Latrinsorm
01-27-2017, 08:05 PM
A discussion in another thread made me want to look at the GOP platforms from 2008 and 2016.
2008 (http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=78545)
2016 (http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=117718)
Obviously the overwhelming majority of it is the same, sometimes word for word. Here are the things that stuck out to me reading the 2008 platform.
2008: We oppose reinstituting the draft, whether directly or through compulsory national service.
2016: We oppose the reinstatement of the draft, except in dire circumstances like world war, whether directly or through compulsory national service.
First of all I think the change to passive voice is really interesting, but obviously the eyebrow raiser is the phrase introduced in the middle.
2008: The struggle in which we are engaged is ideological, not ethnic or religious. The extremists we face are abusers of faith, not its champions. We appreciate the loyalty of all Americans whose family roots lie in the Middle East, and we gratefully acknowledge the contributions of American Arabs and Muslims, especially those in the Armed Forces and the intelligence community.
2016: Many countries in the region have given, and continue to give, substantial assistance to the United States because they understand that our struggle against terrorism is not an ethnic or religious fight. They consider violent extremists to be abusers of their faith, not its champions. We applaud their courage and value their counsel. The U.S. government, together with its global partners, should mobilize its political, economic, and military assets to support the creation of a safe haven in northern Iraq to protect those ethnic and religious minorities continuing to face genocide at the hands of ISIS.
Just something for Terry to chew on.
2008: We support freedom of speech and freedom of the press and oppose attempts to violate or weaken those rights, such as reinstatement of the so-called Fairness Doctrine.
2016: We likewise call for an end to the so-called Fairness Doctrine
What's weird about this is that the Doctrine was not reinstated in the interim, and was in fact formally revoked (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_Doctrine#Formal_revocation).
2008: The gravest threat we face — nuclear terrorism — demands a comprehensive strategy for reducing the world's nuclear stockpiles and preventing proliferation. The U.S. should lead that effort by reducing the size of our nuclear arsenal to the lowest number consistent with our security requirements and working with other nuclear powers to do the same. In cooperation with other nations, we should end the production of weapons-grade fissile material, improve our collective ability to interdict the spread of weapons of mass destruction and related materials, and ensure the highest possible security standards for existing nuclear materials wherever they may be located.
2016: We should abandon arms control treaties that benefit our adversaries without improving our national security. We must fund, develop, and deploy a multi-layered missile defense system. We must modernize nuclear weapons and their delivery platforms, end the policy of Mutually Assured Destruction, and rebuild relationships with our allies, who understand that as long as the U.S. nuclear arsenal is their shield, they do not need to engage in nuclear proliferation.
This was the first bona fide change I could find. Obviously both times we were all for everyone else having less nukes, but back in 2008 we were actually for us having less nukes too.
.
These next few from 2008 don't have express contradictions in 2016, but they're worth listing here anyway as you'll see:
Our country continues to accept refugees from troubled lands all over the world. In some cases, these are people who stood with America in dangerous times, and they have first call on our hospitality. We oppose, however, the granting of refugee status on the basis of lifestyle or other non-political factors
The same human economic activity that has brought freedom and opportunity to billions has also increased the amount of carbon in the atmosphere. While the scope and long-term consequences of this are the subject of ongoing scientific research, common sense dictates that the United States should take measured and reasonable steps today to reduce any impact on the environment.
Because Republicans believe that solutions to the risk of global climate change will be found in the ingenuity of the American people, we propose a Climate Prize for scientists who solve the challenges of climate change. Honoraria of many millions of dollars would be a small price for technological developments that eliminate our need for gas-powered cars or abate atmospheric carbon.
Because a federal mandate on the states must include the promised federal funding, we will fulfill the promise of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act to cover 40 percent of the costs incurred because of that legislation. We urge preventive efforts in early childhood, especially assistance in gaining pre-reading skills, to help many youngsters move beyond the need for IDEA's protections.
.
And here's a couple from 2016 that made me laugh, also for reasons that should be obvious:
To guard against foreign involvement in our elections, we call for vigilance regarding online credit card contributions to candidates and campaigns.
We support repeal of federal restrictions on political parties in McCain-Feingold
2008 (http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=78545)
2016 (http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=117718)
Obviously the overwhelming majority of it is the same, sometimes word for word. Here are the things that stuck out to me reading the 2008 platform.
2008: We oppose reinstituting the draft, whether directly or through compulsory national service.
2016: We oppose the reinstatement of the draft, except in dire circumstances like world war, whether directly or through compulsory national service.
First of all I think the change to passive voice is really interesting, but obviously the eyebrow raiser is the phrase introduced in the middle.
2008: The struggle in which we are engaged is ideological, not ethnic or religious. The extremists we face are abusers of faith, not its champions. We appreciate the loyalty of all Americans whose family roots lie in the Middle East, and we gratefully acknowledge the contributions of American Arabs and Muslims, especially those in the Armed Forces and the intelligence community.
2016: Many countries in the region have given, and continue to give, substantial assistance to the United States because they understand that our struggle against terrorism is not an ethnic or religious fight. They consider violent extremists to be abusers of their faith, not its champions. We applaud their courage and value their counsel. The U.S. government, together with its global partners, should mobilize its political, economic, and military assets to support the creation of a safe haven in northern Iraq to protect those ethnic and religious minorities continuing to face genocide at the hands of ISIS.
Just something for Terry to chew on.
2008: We support freedom of speech and freedom of the press and oppose attempts to violate or weaken those rights, such as reinstatement of the so-called Fairness Doctrine.
2016: We likewise call for an end to the so-called Fairness Doctrine
What's weird about this is that the Doctrine was not reinstated in the interim, and was in fact formally revoked (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_Doctrine#Formal_revocation).
2008: The gravest threat we face — nuclear terrorism — demands a comprehensive strategy for reducing the world's nuclear stockpiles and preventing proliferation. The U.S. should lead that effort by reducing the size of our nuclear arsenal to the lowest number consistent with our security requirements and working with other nuclear powers to do the same. In cooperation with other nations, we should end the production of weapons-grade fissile material, improve our collective ability to interdict the spread of weapons of mass destruction and related materials, and ensure the highest possible security standards for existing nuclear materials wherever they may be located.
2016: We should abandon arms control treaties that benefit our adversaries without improving our national security. We must fund, develop, and deploy a multi-layered missile defense system. We must modernize nuclear weapons and their delivery platforms, end the policy of Mutually Assured Destruction, and rebuild relationships with our allies, who understand that as long as the U.S. nuclear arsenal is their shield, they do not need to engage in nuclear proliferation.
This was the first bona fide change I could find. Obviously both times we were all for everyone else having less nukes, but back in 2008 we were actually for us having less nukes too.
.
These next few from 2008 don't have express contradictions in 2016, but they're worth listing here anyway as you'll see:
Our country continues to accept refugees from troubled lands all over the world. In some cases, these are people who stood with America in dangerous times, and they have first call on our hospitality. We oppose, however, the granting of refugee status on the basis of lifestyle or other non-political factors
The same human economic activity that has brought freedom and opportunity to billions has also increased the amount of carbon in the atmosphere. While the scope and long-term consequences of this are the subject of ongoing scientific research, common sense dictates that the United States should take measured and reasonable steps today to reduce any impact on the environment.
Because Republicans believe that solutions to the risk of global climate change will be found in the ingenuity of the American people, we propose a Climate Prize for scientists who solve the challenges of climate change. Honoraria of many millions of dollars would be a small price for technological developments that eliminate our need for gas-powered cars or abate atmospheric carbon.
Because a federal mandate on the states must include the promised federal funding, we will fulfill the promise of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act to cover 40 percent of the costs incurred because of that legislation. We urge preventive efforts in early childhood, especially assistance in gaining pre-reading skills, to help many youngsters move beyond the need for IDEA's protections.
.
And here's a couple from 2016 that made me laugh, also for reasons that should be obvious:
To guard against foreign involvement in our elections, we call for vigilance regarding online credit card contributions to candidates and campaigns.
We support repeal of federal restrictions on political parties in McCain-Feingold