Redeeming the Republicans

Maj · Post by **Maj** » Thu Mar 19, 2015 3:29 pm

Gun nuts just say Obama's gonna take their guns so they can drum up business. Typical gray hat tactic to make money.

Post by **fbmf** » Thu Mar 19, 2015 5:27 pm

Orion wrote:I'm not aware of any proposal to confiscate firearms from anyone credible in American politics, even in left wing of the Democrats. There are proposals to make it harder to sell guns, but none to kick down people's doors and steal their heirlooms.

Emphasis mine. In the mind of the gun nuts I know personally/am related to, these are much the same thing and/or the latter is phase one of the former.

For reference, my sample size is about half a dozen.

Game On,
fbmf

MGuy · Post by **MGuy** » Thu Mar 19, 2015 9:29 pm

fbmf wrote:
Orion wrote:I'm not aware of any proposal to confiscate firearms from anyone credible in American politics, even in left wing of the Democrats. There are proposals to make it harder to sell guns, but none to kick down people's doors and steal their heirlooms.
Emphasis mine. In the mind of the gun nuts I know personally/am related to, these are much the same thing and/or the latter is phase one of the former.

For reference, my sample size is about half a dozen.

Game On,
fbmf

Yea that's how it goes. You know 'cause Hitler and Nazis and all that.

Post by **fbmf** » Mon Mar 30, 2015 10:21 pm

Anybody want to predict the fallout this latest shit in Indiana will have on 2016 Republican Primary and/or 2016 GOP chances in general?

Is the election too far away for this too have any effect?

Game On,
fbmf

Ancient History · Post by **Ancient History** » Mon Mar 30, 2015 10:33 pm

Unless it stretches out to be an issue in the primary, the effects will be minimal. By and large, the nation does not give a fuck about Indiana. NIMBY and all that. It's the same reason why California's drought should be a huge hot-button issue but it probably won't be.

tussock · Post by **tussock** » Mon Mar 30, 2015 11:43 pm

So, Indiana has just said that the corps have the religion of their CEO, and all their customers and everyone working there has to follow along. Like it's the reformation wars and we're trying to find a way to stop all the genocides or something.

But the law itself is amazeballs. It actually says your business can defend itself against any civil suit, including by the state, by claiming religion. They could literally claim that dumping medical waste in the streets is part of their new religion of "profits first" and be immune to prosecution. Because that's just a regulation with fines and stuff. They could do anything! They could sue the state for impinging on their religion of profit at any time for anything. It's like they TPPA'd themselves.

I get businesses couldn't actually do that because the law would get fixed (calling Church of Satan, Church of Satan to the red blasphemy phone), but the potential to arbitrarily shit all over minority groups instead is pretty obvious.

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Tue Mar 31, 2015 12:00 am

I totally want to go start a Satanic LLC in Indiana now...

MisterDee · Post by **MisterDee** » Tue Mar 31, 2015 4:59 am

The law itself doesn't really matter (for the election - it's obviously going to matter for the people it affects), and Pence remains a nonBush Republican, so it's a sideshow at best.

What could have mattered for the primaries is if a particular candidate had broken the party line on the issue. But everyone just went with the ohnoes we're persecuted stance instead.

In the general election, it'll just be one more soundbite like Romney's 47%. Not a major issue, just another nudge pointing everyone that's not over 60, white and male away from the Republicans.

angelfromanotherpin · Tue Mar 31, 2015 12:38 pm

MisterDee wrote:The law itself doesn't really matter (for the election - it's obviously going to matter for the people it affects), and Pence remains a nonBush Republican, so it's a sideshow at best.

My feeling was that the law was getting a lot of coverage, and so it might clue in some more less-engaged voters that the GOPs crazy level was over 9000 these days, but not much more.

But then Jeb involved himself, publicly supporting Pence and the law even in the face of the enormous public backlash. That was pretty dumb, but I can't decide what kind of dumb. Previously, Jeb had been positioning himself as a relatively LGBT-friendly moderate, so is he simply abandoning moderate positions before the primary? Is he setting himself up for a Romney-esque 'all things to all people' incoherent campaign? Is he just very stupid? All of the above?

RobbyPants · Post by **RobbyPants** » Tue Mar 31, 2015 3:13 pm

angelfromanotherpin wrote: But then Jeb involved himself, publicly supporting Pence and the law even in the face of the enormous public backlash. That was pretty dumb, but I can't decide what kind of dumb. Previously, Jeb had been positioning himself as a relatively LGBT-friendly moderate, so is he simply abandoning moderate positions before the primary? Is he setting himself up for a Romney-esque 'all things to all people' incoherent campaign? Is he just very stupid? All of the above?

My guess is he's trying to have his cake and eat it, too. Pence is currently taking the angle that this legislation is not geared toward discrimination (hint: it is), but rather about protecting religious freedoms from government regulation. That plays right into the Right's talking points, all while trying to maintain a Libertarian veneer of freedom.

Jeb is likely going for that angle, too. He can make it seem that he isn't anti-gay, all while supporting stuff that is very overtly anti-gay.

I don't know. Maybe he thinks a bunch of gay people will vote against their own best interest, and that he'll broaden the base, or something.