Did anyone expect anything else of this GOP “yes” organization and errand boy? When was the last time the Conservative Party trully used its “balance of power” abilities and opposed a Republican nominee for a major office in New York State – or even nationally? What a waste of an organizational effort and the ability to steer the GOP in the right direction.
@3… who would you have preferred they nominate? While I agree that Romney hardly fits the description of “conservative” I am not sure who they might have nominated. I would have hoped Ron Paul just to stick it up the GOP’s A$$ since Romney has no chance to carry New York anyway.
#4. I stand corrected ref Doug Hoffman, even though this was only a congressional seat – not a major statewide or national office.
#5 Even though I disagree with much of Ron Paul’s positions on foreign issues, yes, he would have been the ideal one to use that “balance of power” clout for 2012. But most of these Conservative Party lackeys are, I’m afraid, dyed-in-the wool Republicans as much as they are Conservatives.
The only way the GOP will ever become a genuine working people’s party (i.e., supporting minimum wage and a strong Social Security program) along with traditional conservative family values (Freedom of Religion, 2nd amendment rights, etc.) is for 3rd parties like the Conservative Party to cooperate on the national level and run some Ron Pauls in several presidential elections. After the GOP has lost some close presidential contests – especially where the 3rd party played the spoiler role – then and only then will the Republican Party stop being the part of big business.
I’m not holding my breath on this ever happening, of course. Most 3rd parties even of the Conservative Party stripe, would rather argue among themselves rather than uniting to be a real force that the GOPers would have to be willing to meet them at the bargaining table.
#9. Let me attempt to answer your question by asking you a question. Why is it that when more money is placed into circulation (minimum wage increases or whatever)that causes prices to go up? Again, I ask WHY – not WHAT – causes prices to go up? Could it not be the greedy human factor involved, and not the “voodoo economic doctrines” resulting from some government action which we have all heard for eons from Republicans and Conservatives as what causes inflation?
I’m opened minded. Tell me, why if the government places 500 billion more dollars into circulation, it “automatically” causes the price of bread or the cost of rent to go up?
If I am hiring workers at a higher wage (note: this is all theoretical since the major parties are largely chasing smoke and mirrors since most full time individuals make more than the minimum wage anyway) then what can I do besides going bankrupt? a) charge more or b) fire workers. Evidence shows that firms tend to do more of a rather than b. Furthermore, uhhhh….by what mechanism does a minimum wage cause more money to go into circulation? If I demand a third party (ie, private employers) to pay more to their employees, how am I putting more money into circulation necessarily, unless I somehow allow employers to print their own that is equally recognized? Lastly, I think it is important to distinguish between greed and self-interest. It is self-interest which may encourage one to support start-up firms as competitors to established firms, or may encourage us to choose the cheaper item over the highest priced item, or do you always choose the name brand when you go shopping?
#6 AlaInd: In 2004, the Conservative Party ran Marilyn O’Grady for the U.S. Senate while the Republican candidate was Howard Mills. That’s the most recent example I can find for a major office, although there may be others I missed.
#11 DSZ. You are talking in circles. I initially meant, when I wrote in #6 that if the GOP would (among other pro-working people positions) advocate for higher minimum wages (I agree this issue is only hypothetical), that more REAL working people (people who actually get up every day at 5 or 6 AM and work 40 or more hours a week for their family and who are struggling to do just that)would be more inclined to trust the Republicans and vote GOP rather than Democratic. Because I believe that most REAL working people support those traditional conservative values such as freedom of religion and 2nd amendment rights, but when it comes to taking a stand on these honorable principles or self-surviving economics, they feel they must, for their families sake, vote Democratic even though they despise the Democratic position on social issues.
Yes, there may be a distinct difference between greed and self-interest, but tell me, if a merchant is already making a profit with his goods, but raises his prices when he knows the average customer (via higher minimum wages for whatever) has more money in his pocket and is willing to pay more for higher prices, then what is it that makes the merchant raise his prices? Is it greed or is it self-interest?
On the contrary, if you argue that the merchant does not raise his prices because there is more money in circulation (i.e., raises in minimum wages for his customers), then why do you (and others who hold this view) appear to be afraid of more money going into circulation, via raising minimum wages or more government spending?
It would appear the merchant would welcome more money in circulation (even if via raised minimum wages or whatever, as the more money customers have to spend in his store the more they will spend? Right?