By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
richardhutnik on 25 May 2012
Edit Thread
Kasz216 said:
richardhutnik said:

Rubio's comment here on immigration actually goes into how the game seems to work:

http://www.cnn.com/video/?hpt=hp_t2#/video/us/2012/05/24/lopez-marco-rubio-immigration.cnn

If that is true, but what you see on the GOP side is railing against abortion and gay marriage.  Idea isn't to affect change but "feel their pain".  I doubt the GOP really wants to get rid of abortion, because it gets votes.


I don't see Republicans as that smart.   I think they would get rid of abortion if they could.  I think the Democrats work that game on social issues, while the republicans do on economic issues.  Afterall republcians seem to only push abortion measures when they know they can win.  Democrats only push gay rights or women's rights issues when they know they will lose. (Or republicans will beat them to the punch in overturning a law.)

Democrats will however go along with dumb economic plans that are an issue (see healthcare "reform") and republicans will change the social issues.  (See all the ways they go out of there way to make abortion harder.)

Not an issue of smart of anything, but what Rubio said does sum up the way things are.  Politicians live to get elected, first running under the delusion they think they can make a difference.  They realize they aren't really able to, so then staying in power ends up the top thing.  And sometimes they just stumble into vote getting things.  Abortion, and gay marriage, are two used to get votes.  Those two are bones the GOP votes out to get certain voters, who will vote against their own economic interests, just to have those agenda past, eventhough the GOP likely knows nothing will come about.  And it really isn't whether or not it succeeds, it is a "principles" thing.  It ends up being like Ron Paul in the House of Representatives, in that you pass earmarks to get reelected, and then say you vote against everything to end up getting reputation of being a principled Dr. No.  Then thrown in a playing to the wings with newsletetrs.

By the way, you spoke of the top being very fluid.  The 1% of the 1% is very fluid.  Even the top 10% is somewhat.  But going from the bottom 25% to the 1% is next to impossible actially.  There is fluidity on top.  As for anywhere else, not really.  The distance you have to climb, for one thing, is much, much larger.