just GAF, what a lot of people here actually do is condemn the GOP and its leading representatives for going completely over the edge of insanity. And generally, GAF as a whole gets dismissed by a certain segment of "proud conservatives" as being nothing but a bunch of intolerant liberal hippies for just calling crazy, crazy.

One might ask: is it really so hard to see that what most people are reacting to isn't some sane interpretation of political conservatism, but the crazy three ring circus that's been going on for years, that really does outshine anything the democrats can come up with.

wienke said:
So it's pretty clear then that most of GAF doesn't welcome a faith based point of view no?

In light of that environment, why bother participating in discussion?
Click to expand...

This sounds as if conservatism is being intrinsically linked to religion. And that it isn't based on "facts" but "faith".

Which kind of presents a problem when trying to discuss politics rationally, if you're going to argue purely from a "faith based perspective". Because you can just always say "my faith says you're wrong, for no reason other than I say it's my faith".

So yeah, I could kind of see that being a problem, if that's what conservatism is to you.
 
IMHO, this forum is too popular/busy - if you post something, ten people reply, by the time you come back 2 days later and want to post a reply, it's already been 10 pages of *stuff*.

Gaming threads are even worse, actually. Only good for passive reading.
 
wienke said:
So it's pretty clear then that most of GAF doesn't welcome a faith based point of view no?

In light of that environment, why bother participating in discussion?
Click to expand...


Why should anyone consider faith as a reasonable justification for the support of political views? You're right about 'why bother participating in discussion', if your positions aren't supported by evidence and can't be falsified, then there isn't a discussion to be had.
 
wienke said:
So it's pretty clear then that most of GAF doesn't welcome a faith based point of view no?

In light of that environment, why bother participating in discussion?
Click to expand...

Faith points of view points are complicated. It's not necessarily that GAF doesn't welcome faith based view points (I mean, a lot of GAF is very anti religious, heck I would say I am pretty anti religion) - but if you could somehow present your argument in a compelling, logical and well founded manner - then you'd get at least SOME support from people.

I just don't think that such a thing is compatible with faith based view points, as they are essentially "I think to be pious/receive heavenly rewards, we must do X regardless of Y".

You can't really debate against that. Sure you can say "doing X would inherently harm the financial/sociological/general health of society, when we see similar things happening in N period, or with R country, F is the result. And Y should always be considered, because of etc etc etc" - I mean, people can make that argument, but if the rebuttal is

"Sorry, my holy book is pretty strict about this view point" - it doesn't facilitate conversation.
 
Kaijima said:
This sounds as if conservatism is being intrinsically linked to religion. And that it isn't based on "facts" but "faith".

Which kind of presents a problem when trying to discuss politics rationally, if you're going to argue purely from a "faith based perspective". Because you can just always say "my faith says you're wrong, for no reason other than I say it's my faith".

So yeah, I could kind of see that being a problem, if that's what conservatism is to you.
Click to expand...

Sutton Dagger said:
Why should anyone consider faith as a reasonable justification for the support of political views? You're right about 'why bother participating in discussion', if your positions aren't supported by evidence and can't be falsified, then there isn't a discussion to be had.
Click to expand...

Kinitari said:
Faith points of view points are complicated. It's not necessarily that GAF doesn't welcome faith based view points (I mean, a lot of GAF is very anti religious, heck I would say I am pretty anti religion) - but if you could somehow present your argument in a compelling, logical and well founded manner - then you'd get at least SOME support from people.

I just don't think that such a thing is compatible with faith based view points, as they are essentially "I think to be pious/receive heavenly rewards, we must do X regardless of Y".

You can't really debate against that. Sure you can say "doing X would inherently harm the financial/sociological/general health of society, when we see similar things happening in N period, or with R country, F is the result. And Y should always be considered, because of etc etc etc" - I mean, people can make that argument, but if the rebuttal is

"Sorry, my holy book is pretty strict about this view point" - it doesn't facilitate conversation.
Click to expand...

So basically social conservative issues are a hard discussion on GAF as a result between conservatives and liberals.

From what I've seen around here, fiscal and foreign policy political discussions are a lot more tame and from what I can tell, it's not nearly the echo chamber that the social issues tend to be.

However at the end of the day, I'm not sure if a full on republican can comfortably express their opinions on a regular basis because it's too easy (or at least tempting) for someone to point back at the social issues and go "well you're a bigot so your argument is invalid.".

But, I'm open to the idea that my opinion might be slightly jaded from the overwhelming anti-religious tone of GAF. At the end of the day, it's just easier to sit in NFL-GAF and make fun of Patriots fans.
 
Not gonna hide. I've posted conservative fiscal and social posts before. I don't do it anymore cause it doesn't help resolve anything.
 
I'm catching up on the thread so I don't know if there's been any turns or not but yes, I consider myself a Conservative but I usually avoid politics thread here.
 
GAF is a global board. And frankly, american conservatives are super conservative compared to most of the developed world.

Plus most (if not all) religious zealots are conservative. It's in their nature. crazy extremists that paint conservates in a bad light.
not to mention that being conservative means stopping/slowing down progress. it means not wanting change, sticking to what works. and since the internet, and gaming,, is relatively new, it doesn't tend to attract much conservatives.
 
Raonak said:
GAF is a global board. And frankly, american conservatives are super conservative compared to most of the developed world.

Plus most (if not all) religious zealots are conservative. It's in their nature. crazy extremists that paint conservates in a bad light.
not to mention that being conservative means stopping/slowing down progress. it means not wanting change. and since the internet, and gaming,, is relatively new, it doesn't tend to attract much conservatives.
Click to expand...

Eh I don't know about that but I see what you're saying.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom