SCOTUS rules for Equal Protection Under the Law
This could actually be a boon for the GOP....if they're politically savvy enough to seize upon it. Until this day, a platform of denying civil liberties to fellow American citizens, has been a divisive plank that has kept many from voting for Republican candidates. I've long said that if the GOP were to embrace individual sovereignty and civil liberty...[notwithstanding their liberal spending policies], they would regain enough Libertarian voters to keep the Democrats at bay.
Sadly, as long as they pretend that marriage is not a legal contract between citizens....but rather some unalterable law bequeathed by God [though marriage predates the institution of Christianity], this is an unlikely prospect.
So, more likely....this further entrenches the Democratic Party as the majority.
Libertarians mostly all vote GOP anyway.
ReplyDeleteJMJ
How do you figure? This Libertarian doesn't.
DeleteMost do. This isn't news. But the libertarian vote has changed a little since the Bush years. It's a tough balance for libertarians, as civil libertarianism is best represented by the Democrats and economic libertarianism is best represented by the GOP, or so the narrative goes. But the narrative is simplistic. Libertarians tend to be relatively, rather engaged and knowledgeable, and so you have a lot of them, especially those who identify specifically as such, who's vote is more nuanced. It's hard to say where that vote is heading today. You could say that with more civil liberties 'out of the way,' so to speak, libertarians will vote all the more GOP as the civil issues become settled. Or you could say the libertarians are still pissed off at the GOP for all the war mongering and borrowing and spending, and will prefer they not regain control of DC. Let's hope it's the latter. The last thing we need now is a return to a decade ago. It would end very, very badly.
DeleteJMJ
A decade ago we had less borrowing and spending, at least, Jersey. Obama's budget choices, including to nearly double the national debt, make GWBush look responsible in comparison.
DeleteAnd war mongering? Obama took us into Libya, and back into Iraq after the Bush agreement had us out of there. Not to mention Obama really ramping up the war in Afghanistan (along with a huge increase in US casualaties). All Obama's choice.
It's ending "very very badly" now, under the administration of the Left.
There's extensive information on the voting habits of many sectors of voters. This should be easy enough to prove or disprove.
ReplyDeleteSo, more likely.... this further entrenches the Democratic Party as the majority.
ReplyDeleteThe Democrats don't control Congress. How are they an entrenched majority?
The GOP is still heavily entrenched in equating god's law with man's. Statism is a growing religion in the GOP, but it is still not alone.
ReplyDeleteThe left has their own reasons to invade the bedroom (something they have always done). Usually because they do not want anyone -- gay or straight -- to love anyone, except government.
Right now I do not think it matters which party has a majority anymore. They all believe they they can decide what you can and cannot say, who you can associate with, whether you can defend yourself or not, how much money you can make.
Let the uni-party de-legitimize itself.
I certainly agree with you about the affinity that both parties have for power and control....negating any remaining, fundamental difference between the two. Though I don't term Statism as a religion, it is most definitely on par with rule by religious fundamentalism......tyranny.
DeleteYes, CI. Socialism and theocracy.... both tyrannical, both deadly.
DeleteLibertarianism = tyranny of the plutocrats.
DeleteLibertarianism has absolutely nothing to do with plutocrats.
DeleteLibertarianism was invented by the plutocrats to pull the wool over the eyes of people like dmarks and Will Hart.
DeleteWow...who knew an entire political ideology was 'invented' to fool two internet bloggers.
DeleteIt's Friday night comedy.
DeleteI said "people like", not these two people exclusively. A very dishonest twisting of my words by CI. Pretty stupid as well, as anyone can see my original words... although dmarks was obviously fooled. Just like he's been fooled by Libertarianism.
DeleteGreat contributions, Son.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
Delete