Member Post

 

Richard Feynman was a theoretical physicist who taught at Cornell University, but he also was a just plain scientist. He had a thought on theory. Preview Open

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

Promoted from the Ricochet Member Feed by Editors Created with Sketch. Must a Conservative Always be a Loyal Republican?

 

shutterstock_117192478Here in America, we’ve two major parties that compete to control Congress and elect Presidents. Does that mean conservatives will sometimes be forced to vote for unacceptable Republican candidates because the alternatives are worse?

Not necessarily so. In a few states in the last few elections conservatives have voting for conservative third-parties. In 2010, more Coloradans voted for the Constitution Party candidate than for the Republican. That same year, Sen. Lisa Murkowski won re-election as an Independent over the Republican nominee.

Do we conservatives owe loyalty to the Republican Party, or is it just a matter of pragmatism? I say we stick with the party when we have to, bolt when the opportunity exceeds the risk.

Promoted from the Ricochet Member Feed by Editors Created with Sketch. The “Evil” Koch Brothers

 

The New York Times:

More than a thousand miles from the labor tumult in Wisconsin — where his name shows up on the signs of protesters and a liberal blogger impersonating him got through to the governor on the phone and said “gotta crush that union!” — the real David H. Koch was greeted rather more warmly here Friday when he officially opened a new cancer research institute bearing his name.

Contributor Post Created with Sketch. Member Post

 

I’ve changed my mind. I think Jeb should run for president in 2016. And Romney, too. That way, they will split the moderate GOP primary vote with Christie, allowing conservatives to unite behind a conservative candidate and push him (or her) over the top. Preview Open

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

Member Post

 

I just ranted on Twitter. I defied their 140 character rules and spewed forth a rant about Oregon politics. What’s wrong with it? Let’s start here. Republican Senatorial candidate Monica Wehby is everything that the pundits say will be a winner. She’s moderate. She’s a doctor who’s against the ACA. She’s a she. She’s moderate […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

Promoted from the Ricochet Member Feed by Editors Created with Sketch. Winning The Abortion Debate

 

shutterstock_155127419A few months back, I posted about a sex selection abortion ban in California being voted down on party lines. I went toe-to-toe with several folks on Ricochet as to the efficacy of the law and whether or not it could be enforceable. We had a nice debate on it, but I want to focus on one big benefit to putting a bill like this up for a vote. We have them on record voting “yes” to gendercide.

Most pro-choice Americans get queasy at the idea that someone could justify an abortion solely on disapproving of the child’s gender, i.e., it being a girl. Forcing Democrats to vote on this bill exploits that unease and gives us something to fight back with, especially with regards to the so-called “War on Women.” The next time a Democrat accuses his opponent of “not caring about a woman’s choice” or about women’s “reproductive health,” the Republican candidate can point to these votes and ask her opponent whether he — like all other Democrats who voted on the bill — thinks it’s okay to abort a baby for the crime of being a girl. Wait for an answer, and don’t let him weasel out of it. If Democrats want a war on women, we’ll give them a war on women.

There are other arrows pro-life candidates can pull from their quivers. You know how Democrats like to hammer everyone about “women’s health,” which is now the most important thing in the world? Then ask why so few abortion clinics in Democrat-run cites like Philadelphia (hello, Kermit Gosnell) and New York inspected for sanitary standards like other medical clinics. Remember that bill that Wendy Davis — the “Abortion Barbie” as some have dubbed her — filibustered in her pink sneakers? That was the meat of the bill.

Promoted from the Ricochet Member Feed by Editors Created with Sketch. Kentucky’s Lesson for Republicans

 

As I write this, the Democratic senatorial candidate running against Mitch McConnell in Kentucky, Allison Lundergan Grimes, is running ads differentiating herself from Obama.

Contributor Post Created with Sketch. The Lost Art of Political Persuasion

 

Persuasion used to matter in politics. A good politician was someone with the inclination — and the skill — to convince people who weren’t among his supporters to endorse his preferred policy or legislation.

There are many ways to accomplish this. Lyndon Johnson operated at the retail level, so to speak. Johnson was a master at twisting arms in the Senate, and cajoling members on both sides of the aisle into forming a coalition to pass whatever legislation he wanted. In contrast, Ronald Reagan worked wholesale. He had a genius for convincing millions of voters he was right and — through them — convincing his political opponents that supporting the president’s policies was the best way to keep their jobs.

Promoted from the Ricochet Member Feed by Editors Created with Sketch. What Explains Our Polarized Tastes?

 

Political polarization is no mystery and nothing new, nor is it anything I worry about. Opposing politicians used to beat one another half to death with canes in the Senate, and that was before 3% of the population died in a savage war against fellow countrymen. So until we see THAT level of division, I don’t fret much.

But what is more inexplicable is the conservative and liberal divergence over the non-political. Why is it in our everyday lives that we have such wildly different but predictable interests outside of the political realm? And not just that, but just by seeing an individual or asking him what he likes to do, prefers to eat, or usually wears, you can guess with about 90% certainty how he thinks about political and social issues.

Promoted from the Ricochet Member Feed by Editors Created with Sketch. Why Conservatives Should Care About #GamerGate

 

Assassin's_Creed_coverEvery once in a while, the progressivism’s destructive effects penetrate so deeply into a story that they change the way people view the world. To the under-35 gaming crowd, #GamerGate may be one of those events.

I suspect many readers have no idea what I am talking about, or caught a primer through this week’s Radio Free Delingpole. Milo Yiannapoulos has covered it over at Breitbart. In brief, the community of people who regularly play video games (“gamers”) has significantly grown and expanded, to the point today where the image of the lone white young man in his mother’s basement is no longer accurate. It’s a diverse and widely tolerant community of people, mostly still under the age of 40 (Mr. Delingpole aside, apparently). The industry has exploded in size, rivaling — if not surprising –Hollywood’s revenue.

Increasingly, the gaming press has taken a progressive bent by injecting specious feminist arguments into reviews and coverage of games. Instead of providing insight into the industry and delivering advice on the best up and coming games and development trends in an unbiased manner, they have been weaving in feminist theories of misogyny in video games and objectification of women in a manner that is meant to steer the industry towards the development of more progressive titles.

Contributor Post Created with Sketch. Member Post

 

Ask anyone where they do their best thinking and you’ll get a handful of reasonably familiar answers – in the car commuting, in the shower, on long walks, wherever one can find a certain degree of solitude. The range of thinking usually takes one of two directions – real world problem solving or engaging in […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

Promoted from the Ricochet Member Feed by Editors Created with Sketch. The Clintons of 2016 Will Not Be The Clintons of 1992

 

In 1992, Bill Clinton ran as a “new kind of Democrat,” one who would “end welfare as we know it” and craft a society that would reward those who “work hard and play by the rules.” Clinton knew that he could not win as a traditional liberal, so he crafted the now-famous “Third Way” approach, and campaigned and governed under a Third Way banner.

Of course, the Third Way was reinforced by the disastrous (from the Democrats’ perspective) 1994 Midterm Elections. Clinton accepted a Republican welfare reform bill (after two vetoes), balanced the budget (after much Republican prodding) and expanded free trade. At the same time, he proposed a bevy of micro-reforms that won bipartisan approval, in part because they were cleverly crafted so that Republicans could not vote against them. Through a combination of circumstance, accident, and design, Clinton became the Third Way president he had promised.

Contributor Post Created with Sketch. The GOP, Behind Again

 

shutterstock_120145924I’d be interested to hear what Rick Wilson and the other political professionals here at Ricochet have to say about this, but this observation from a friend who works in high tech seems to me to ring only too true:

It is remarkable to see the number of high quality agencies, technology providers, and firms who can offer testimonials for the work they’ve done for the Obama for America 2012 campaign team. I have never seen a single testimonial from a member of the Romney team. It may be survivorship bias (the winner is glad to write a satisfied testimonial, the loser remains silent or badmouths the provider).

But to my eyes, in the digital campaign game, Romney didn’t just lose, he wasn’t even on the field!