What makes so many Republican voters pro-war?

[Kevin Smyth]

We need to get to the root of this question and try to influence them to change their minds. If they changed their minds I'm certain that thousands of GOP voters who at the moment support one of the pro-war candidates would start supporting Ron Paul.

I think a main reason why Republican voters are pro-war is their belief that all Muslims are the same (all bad) and that we must keep attacking them to be safe.

What kind of statements do you hear from pro-war people when you ask them why they are pro-war?

[limequat]

I've heard that biblical prophesy says that jesus won't come back until we go to war with Iran.

We're up against some deep $#@! here.

[ILUVRP]

big banks--big defence mfr's--the fed make big money from wars , big donations to the r's

[limequat]

big banks--big defence mfr's--the fed make big money from wars , big donations to the r's

Yeah but that doesn't explain the evangelicals. Somewhere along the line, their pastors are telling them that Jesus says bomb the muslims.

[purepaloma]

It all changed with the NEO-CON agenda movement. Happened slowly and peaked during Bush due to 9/11.

Neo-Con movement has been losing steam over past few years, mainly thanks to the Tea Party and shiny the light on the topics.

Lots of information on Neo-Con's online --- they are really NOT true Conservatives, nor do they represent the history of the GOP.

[purepaloma]

Yeah but that doesn't explain the evangelicals. Somewhere along the line, their pastors are telling them that Jesus says bomb the muslims.

Disagree, what happened was FOX NEWS.

[limequat]

Disagree, what happened was FOX NEWS.

Is there a correlation between evangelicals and Fox News viewership? I bet that could be extracted from the PPP crosstabs.

[LibertyEagle]

They are propagandized 24/7 by FOX news. Many honestly believe that if we do not "fight them over there"... yada yada. Many also believe that there is a concerted effort going on by Muslims to take over our country, introduce Sharia law here, etc.

Fear, fear, fear.... 24x7 by the MSM.

-----------

I have reached a few by saying that the Muslims didn't bankrupt our country;
the Muslims didn't pass laws to negate the 4th and 5th Amendments to the Constitution;
the Muslims aren't creating money out of thin air, resulting in the dollars in your pocket buying less than they used to; the Muslims aren't bailing out their banker and corporate buddies, with our tax dollars;
etc.

But, our government is.

And that way before any Muslims might takeover our country, assuming that they even wanted to, our country will have fallen because of what we have allowed our government and their cronies to do.

[airborne373]

Why? One reason is because 25% of registered Republicans are "modern day liberals" which means they believe in "Spreading Democracy around the World" just like their ideological leaders Woodrow Wilson and FDR.

[Krugerrand]

Think Cold War. The GOP was all about build up a strong military and be ready to defend the country. It's a self-defense thing. They've been fooled into thinking these wars are helping us be safe. They've been fooled into thinking they are in any way related to self-defense.

[Michael Landon]

They are propagandized 24/7 by FOX news. Many honestly believe that if we do not "fight them over there"... yada yada. Many also believe that there is a concerted effort going on by Muslims to take over our country, introduce Sharia law here, etc.

Fear, fear, fear.... 24x7 by the MSM.

Agreed.

- ML

[Lafayette]

If the talking heads at FOX and guys like Beck and Rush did a 180 tomorrow and started preaching non intervention, no policing the world, in a matter of hours the GOP would turn anti-war/pro constitutional foreign policy.

It would be that quick.

Of course that doesn't fit the agenda of those in charge so the war mongering and destruction of the constitution will go on as planned.

[roc_rob]

Many Republicans see the state as the last line of moral defense. It is a consistent viewpoint, regardless of how ugly we may perceive it to be. They view their moral battles on a global scale.

I believe that these people are best won over by illustrating how interventionist policies are counterproductive to their goals.

I think this approach also works within our own borders. They need to be shown how state intervention damages their goals.

Paul provides an alternate consistent viewpoint.

[zerosdontcount]

In my opinion it's all about culture and media. The neocon culture is very pro war and is emphasized by the media on a constant basis. Many neocons simply just don't know any different and aren't willing to except different ideas outside what they consider to be the correct worldview.

[erowe1]

It's partisanship. They align themselves with the Republican party first, and then they are inclined toward the ideology of that party second.

So the question is more what makes the party itself pro-war than what makes those who vote for it pro-war.

[specsaregood]

Because they are all closetted homosexuals.

[Philadelphia76]

I think it has a lot do with Jimmy Carter looking so meek and ineffectual in his dealings with Iran back in the late 70's. In that context it became politically expedient for Republicans to be the party of military strength and a robust foreign policy compared to the weak-kneed liberals who just got their asses handed to them by a 3rd rate theocracy. The military was then built up massively in the 80's under Reagan and used by Bush Sr. to whip the living daylights out of Saddam Huessein in the Persian Gulf War. Once that happened- it was a done deal IMHO.

Anyway- seems to me the reason Dr. Paul has so much difficulty these days is not necessarily because other Republicans are "hard core" Neo Cons (very few ACTUAL Neo Cons out there IMHO)- it's b/c his FP reminds them of Carter (especially since the issue of Iran is once again at the forefront).

This is obviously the toughest nut to crack. I think Dr. Paul does his best when he links the country's obvious financial problems (virtually all Repubs agree with that) with the resulting risk that we may have to pull back our forces in humiliation like the Soviets had to- and NOT as a result of military defeat but b/c of financial/economic collapse. Almost all Republicans want the troops to preserve their honor- so that should resonate. Dr. Paul is less effective IMHO when he uses arguments for non-intervention and the "golden rule", etc. (though they are enormously valid reasons to avoid war too)...

[roversaurus]

It's because they could beat up democrats with the issue.
Really, most of it is a team red team blue thing from the Bush term. Now they "own" the issue and they don't want to admit they were wrong.

[The One]

I honestly think that a lot of so-called "hawkish" people are actually giant pussies in their own lives, so talking tough about war and taking it to the terrorizers helps them compensate in their own minds for their own self-loathing. Inside, they feel deeply inadequate for being punk-ass bitches.

[xFiFtyOnE]

The rich elite of the GOP use religion to dupe the ignorant masses into war. To the elite it's all about money.

[milo10]

All of the above is correct, but on another level, many conservatives are addicted to and identify with the sense of American military superiority. They get a vicarious thrill from being on the winning team.

The United States exercising military hegemony around the world also glosses over the fact that the United States and the West overall is in a state of decline, and has been for many decades.

[rs-fl]

I agree 100%

[Muwahid]

it's purely fox news propaganda.

no real christian is pro-war, contrary to popularized beliefs, no major religion advocates wars or bloodshed, but rather ideologies do which are motivated by ulterior motives other than religion, and it just so happens many republicans are Christians because their values align, pro life and such.

so its just the propaganda machine at work. but dont be fooled the left are just as hungry for war just dont tell their constituents that.

dems - the party the pretends to be anti-war, but is pro-war
republicans - party that says to be pro-war, is pro-war

almost makes me miss bush, we knew what we were getting

[ApathyCured]

There are plenty of reasons why conservatives are pro-war:

1) Fear-need for safety
2) Complete lack of empathy
3) Belief that everything we do is morally correct and justified
4) Its our job to spread goodness around the world and the army is the easiest way for them to spread it since they arent in the army (the whole chicken hawk problem)
5) Christian conservatives are convinced that muslims hate christian countries and want to take over the world - we must stop them to further the kingdom of God

Those are reasons I get from conservatives in Canada

[Luieburger]

The two parties shifted greatly after Teddy Roosevelt/Taft. Goldwater was the last of the true conservatives. Reagan ran on a true conservative campaign, but ran a very big-spending administration. Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton ran on the idea that "The era of big government is over". Debt didn't increase too substantially under their administrations, but taxes did (at least under Clinton).

I see Carter and Clinton as a Democratic effort to go back to the good old small government democrat days. (Andrew Jackson style). It didn't really work too well.

On top of all that, the media has changed since the 70s and 60s and earlier. At least I'm led to believe that by my elders.

http://www.270towin.com/

I love to slide through the years on that website and watch how everything has changed. It's quite intriguing.

[Deborah K]

We need to get to the root of this question and try to influence them to change their minds. If they changed their minds I'm certain that thousands of GOP voters who at the moment support one of the pro-war candidates would start supporting Ron Paul.

I think a main reason why Republican voters are pro-war is their belief that all Muslims are the same (all bad) and that we must keep attacking them to be safe.

What kind of statements do you hear from pro-war people when you ask them why they are pro-war?

Neocons took over the party. Back in the 60s democrats were considered war-mongers. Then a faction of them adopted the philosophy of neoconservatism and infiltrated the Republican party. Since so many pro-war sheeple are media-led, all it takes is for the neocons to control the narrative and voila, the media-led follow suit. Now the neocons refer to themselves as true conservatives. It's kind of like what socialists have done - they infiltrated the democrats, changed their name to "liberals", and then "progressives".

[whippoorwill]

They are propagandized 24/7 by FOX news. Many honestly believe that if we do not "fight them over there"... yada yada. Many also believe that there is a concerted effort going on by Muslims to take over our country, introduce Sharia law here, etc.

Fear, fear, fear.... 24x7 by the MSM.

-----------

I have reached a few by saying that the Muslims didn't bankrupt our country;


In the buildup to the 2003 war, the New York Times published a number of stories claiming to prove that Iraq possessed WMD. One story in particular, written by Judith Miller helped persuade the American public that Iraq had WMD: in September 2002 she wrote about an intercepted shipment of aluminum tubes which the NYT said were to be used to develop nuclear material.[citation needed] It is now generally understood that they were not intended (or well suited) for that purpose but rather for artillery rockets.[citation needed] The story was followed up with television appearances by Colin Powell, Donald Rumsfeld and Condoleezza Rice all pointing to the story as part of the basis for taking military action against Iraq. Miller's sources were introduced to her by Ahmed Chalabi, an Iraqi exile favorable to a U.S. invasion of Iraq.[citation needed] Miller is also listed as a speaker for The Middle East Forum, an organization which openly declared support for an invasion.[citation needed] In May 2004 the New York Times published an editorial which stated that its journalism in the build up to war had sometimes been lax. It appears that in the cases where Iraqi exiles were used for the stories about WMD were either ignorant as to the real status of Iraq's WMD or lied to journalists to achieve their own ends.[citation needed]

Despite the intelligence lapse, Bush stood by his decision to invade Iraq stating:

But what wasn't wrong was Saddam Hussein had invaded a country, he had used weapons of mass destruction, he had the capability of making weapons of mass destruction, he was firing at our pilots. He was a state sponsor of terror. Removing Saddam Hussein was the right thing for world peace and the security of our country.

In a speech before the World Affairs Council of Charlotte, NC, on April 7, 2006, President Bush stated that he "fully understood that the intelligence was wrong, and [he was] just as disappointed as everybody else" when U.S. troops failed to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.[85]


the Muslims didn't pass laws to negate the 4th and 5th Amendments to the Constitution;
the Muslims aren't creating money out of thin air, resulting in the dollars in your pocket buying less than they used to; the Muslims aren't bailing out their banker and corporate buddies, with our tax dollars;
etc.

But, our government is.

And that way before any Muslims might takeover our country, assuming that they even wanted to, our country will have fallen because of what we have allowed our government and their cronies to do.

The Newyork Times lead the charge

[69360]

faux news. If faux went off the air it would be a whole new ballgame.

[Philosophy_of_Politics]

It's a mixture of skewed religious beliefs and MSM propaganda, for sure.

[The One]

I think you guys are underestimating the "compensating for being a pussy" factor.