Posted on 12/13/2013 9:51:29 AM PST by kobald
Fifty-six percent of Americans ages 18-29 disapproved of the Affordable Care Act, the poll found; when it was worded as “Obamacare,” the disapproval was 1 point higher. And less than a third planned to buy health insurance from an exchange...
..President Obama’s job-approval rating had dropped to 41 percent, about the same as the president’s approval rating among the population as a whole, with 54 percent disapproving. The poll also found that a surprising 47 percent of millennials would recall Obama if they could; 46 percent would not. For a group that has been among Obama’s staunchest supporters, these numbers must be awfully dismaying for the president and his supporters...
..At the same time, any conservative or Republican looking at these same numbers with hope of support for limited or minimalist government must confront other findings that show that while this generation has a healthy--or unhealthy, depending upon your perspective--view of government, millennials also have a profound streak of libertarianism. Specifically, the conservative positions on social and cultural issues that have come to be dominant in the Republican Party in recent years run precisely against the grain of this new generation that is maturing politically.
One national conservative leader recently told me about visiting campus chapters of a national, very conservative organization and canvassing these conservative student activists about issues. Within their ranks, he could not find any that opposed same-sex marriage. Among younger conservatives, the perennial applause line of wanting “government out of our lives” now extends to every room in the house and the ob-gyn’s office as well. The GOP’s strict opposition to abortion and same-sex marriages, along with its other unambiguous conservative positions, severely jeopardizes any progress that conservatives and Republicans can hope to make from their skepticism of the effectiveness of government...
(Excerpt) Read more at nationaljournal.com ...
The Mandela editorial was the last straw for me, but this is apparently National Journal. This could be satire too, maybe.
lol
Propaganda and brainwashing work
wait until they live in the real world for a while
Yes. Conceed to "taxing the rich" even more to support a socialist state. Conceed to continuing to grow the government which stomps on our constitutional rights, and conceed to the destruction of our once great nation.
What silliness.
Dial back on Social Conservativism and you get more Big government. See the baker ordered to bake for gays.
exactly how many moderate/liberal Presidential candidates have we tried?? far too many.
I think the path to success is to have a strongly balanced conservative candidate focus on the economic issues and play down the social agenda. So, when someone like George Clintonopholous asks a conservative POTUS candidate about abortion or birth control in a live debate, the candidate should simply state that they are pro-life and immediately pivot to why Obamacare or other disastrous Dim policies are hurting women or millennials. Don’t let the media define the debate....rather, conservatives need to drive the debate....Mitch Daniels said as much about having a “truce” (not the best choice of words) on the social issues with a focus on the growing debt and he got roasted in the process. But, me thinks he was right! Success will come with a conservative leader driving the discussion, not following the Dim narrative...viva La Cruz!
It’s not our choice what to “emphasize.” As you can see in a Democrat fundraising e-mail, or their contraception nonsense last year, they will bring up whatever issue they want to emphasize and attach us to it. And the issue will come up in the debates. You have to be prepared to defend your beliefs on the stage, unless you abandon them completely. Nobody’s ever suggested running a campaign that talks more about social issues than the debt or taxes. The Tea Party talks about debt and taxes more than anything else.
No, that’s what happens when you dial back on liberty……
That is the problem. There is a difference between believing in morality and virtue and wanting the government to get involved in mandating what it is and how we must do it.
BULL!! There are Freepers every single day who insist we run campaigns emphasizing social issues….even if it means giving away the farm on liberty and property……and there are a number of so-called tea party groups who have become social conservative groups almost exclusively. But I do agree, you need to be able to defend social conservatism when challenged…..
So correct I thought it was worth re posting!!
Agree.
Remove any semblance of Christianity from the public square.
Perhaps rather than indulge youthful ignorance in those unlucky enough to be raised since the divorce of education and virtue, we should try harder to explain how the character traits advanced by social conservatism make economic conservatism even possible.
They’ve been dead to me since the Derbyshire fiasco. I saw one excerpt from and article here today at FR regarding the left’s “disinformation” campaign. Coming from NR, that’s “Rich” (as in Lowry).
Ummm, you misspelled "concede" three times.
Sorry, couldn't resist.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.