There are many fiscally conservatives in the democratic party that are for choice. Would they vote republican if the republican platform was pro choice?
2007-12-25 15:23:30 · 14 answers · asked by wooper 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
the only reason the republicans ever win an election is because fundamentalist nut cases vote for them thinking they will get rid of abortion
2007-12-25 15:31:25 · answer #1 · answered by PD 6 · 1⤊ 3⤋
I think if abortion were not an issue, the Republican party would be weaker. Roe v. Wade has served as a battle cry for many Republicans across the board. It unites them in their fight against the Democrats.
If abortion wasn't an issue, I think the party would be more fragmented. There are three issues that unify moderate to hardline Republicans: a strong national defense, abortion, gay marriage. All Republicans more or less on are the same side on this issue. If you take one of them away, well you get the point.
As far as whether a fiscally conservative Democrat would vote Republican if they were pro-choice, that's impossible to say. You'd really have to narrow down the group of people you are talking about, and maybe even then it's still not possible. For some people, it's Iraq. For others, it's solely based on a candidate's stance on the right to privacy and its implication on the issue of abortion. Everyone has their own deal breaker issues that will decide who they will vote for.
2007-12-25 23:34:51 · answer #2 · answered by ctown 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
There are far more people who are pro life that vote based on the abortion than there are pro choice people who do. For pro life people it is an important issue that they see as a fundamental value, but on the pro choice side, since abortion is legal, do not think it is worth voting on. If the supreme court overturns Roe vs Wade, the issue might work against the Republican, but as things stand now it works in their favor. Most of the court have been appointed by Republican Presidents, is it really an accident that their decision on abortion is still in place?
2007-12-26 02:37:30 · answer #3 · answered by meg 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, it's unlikely. The party has spend many years coddling the social conservatives and with the concerted effort of the neoconservatives really has helped to break the party into three distinct and increasingly non-communicative and incompatible groups.
Social Conservatives - Evangelical Christians and others seeking a semi-theocratic or strongly theist state catering to their specific belief systems.
Traditional Conservatives - Fiscally conservative, socially moderate , and generally against waste or inefficient social programs - largely seeking appropriate levels of regulation in the private sector rather than public originated programs.
Neoconservatives & Plutocrats - Those who see either to extend or create an actual hegemony of capitalist control, appealing to the "borgeious" (their term for the middle class), while catering - to special interests (international, economic and military) - to the detriment of the republic towards some sort of semi-democratic totalitarian state.
Three legitimate concerns for the nation include
1. Massive unresolved debt
2. Increased resource / market constraint upon available resources
3. Decreasing overall real personal wealth due to 1 & 2.
2007-12-26 01:35:34 · answer #4 · answered by Mark T 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Back during the Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford era, before the GOP recruited the Jesus freak right to shore up their diminishing numbers, most people felt that the republicans and the democrats had worked out a fairly good system....one bunch would take over the congress, the other would take over the executive and everyone would play by a middle of the road set of rules where everyone got something and nobody developed too large a power base. Somehow, the Goldwater republicans allowed in a cadre of folks that were neither republican or 'conservative', but rather reactionary...the 'neo-conservatives' or the 'new' conservatives as they called themselves. Small in number, but well organized they teamed with Campus Crusade for Christ and the Young Republicans for Freedom and like organizations....and found as their leader Ronald Reagan, the slightly right of center governor of California who, with a bit of tweeking by the heavy hitters of the neo-con movement such as Holms Tuttle and others eventually moved Reagan over to the 'dark side' and thus over time restructured the party and changed what had been the reasonable 'old boys' club of republican government to the confrontational swift-boaters of today. The Jesus freaks, first recruited to be privates and corporol in the ranks are now the colonels and generals of the party. Getting rid of that bunch is going to be like curing AIDS. Couple the 'freaks with the overwhelming political influence of the trans-national corporations and the 24/7 drumbeat of right wing radio propaganda you have a fascisti juggernaut on your hands. Abortion is just one item now...there's a lot more to overcome!
2007-12-25 23:57:39 · answer #5 · answered by Noah H 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Why do you think the GOP became the anti-abortion party in the first place?To get all the anti-abortion nuts on their side!Which is why they portray the democrats are the pro-abortion party!
Believe it or not there is a difference between pro-abortion and pro-choice!
Personally I am not pro-abortion.......if I got a woman preganet I would want her to have it..........however I do feel a woman should have the choice and the government should have no say in the matter!
2007-12-25 23:45:38 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
That's funny considering it's not the Republicans that push the abortion issue but the pro-abortion lobby that tries to instill an irrational fear in women that abortion will be banned in order to get them to vote for the candidates they support. Organizations like Planned Parenthood make millions of dollars every year from performing abortions. They lobby to keep abortion legal and try to scare people that the GOP wants to outlaw it. We don't. They're just trying to protect their businesses. It always boils down to money in life. Dig deep enough and the reason is always money. Planned Parenthood makes alot of it by performing millions of abortions every year. They don't want that to go away. Simple.
2007-12-26 00:19:16 · answer #7 · answered by Bob 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No, because going back the the Nixon Administration, the Republican Party has a VERY poor record when it comes to fiscal responsibility. The Democrats have done better (contrary to the GOP image), which is why fiscal conservatives are gravitating to the Democrats, but it has taken too many people too long to realize this!
2007-12-25 23:31:42 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
To answer your question;
It would depend on the candidate, Ronald Reagan pulled many Democrats into the Republican party, myself included. The abortion issue to me is not about choice but of Government funding for them. In my mind abortion is a elective surgery and not a protected right therefore should not be funded by Government funds.
2007-12-25 23:35:42 · answer #9 · answered by T-Bone 7 · 0⤊ 3⤋
NO, because to both parties it is not a huge issue. It is always trumped by other issues of the time such as now the War in Iraq and the economy.
2007-12-25 23:34:43 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Abortion is a minor issue. The only reason any Democrat gets elected is that the population of losers who are too stupid to get an education and decent job is growing. They expect others to support their nasty existence.
2007-12-25 23:55:40 · answer #11 · answered by Return of Bite My Shiny Metal... 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋