I have seen this concept of PUB roots bandied about for quite a bit now and am curious as to a few things. This, from another thread, motivated me to ask a couple of questions.

Can you imagine just how motivated the right would be if the GOP had returned to it's roots?

Upon reflection, and having voted mostly PUB since 1964 in my rebellion against LBJ, DIMS, and mostly liberals, I was motivated to ask;

What are the PUB roots?

When did the PUBS acquire those roots?

How would the PUBS return to those roots?

I suppose everyone has their own take on such a subjective question. Someone could go all the way back to the abolitionist roots of the 1950s if they really wanted too althought I don't see how that would be practical.

For me, I think of Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan. Small government types. Not sure how others would define it.

Quote from: Dan on September 30, 2010, 06:52:43 AM
I suppose everyone has their own take on such a subjective question. Someone could go all the way back to the abolitionist roots of the 1950s if they really wanted too althought I don't see how that would be practical.

Not picking here, Dan, but presume you mean the 1850s, which BTW, wasn't conservative.

QuoteFor me, I think of Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan. Small government types. Not sure how others would define it.

Barry yes, though in truth he never had the opportunity to eviscerate Big Government as he wished to, and Reagan actually chose not to.

Quote from: Shooterman on September 30, 2010, 06:58:26 AM
Not picking here, Dan, but presume you mean the 1850s, which BTW, wasn't conservative.

Yes I did. Thanks for the catch.  ;)

Quote from: Shooterman on September 30, 2010, 06:58:26 AMBarry yes, though in truth he never had the opportunity to eviscerate Big Government as he wished to, and Reagan actually chose not to.

In defense of Reagan, he was working against a pretty stiff headwind. He didn't have a Congress that would work with him on most of the things he wanted to do. Like abolishing the department of education.

When I say roots, I'm referring to the better qualities of the GOP, smaller Gov, lower taxes, a less intrusive gov.
Following their motto of "Neighbors Helping Neighbors", not Gov stealing tax dollars to create a permanent voting class.

Quote from: Dan on September 30, 2010, 07:00:48 AM
Yes I did. Thanks for the catch.  ;)

In defense of Reagan, he was working against a pretty stiff headwind. He didn't have a Congress that would work with him on most of the things he wanted to do. Like abolishing the department of education.

Ronnie, as the Great Communicator actually managed to get what he wanted by enlisting the people's aid. He did not eliminate the Departments of Education and Energy, and engaged in horrendous spending deficits ( for his time ) and I have to presume he was willing to do so to get what he really wanted.

Along those lines it's pretty simple.

Lower taxes. Smaller government. Less power at the federal level and more at the state and local levels. A constructionist view of the constitution. Decisions on social issues being made by the voters of each state. Not by the federal government and not by judges. Less involvement in the projection of power overseas, but maintaining a strong military that could defend our interests whenever and whereever they were needed. Defense of our borders. Enforcement of immigation laws. A balanced budget. Defense of the second ammendment. And a lot less hostility towards people of faith.

Quote from: Solar on September 30, 2010, 07:04:22 AM
When I say roots, I'm referring to the better qualities of the GOP, smaller Gov, lower taxes, a less intrusive gov.
Following their motto of "Neighbors Helping Neighbors", not Gov stealing tax dollars to create a permanent voting class.

Fair enough, Solar, so I'll reiterate; when did these qualities first show themselves. Lincoln? Teddy Roosevelt? Hoover? Ike? Nixon-Ford? Reagan?, Bush One-Two?

Quote from: Shooterman on September 30, 2010, 07:15:09 AM
Fair enough, Solar, so I'll reiterate; when did these qualities first show themselves. Lincoln? Teddy Roosevelt? Hoover? Ike? Nixon-Ford? Reagan?, Bush One-Two?

I have no doubt is was a slow process, they all didn't come at the same time, just as the Dim party hasn't always been Marxist.

Quote from: Solar on September 30, 2010, 07:22:29 AM
I have no doubt is was a slow process, they all didn't come at the same time, just as the Dim party hasn't always been Marxist.

True dat. The converse question is when did the DIMS cease being the Party of Jefferson? Or even Andy Jackson?

Quote from: Shooterman on September 30, 2010, 07:43:08 AM
True dat. The converse question is when did the DIMS cease being the Party of Jefferson? Or even Andy Jackson?

The Dim party of the 60s is the current GOP, but the Dims were doing a slow move left, until Newt killed them, and a majority jumped ship, only to overload the GOP life raft.
WE took on liberal amounts of water, while the Dims were taking on socialists, like Hussein.

It was during this time the the Dims ceased to be a party of the the peolple, and became a party over the people.
But never having dreamt it possible, the Dim party has but one direction to go, and that is to return to it's so called roots as well.

We are watching history in the making.

It happened at distinct break points. The first step was FDR. The second was LBJ. The third was the 70s and the strong leftist push in popular media from TV to Movie to Music to Newspapers.

Quote from: Shooterman on September 30, 2010, 07:43:08 AM
True dat. The converse question is when did the DIMS cease being the Party of Jefferson? Or even Andy Jackson?

I think it was 1940 in Chicago with Roosevelt for me.

Quote from: Shooterman on September 30, 2010, 06:44:25 AM
I have seen this concept of PUB roots bandied about for quite a bit now and am curious as to a few things. This, from another thread, motivated me to ask a couple of questions.

Can you imagine just how motivated the right would be if the GOP had returned to it's roots?

Upon reflection, and having voted mostly PUB since 1964 in my rebellion against LBJ, DIMS, and mostly liberals, I was motivated to ask;

What are the PUB roots?

When did the PUBS acquire those roots?

How would the PUBS return to those roots?

I think answers to these questions would vary on which part of the country it is asked.  I live in New York and our Republicans have a different agenda and approach then those in the South.  I guess this is true of the Democrats but I don't think to the same degree. 

Quote from: Solar on September 30, 2010, 07:54:45 AM
The Dim party of the 60s is the current GOP, but the Dims were doing a slow move left, until Newt killed them, and a majority jumped ship, only to overload the GOP life raft.
WE took on liberal amounts of water, while the Dims were taking on socialists, like Hussein.

It was during this time the the Dims ceased to be a party of the the peolple, and became a party over the people.
But never having dreamt it possible, the Dim party has but one direction to go, and that is to return to it's so called roots as well.

We are watching history in the making.

Don't see the DIMS of the 60s being today's PUBS. God help us if that is true. There were two distinct factions, both liberal and conservative in both parties in the 60s. Mostly Big East was the liberals, especially the PUBS. Of course, many in the South were liberal DIMS, notably LBJ, Sam Rayburn, Jack Brooks, and a slew more. The liberals began to control politics in Texas primarily with LBJ stealing the Senate seat from Coke Stevenson in '48.

The liberal PUBS basically defeated Bob Taft in the PUB convention in '52 and installed Ike as the candidate, and were the direct cause of the failure of Goldwater in '64. Everything went to shit after that.

I personally see the Tea Party as morphing into a new party or dying if it becomes only the mouthpiece for PUBS. Time will tell.

I would also tell you, I see no return to either parties roots within my lifetime.