Is the Republican Party further to the right on the Political Spectrum

[1967100]

I was wondering between these two parties, which is further to the right?

I mean, Bush seems a lot more Liberal than Harper to me. Or is it just me?

[bush_cheney2004]

I was wondering between these two parties, which is further to the right?

I mean, Bush seems a lot more Liberal than Harper to me. Or is it just me?

No, the CPC would have more in common with US centrists or moderate Democrats than the Republican Party. The Bush-Harper bogeyman was invoked in a failed effort for Grits to win the last election in the wake of Adscam. PM Harper would be considerate a moderate in the USA.

As you have indicated, Bush has not been true to all Republican or conservative issues.

[sharkman]

I was wondering between these two parties, which is further to the right?

I mean, Bush seems a lot more Liberal than Harper to me. Or is it just me?

Or maybe not. Bush is against abortion and gay marriage, while Harper is in favour of gay unions and at least some abortions. BTW, the title of your thread is a little confusing, it might be better to keep them shorter and concise.

[Shakeyhands]

Sharkman.... thats the question the teacher asked though.

I would say that the CPC in its current state is not quite as right as the majority of the Republican party, wait for a majority government here though and re-examine.

[Canadian Blue]

I wouldn't call the conservatives extremely right wing, as we still have abortion, gay marriage, a welfare state, progressive taxes, publicly funded broadcaster, etc.

Some people just like to think they are extremely right wing, even though this might be an unfounded accusation. As well just because Marijuana hasn't been decriminalized, it doesn't that we are living in an extreme right wing social conservative country.

I would say that the CPC in its current state is not quite as right as the majority of the Republican party, wait for a majority government here though and re-examine.

I doubt the party would ever shift so much to the right that they would be similar to the Republican's. If they did then they would quite a few moderate MP's.

[gc1765]

I was wondering between these two parties, which is further to the right?

I mean, Bush seems a lot more Liberal than Harper to me. Or is it just me?

Back in his NCC days, they were probably roughly equally far to the right. But Harper is trying to get a majority and will put aside his principles and govern based on polls in order to get that majority he seeks.

[BC_chick]

Bush's social-spending was more liberal and put Bill Clinton to shame (38% more), but Harper's social policies have (reluctantly) been more liberal. Both are catering to their base. If Harper thought people would support him, he would love to take away gay-marriage and abortion. But he's a politician first....

[Canadian Blue]

If Harper thought people would support him, he would love to take away gay-marriage and abortion. But he's a politician first....

Despite the fact that during his term as a Reform MP he joined Jan Brown in fighting against the party adopting socially conservative policies, and being pro-choice.

But if you wish, keep on believing that since ignorance is more likely to make you happier than the facts.

[Figleaf]

[

Edited July 24, 2007 by Figleaf

[Catchme]

Harper uses the same handlers that the Republican Party uses, the CPC sent Canadians to the Republican convention, but not the democratic, what does that say?

SUCCESSFUL POLITICAL CLIENTS

People and organizations with whom the personnel of McLaughlin & Associates have been involved include:

Republican National Committee

National Republican Senatorial Committee

National Republican Congressional Committee

Republican Governors Association

Florida Republican Party

Montana Republican Party

New York State Conservative Party

New York Republican State Senate Majoriy

North Carolina Republican Party

Illinois House Republican Campaign Committee

Indiana House Republican Campaign Committee

Indiana Senate Majority Campaign Committee

New Jersey Republican State Senate Committee

New York Republican Assembly Campaign Committee

New York State Senate Republican Campaign Committee

Nassau County Republican Committee

Progressive-Conservative Party (Canada)

Conservative Party (Canada)

Conservative Party (United Kingdom)

Likud Party (Israel)

Six sitting U.S. Senators, including:

John Thune (SD) - 2004

John Warner (VA) - 2002

Richard Lugar (IN) - 2000

Bob Bennett (UT) - 1992

Jeff Sessions (AL) - 1996

Richard Shelby (AL) - 1998

21 sitting U.S. Congressmen, including:

Robert Aderholdt (AL-4)

Roscoe Bartlett (MD-6)

Eric Cantor (VA-7)

John Carter (TX-31)

Ander Crenshaw (FL-4)

Tom Davis (VA-11)

Thelma Drake (VA-2)

Elton Gallegly (CA-24)

Sam Graves (MO-6)

Denny Hastert (IL-14)

Duncan Hunter (CA-52)

Tim Johnson (IL-15)

Pete King (NY-3)

Mark Kirk (IL-10)

Randy Kuhl (NY-29)

Mike Rogers (AL-3)

Dana Rohrabacher (CA-46)

Jim Sensenbrenner (WI-9)

Mark Souder (IN-4)

Todd Tiahrt (KS-4)

Ed Whitfield (KY-1)

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger (CA)

Forbes 2000

Steve Forbes for President Committee

Conservative Party Leader Stephen Harper (Canada)

http://www.mclaughlinonline.com/services/p...cal/clients.htm

[Canadian Blue]

Harper uses the same handlers that the Republican Party uses, the CPC sent Canadians to the Republican convention, but not the democratic, what does that say?

That they are part of the International Democrat Union [Conservative and CDU parties in the world], and are considered conservatives or conservative thinkers. I also noticed the former Progressive Conservative party was on that list. So that doesn't really prove a thing.

As well Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger is more liberal than most Republican's, so I would say that Harper would be considered more liberal among the people there.

[BC_chick]

If Harper thought people would support him, he would love to take away gay-marriage and abortion. But he's a politician first....

Despite the fact that during his term as a Reform MP he joined Jan Brown in fighting against the party adopting socially conservative policies, and being pro-choice.

But if you wish, keep on believing that since ignorance is more likely to make you happier than the facts.

Speaking of ignorance, did you miss the "but he's a politician first" part or did you not understand what I meant?

If it's the latter, please allow me to explain.

Even though he's anti-gay-marriage and anti-abortion (which he himself has admitted), he's still a politician first and he will therefore do and say what he needs to in order to be elected. In this case, not changing abortion laws and leaving gay-marriage up to Parliament to decide.

Why? Because he's a politician first who knows that socially-conservative ideas will not get him elected. Therefore he is against the party adopting such policies.

[gc1765]

If Harper thought people would support him, he would love to take away gay-marriage and abortion. But he's a politician first....

Despite the fact that during his term as a Reform MP he joined Jan Brown in fighting against the party adopting socially conservative policies, and being pro-choice.

But if you wish, keep on believing that since ignorance is more likely to make you happier than the facts.

Harper has said that on the issue of abortion, he would do what he felt Canadians wanted. If Harper thought most people wanted laws agains abortion, he would bring them in. I believe that is what the post you quoted was trying to say. So, how is that ignorant? And we all know where Harper stands on SSM. So....what socially progressive policies has Harper fought for?

[Canadian Blue]

Speaking of ignorance, did you miss the "but he's a politician first" part or did you not understand what I meant?

If it's the latter, please allow me to explain.

No, he admitted to being pro-choice as a Reform MP, and neutral on abortion while running for the leadership of the Canadian Alliance, and the Conservative party. I'm mentioning some notable fact's from history which show that he doesn't hold these ultra social conservative beliefs as many presume.

Harper has said that on the issue of abortion, he would do what he felt Canadians wanted. If Harper thought most people wanted laws agains abortion, he would bring them in.

No, he said it would be a free vote in parliament, and that MP's should be able to vote freely based on what they believe their constituents want, which isn't all that much different from the Liberal's who allow pro-life MP's in that party.

As for abortion, 71% of Canadian's support some regulation's with regards to abortion according to a recent poll. So really, government has been out of step with Canadian's for a long time.

And we all know where Harper stands on SSM. So....what socially progressive policies has Harper fought for?

None, he's a conservative, however I'd say he's much more moderate in term's of social policy. I wouldn't say he aggressively supports same sex marriage, abortion, or euthanasia, however it's more of a moderate stance which seeks a compromise. Which is something government should do with such issues.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Brown

Brown rose to prominence as a well-spoken and moderate member of the Reform Party, becoming Canadian Heritage Critic in its shadow cabinet. She was one of only two MPs, the other being Stephen Harper, to speak out against the motion to deny same-sex couples the same rights as heterosexual ones at the 1994 Reform convention. She won much admiration for putting a yellow rose on the empty desk of rival party leader Lucien Bouchard, who was suffering from a life-threatening illness. The image of the solitary rose on his empty desk was broadcast around the nation.

[Catchme]

Harper uses the same handlers that the Republican Party uses, the CPC sent Canadians to the Republican convention, but not the democratic, what does that say?

That they are part of the International Democrat Union [Conservative and CDU parties in the world], and are considered conservatives or conservative thinkers. I also noticed the former Progressive Conservative party was on that list. So that doesn't really prove a thing.

As well Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger is more liberal than most Republican's, so I would say that Harper would be considered more liberal among the people there.

Yes, well that PC Party of Canada was whom again? Oh yes, Peter MacKay.

And of course it does, only the sublimely obtuse would say otherwise.

[Canadian Blue]

Here's the thing Catchme, I'm pointing out who all was on the list, including moderates, so the list doesn't prove anything sinister about Harper.

And of course it does, only the sublimely obtuse would say otherwise.

Only those completely slow to understand would say otherwise. Not really, didn't you know that politician's of every stripe have used group's such as the one you listed to help with political campaigns. You're trying to make something out of nothing.

Here is the overview of what the organization does.

McLaughlin & Associates is a national survey research and strategic services company whose personnel have played a key role in assisting successful organizations in the United States, Canada, Latin America, Europe, and Asia.

We specialize in public opinion research, media planning and buying services, and strategic consulting services.

We have analyzed and interpreted literally thousands of public opinion surveys, and more importantly, we have used this information to create successful campaigns and programs for our clients. We provide you with data, information, and analyses that are reliable, confidential, and credible.

In short, McLaughlin and Associates has the experience and expertise to turn research statistics into a winning political strategy to assure the maximum success for you.

[jefferiah]

Extremely right-wing hahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

[sharkman]

Harper has said that on the issue of abortion, he would do what he felt Canadians wanted. If Harper thought most people wanted laws agains abortion, he would bring them in. I believe that is what the post you quoted was trying to say. So, how is that ignorant? And we all know where Harper stands on SSM. So....what socially progressive policies has Harper fought for?

Good grief! Enough with the knicker twisted knee jerk reactions. A party can't just 'bring in a law'. There is the small matter of the Canadian Constitution and our Supreme courts which would slap down any such law they don't feel is in line. We've had abortions in Canada for a generation, the courts are not going to abolish them period.

[gc1765]

Good grief! Enough with the knicker twisted knee jerk reactions. A party can't just 'bring in a law'. There is the small matter of the Canadian Constitution and our Supreme courts which would slap down any such law they don't feel is in line. We've had abortions in Canada for a generation, the courts are not going to abolish them period.

Notwithstanding Clause

[geoffrey]

I was wondering between these two parties, which is further to the right?

I mean, Bush seems a lot more Liberal than Harper to me. Or is it just me?

Back in his NCC days, they were probably roughly equally far to the right. But Harper is trying to get a majority and will put aside his principles and govern based on polls in order to get that majority he seeks.

The NCC is very libertarian. They do not resemble the GOP in any way, shape or form.

Bush's social-spending was more liberal and put Bill Clinton to shame (38% more), but Harper's social policies have (reluctantly) been more liberal. Both are catering to their base. If Harper thought people would support him, he would love to take away gay-marriage and abortion. But he's a politician first....

I really have yet to see evidence that Harper is against civil unions or abortions.

[sharkman]

Notwithstanding Clause

So you figure Harper's got an itchy trigger finger for the notwithstanding clause. So how many times has this clause been used? Once or twice?

[gc1765]

So you figure Harper's got an itchy trigger finger for the notwithstanding clause. So how many times has this clause been used? Once or twice?

Wow, that's the biggest strawman I've seen in a while. Show me where I said Harper has an "itchy trigger finger" for the notwithstanding clause.

IF the majority of Canadians wanted to make abortion illegal and IF the courts struck it down, then maybe we would see it being used.

[sharkman]

Since you brought up the issue of the notwithstanding clause while quoting my comments, I assumed you disagree with my comment and feel this is the way Harper could bring in abortion laws.

While pointing out a strawman, I see you avoided the issue completely. How many times has the notwithstanding clause been used? Are you going to avoid the question again?

[gc1765]

Since you brought up the issue of the notwithstanding clause while quoting my comments, I assumed you disagree with my comment and feel this is the way Harper could bring in abortion laws.

Your original post implied that the courts could strike down any law passed by the government. I simply pointed out that is not the case because the government can override the courts by using the notwithstanding clause (I'm not sure if you forgot we had a notwithstanding clause, or purposely left it out of your post).

While pointing out a strawman, I see you avoided the issue completely. How many times has the notwithstanding clause been used? Are you going to avoid the question again?

This is completely irrelevant. But to answer your question, I don't think it has ever been used, but I could be wrong on that...it certainly hasn't been used often. But how often has there been a need to use it? How often has there been an important issue that the majority of Canadians (including the majority of MPs) agree with that has been struck down by the courts?

My point is that IF the majority of Canadians wanted abortions to be illegal, the Harper government could (and most likely would) bring in legislation to make it illegal. If the courts struck it down, he could (and probably would) use the withstanding clause. That is what I have been arguing...do you disagree?

[geoffrey]

How many times has the notwithstanding clause been used?

Once, in Quebec, to oppress English speaking minorities.