"Things You Wouldn't Know If We Didn't Blog Intermittently."
Of course, it may not mean as much as many liberals hope. For example, I've been voting for over 20 years, and have NEVER identified myself as a Republican (I'm not.. I'm a conservative--and there is a big difference) I have voted for the Republican candidate for president over the Democrat every time (though I voted for a conservative independent twice)Plus, it may just be the Republicans are ashamed to admit it right now, and who could blame them?Also, the poll itself shows people self-identifying as democrats shrinking from 39% to 35%. Looks like the rise of the independent voter (if only!)
I have to agree with Mike. I identify myself as "Conservative" rather than as a "Republican", even though I have voted Republican in the last few elections. However, if the Republican party can't figure out how to be fiscally and socially conservative, I may be voting for a libertarian candidate next time.Hmmm...Maybe Ron Paul?
If you follow the links to the poll data itself, there is no choice for "conservative" (or "liberal"), which presumably were not considered "political parties" - the total for R+D+Indep was 94% for the demographic data question #901.Question 908a addressed liberal vs. conservative vs. moderate. The numbers now are essentially identical with June 5, 2005.
Brian, in what way are the GOP not socially conservative enough for you? You sound like a papist.
Anonymous,I AM a Catholic. But hey, I'm a non-practicing one since I'm going to a Unitarian Universalist Church right now since I'm not to happy with the Pope anyway.The majority of my disagreements with the Republican Party stems from their lack of fiscal conservatism, rather than social. However, there seems to be some sort of movement within the Republican party toward fiscal conservatism with liberal social outlooks. A fine example would be California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. I recognize that any industrialized or advanced nation must provide for the welfare of their impoverished citizens, combating poverty. Too many Republicans today have forgotten the old adage: Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Give a man a fishing pole, and he eats for a lifetime. The GOP has fallen (occasionally) into the same trap that traps Democrats: how do we pay for such charity? Socially conservative Republicans are supposed to believe that it comes from philanthropy and private charity. Democrats seem to believe that it should be taken from the wealthy, regardless of their philanthropic pursuits and without their direction for spending, and distribute it according to who is most likely to vote for them.That said I could even tolerate a Democrat provided they were fiscally responsible...not even conservative...just RESPONSIBLE.