Talk:Republican Party (United States)

Election box metadata

This article contains some sub-pages that hold metadata about this subject. This metadata is used by the Election box templates to display the color of the party and its name in Election candidate and results tables.

These links provide easy access to this meta data:

• Template:Republican Party (United States)/meta/color Content:    
• Template:Republican Party (United States)/meta/shortname Content: Template:Republican Party (United States)/meta/shortname

Description of the party as far right

I tend to agree that "far-right" should appear in the party's description, https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/06/26/opinion/sunday/republican-platform-far-right.html? appears to be a reliable source positioning the republicans to the right of parties like the Freedom Party of Austria or the Finns party, which are both described as "right-wing to far-right" on their pages so I think it would be appropriate to add this as a descriptor to the Republican Party Netx444 (talk) 02:02, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

To bolster Netx444's argument above: this is an article appearing the New York Times, one of the most respected publications in the world. It is an opinion piece, which I foresee people latching on to, but I would have two preemptive rebuttals: (1) where else do we describe the stance of parties? There is no objective definition of right- or left-wing, it is purely a matter of opinion; (2) respected political scientist Will Lowe (of the Woodrow Wilson School in the Department of Politics at Princeton) contributed to the analysis, which was based on data from the Manifesto Project, a project funded by the German government. It's not like this is some random yahoo saying something on Facebook: this is about as a "reliable source" as you can get for something that is inherently subjective. LordDimwit (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 18:25, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

I think given the events of Jan 6, 2021, including not just attempts by the majority of the Republican Congressional membership to overturn election results by procedural means but also by the party leader inciting his followers to march on the Capitol and the party leader's intentional non-response to the dangerous security situation that caused, combined with the fact that the 2020 Republican Party platform was more-or-less "whatever Trump wants", there's no longer any reason to not describe the party as "far right." LordDimwit (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 19:46, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

This is a heavily biased article that goes out of its way to make it seem as if the party is mostly made up of "centrists", "libertarians" and "neoconservatives", and in effect to whitewash the party and to make an openly far-right, openly racist, openly fundamentalist and openly anti-democratic party currently engaged in a coup attempt to overturn an election result[1] seem like a normal, mainstream, centrist, democratic party. This is not how the party has been perceived for many years, and there is an abundance of sources that describe the party's current dominating ideology as Trumpism (with little room for centrism and hardly any noticeable centrist dissent against Trump and Stephen Miller) and the party as far right. The description of the party as far right even predates the rise of its current far-right leader; for example MSNBC has described the party as a "far-right party" with reference to its actions in 2010.[2]

We need something in the section on ideology on how the party has developed with the rise of the Tea Party and later Trumpism. Other parties are clearly identified as far-right, even if they are far more politically moderate than the Republican Party. For instance, the Alternative for Germany (AfD) article discusses how the party is regarded as far-right, but AfD's political positions are not nearly as far right, fundamentalist, racist or anti-democratic as the Republican Party, e.g. in their rhetoric about immigrants, Muslims, racism, climate change, respect for the democratic process/elections and election results/democratic institutions, and a whole range of other issues on which the Republican Party holds ten times more extreme views. We also describe numerous other far-right parties from other countries as far-right, so there is no reason to make an exception for the far-right party in the U.S. --Tataral (talk) 09:36, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

I tend to agree. I would like to see a more global perspective on assessing the position of the party. This is a global encyclopaedia, and 95% of the world's population is not American. Rather than observing where the party fits on the spectrum within the US, I believe we should be trying to reflect how the world sees it. HiLo48 (talk) 22:59, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

to me "FAR" means going beyond the normal boundaries of democracy--such calling democratic elections into doubt without evidence acceptable to the court system.That in the last two weeks has become a very live subject in all the media. Rjensen (talk) 03:53, 22 November 2020 (UTC) regarding the GOP and its top 100 or so leaders. Rjensen (talk) 03:53, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

HiLo48, a global perspective clearly places them in the far-right, as currently constituted. It remains to be seen what will happen after Jan 20. The Overton Window in the US is well to the right of the global average. Guy (help! - typo?) 13:15, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

It certainly is far right. The hard thing is trying to convince most Americans that is the case, because they tend to inevitably believe their country must be somewhere near the middle, and not a lot of them have a good knowledge of politics in the rest of the world, only the handful of countries frequently in the news. HiLo48 (talk) 20:51, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

This has been discussed to death before. Glaring factual inaccuracies here aside, there is no global political spectrum, and both the Democrats and Republicans are broad, big-tent parties that have little central control over their ideology or membership. Your "MSNBC" source here is actually a quote from the Rachel Maddow Show - a left-wing, opinion commentary source. Most claims of "far right" fall into that same category. Moreover, both parties are broadly representative of the American right and left - this is undeniable. This is not a new debate and has been resolved numerous times in the past. Toa Nidhiki05 01:39, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Toa Nidhiki05, the GOP isn't a big tent any more. At least not at the national level. Guy (help! - typo?) 13:16, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Ah, that explains the 2020 election, where the GOP gained seats in the House, have so far only lost one seat in the Senate. They did this because they are not a big tent...right! That explains why there are now more female republican representatives than ever before...because the GOP alienates females. This also explains why Trump got more Hispanic and African American votes percentage wise than he did in 2016! Got it!--MONGO (talk) 14:03, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

That can all happen without it being big-tent. HiLo48 (talk) 21:06, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Within his first 100 days, Hitler killed his predecessor and his rivals within his own party, suspended the legislature, was declared dictator, outlawed all rival political parties, took over the media and sent numerous opponents to concentration camps. It only got worse from there. Trump's got a long way to go before he would qualify as far right. TFD (talk) 03:44, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

that assumes Hitler-1933 is the standard for "far right." None of the RS assume we should use Hitler in 1933 as the minimal measure--that would exclude Hitler in 1932. Rjensen (talk) 03:59, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Parties like Fidesz and the British National Party are non-controversially described as "far-right" and have remarkably similar platforms to the modern Republican Party in the United States. You don't have to be literally Hitler to be "far right" just as you don't have to be literally Marx to be "far left". And given that a very large number of high-ranking Republicans are trying to overturn an election with literally no evidence (when under oath in court they've continually admitted they've got nothing but hearsay and conjecture), I think "fascist" might not be a bad adjective either.LordDimwit (talk) 15:54, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Even though Hitler was also far-right, he is not the standard for all far-right people or movements. Islamophobia is a far-right ideology, but Islamophobic parties across Europe that we describe as far-right haven't killed any predecessors or done any of that stuff. Far-right is simply a term for those to the right of the normal democratic right (e.g. CDU). That Trump is to the right of the normal right, even far to the right of any mainstream Republicans just a few years ago (even though the Republican Party before Trump was already a very right-wing party), is very clear and supported by countless RS. That he doesn't operate within the normal conventions of liberal democracy is also clear as the world discusses his far-right coup attempt. We already describe many of the main people in the Republican Party, people with the most senior roles in the Trump administration (e.g. Stephen Miller), as far-right, so it goes without saying that we need to include something about the party having a far-right element here. Yes, we need a global perspective, not just a local U.S. perspective, just as we describe both Putin's Russia and Erdogan's Turkey from a global perspective, not just from the Russian or Turkish governments' own perspectives. --Tataral (talk) 16:18, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

There are two common definitions of far right: to the right of traditional mainstream political parties and as far right as it is possible to go. I think it's best to just use the term for the second category to avoid confusion. Trump's policies as opposed to his speech and style, aren't very different from his predecessors. But America has a long tradition of portraying political opponents in extreme terms. At the same time, parties have also tried to absorb potential supporters of third parties of the left and right by making a direct appeal to them. We could have been having this discussion about Nixon, Reagan or George W. Bush. On the other side of the aisle, Republicans have been calling the Democrats socialist since at least the 1908 election. TFD (talk) 05:09, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Agree with Toa Nidhiki05. Pretty much every comparison I have seen made to call the GOP "far right" is mainly Western European nations. Needless to say, that is not the whole world.Rja13ww33 (talk) 23:37, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

This idea of yours that the opinion isn't all that relevant because it's European is rather odd. Quite frankly, on this particular topic the world's leading authorities are mostly found in Europe (especially Western Europe), and Europe represents the mainstream view of democratic countries and most reliable sources. That the governments of totalitarian or authoritarian countries (like China and Russia) wouldn't agree doesn't matter much; there isn't much room for any independent, reliable sources (like a free press, or academic publications) in those places; the United States just had a (failed) coup attempt by its far-right president, and doesn't have the kind of advanced democracy that most European countries have. Still, even American commentators such as historians and political scientists have described Trump's party or some elements of it as far-right. From a European perspective the Republican Party is now clearly a far-right party, that could possibly be described as merely right-wing in the past. --Tataral (talk) 16:45, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Rja13ww33 - I think you'd find, that if you asked the whole world, far right would be the even more likely answer. HiLo48 (talk) 21:06, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

I didn't say anyone's opinion is irrelevant "because it's European". What I said was the (party to party) comparison I have typically seen is a Western European nation's party compared to the GOP (or whomever else in the USA). And again: that isn't the world. Multiple RS weighing in on where the GOP stands as far as world politics go is what is needed to justify this change. And even then we would have to be clear on where they stand in American politics. After all, the Democrats would be considered center-right in some countries.Rja13ww33 (talk) 03:59, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

In most of the world actually, which obviously makes the Republican party far right. HiLo48 (talk) 04:13, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

That's great but for such a point in the article we need some RS here. (Some of them being scholarly sources would be great too.) So far, all I've seen is a [single] article on MSNBC.com.Rja13ww33 (talk) 04:32, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

At the very least, I would describe the Republican Party as it currently is as a right-wing party. There are certainly many Republican elements that can reasonably be described as hard right or borderline far-right, but at the same time, I am hesitant to label the party as being broadly far-right. There are certainly a handful of center-right, reasonable Republicans such as me, all of whom have become the party's black sheep, because we Rockefeller Republicans have been marginalized by increasingly right-wing factions. To keep this from not becoming a forum, I will not discuss how stressful it is for me to be a black sheep of the party, as well as in my own circles. On the other hand, the political alignment of the Republican Parties of the states are not entirely consistent. Some of them such as the Oklahoma Republican Party are right-wing, whereas others such as in California and New York are center-right. However, others such as in Texas are a mixture of them. With that in mind, I think classifying the Republican Party as a whole as right-wing would work. FreeMediaKid! 11:39, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Those persons above claiming the current republican Party is “nothing like Hitler” and aren’t far-right look pretty foolish now, don’t they? I mean these guys are literally supporting sedition and overturning democracy to keep their dear Fuhrer in power. My god, if this isn’t the Republican Party’s Reichstag Fire moment, what is?

Most of this article describes the Republican Party of 1994-2008, not the right-wing populist party that exists today 2603:8080:7D05:7200:5142:3E33:171B:89C6 (talk)

The Republican party is not far-right, and the the New York Times is no longer a "reliable source". Billinjax (talk) 22:11, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

"Those persons above claiming the current republican Party is “nothing like Hitler” and aren’t far-right look pretty foolish now, don’t they? I mean these guys are literally supporting sedition and overturning democracy to keep their dear Fuhrer in power. My god, if this isn’t the Republican Party’s Reichstag Fire moment, what is?"

Ridiculous.

The only ones "supporting sedition and overturning democracy" are arguably those that were AGAINST pausing the certification of electors to follow proper, constitutional procedures to address concerns with irregularities in voting and the various ways in which established election law was subverted. Asking Representatives to follow the Constitution is in no way seditious, and wanting fair elections is not overturning democracy.

Billinjax (talk) 22:19, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Change 'right-wing populism' from 'faction' to majority

With the rise of Trumpism within the Republican Party, it seems that the party has become overwhelmingly a right-wing populist party, rather than a conservative party. I propose moving 'right-wing populism' from the 'factions' category into the 'majority' category. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MayebhYT (talk • contribs) 04:33, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

I feel rather unsure about labeling the Republican Party as being predominantly right-wing populist. I understand why you may think this way, but I also know that there are myriads of Republicans like me who are opposed to populism and anything right of the center-right, as well as derided—and then decried—Mr. Trump's claims of voter fraud in the 2020 presidential election. While there certainly are so many supporters, some sycophantic and others who do not like him but figure he is a lesser evil than Biden, it would be a dramatic change of pace and a national tragedy for the Republican Party to abandon conservative values and embrace populism. Fortunately, we are not quite there yet. While Fox News has let me down, at least it is not embracing populism like its competitors Newsmax and especially One America News Network, which are still fringe members of the right-wing media. FreeMediaKid! 07:02, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

You would need to show that reliable sources in comparative politics classify it that way, which they don't. In fact the sources for right-wing populism in this article merely refer to populism. Basically it's a party of big business that sometimes uses populist rhetoric, which is what it has always been. TFD (talk) 10:02, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

There are plenty of reliable sources that say that the Republican party is a right-wing populist party. Right-wing populism is at least as strong as the Conservatism in the party. Maybe in the future it goes back to being a standard Conservative party, but right now it is not one. We should at least add a paragraph to the 'history' section detailing the Republican party's rightward shift and the growing strength of right-wing populism among Republican politicians and voters. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MayebhYT (talk • contribs) 17:39, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

Your first source cites a studies that ranks the Republicans high on the populism scale but does not mention right-wing populism. Note that right-wing populism is defined topic and does not just mean populist + right of center. Your second source refers to them as "plutocratic populist," which is an "alliance between plutocratic economic interests and right-wing populist forces." Your last sources are opinion pieces hence fail rs. You need something like a textbook on world political parties or on right-wing populism that shows that this is how the party is now categorized.

Bear in mind that populist rhetoric is pretty routine in U.S. political rhetoric. Biden for example routinely mentions that he is from Scranton (a working class town in Pennsylvania), didn't go to an ivy league university and stands for Main Street values over Park Avenue values. Ironically, Trump is one of the few U.S. politicians who doesn't play this populist card.

Incidentally, which definition of conservative are you using?

TFD (talk) 19:22, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

The wiki article you linked specifically defined right-wing populism as "a political ideology that combines right-wing politics with populist rhetoric and themes" Thus, my first 2 sources are proof of the Republicans being right-wing populists. The first sources shows that the Republicans, a right-wing party, are high on populism and illiberalism, thus making them right-wing populists by definition.

The second source shows an alliance between plutocratic economic intrests (right-wing) and populism, thus right-wing populism. I did misuse the term 'convservative' in my statement to basically mean 'pre-Trump GOP establishment,' and I should have been more clear about that.

We can agree to disagree about whether the Republicans are primarily a right-wing populist party, but there should at least a paragraph detailing the rightward shift of the Republican party. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MayebhYT (talk • contribs) 20:56, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

There is a body of literature about right-wing populism beginning with Hans-Georg Betz' The Radical Right and the Radical Right-wing Populism in Western Europe (1994). Few of these sources apply the term to the U.S. However, Chip Berlet does in Right-Wing Populism in America (2018). As I said, rw populism is more than just right of center + populist. Betz and others detected a new family of political parties that were to the right of the mainstream and invented a term to describe them. Later writers have noted that mainstream right-wing parties, including in the U.S., Canada, the UK and Australia have copied some of their approach. It doesn't mean they are the same thing. If the Republicans were really right-wing populists, government policy would be more extreme and business elites wouldn't fund them. Not only that, but in cases where moderate parties have transformed into rw populist parties (Switzerland, Brazil), the membership has been entirely replaced.

I don't know why you miss the fact that the Republican Party drifted to the right under Reagan and brought the Democratic Party along with it. But that was due to the adoption of the neoliberal paradigm, which happened everywhere.

TFD (talk) 21:53, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

This source uses this - admittedly long-winded - definition of right-wing populiism:

"Populism’s central and permanent narrative is the

juxtaposition of a (corrupt) 'political class,' 'elite,' or 'establishment,' and 'the

people,' as whose sole authentic voice the populist party bills itself.

„Right-wing populism adds a second antagonism of 'us versus them.' Based on a

definition of the people as culturally homogenous, right-wing populists juxtapose its

identity and common interests, with are considered to be based on common sense,

with the identity and interests of 'others,' usually minorities such as migrants, which

are supposedly favored by the (corrupt) elites."

This definition maps quite closely with Trump's language about 'the establishment' (ik whitehouse.gov is not a reliable source; I am using it for evidence of Trump's views, for which it is a reliable source.) And Trump's langauge about minorities,. This kind of langauge maps cleanly on the definition of right-wing populism as described above, that is, a movement that pits a version of 'the people' that is defined as a culurally homogenous group vs a group of 'elites' that want to make 'the people' not so cultrually homogenous, and thus are agaisnt the people.

If you buy my argument that I layed out that Trumpism is a right-wing populist movement, you must then conclude that the Republicans are a right-wing populist party, as the Republican party has become totally overcome by Trump and Trumpism, with nearly every Republican politician advancing the Trump line no matter what. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MayebhYT (talk • contribs) 00:54, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

, per no synthesis, we cannot make a determination on our own. I would say however that your source says that political parties use populist rhetoric opportunistically. Please compare Trump with Viktor Orbán, PM of Hungary. He re-wrote the constitution, cancelled elections, built a real wall, outlawed "fake news" and forced minorities to flee. Trump OTOH is just talk. TFD (talk) 03:26, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

References

Right-wing party based off of House ideological caucus positions

I propose the Republican Party being put as "Right-wing" for its political position. This is where the Republican Study Committee, which is 147 of 198 House Republicans, is put. It also is where the Freedom Caucus (37 members) and the Liberty Caucus (8 members) are put as well. JoeSmoe2828 (talk) 08:17, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

JoeSmoe2828 Wikipedia content is not determined by original research or our personal opinions, but on what independent reliable sources state. If you have such sources stating that refer to the GOP as right wing, please offer them. 331dot (talk) 08:21, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

JoeSmoe seems to be going off of what the infoboxes on those other pages say. That's not a super strong argument, though, since those other pages haven't gotten as much attention as this one. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 04:27, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Article should state thing as they are and not try to send a specific message. Some of these articles really sound like it is trying to send a specific message. There is no need to play around anymore. 202.21.96.212 (talk) 09:34, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

I think the field was deleted from the info-box because it added no new information and was ambiguous. If we say for example that their ideology is conservatism, fiscal conservatism, social conservatism, different people will interpret that as right-wing, center-right, or even centrist or far right. While we can say they are the more right-wing of the two major parties, where exactly along the left-right spectrum that belong is a matter of subjectivity. TFD (talk) 20:43, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

It should be described as far-right, not right-wing. It's not right-wing or conservative in the normal sense of those terms. It openly espouses racism (to an extreme degree), climate change denial, fringe conspiracy theories and is involved in a coup attempt, with its leader trying to "find" fictious votes to overturn an election. It's a far-right authoritarian party if there ever was one, and that's how mainstream RS view it, at least from a global perspective. (The fact that far-right racism is "normalised" in the US isn't that important for us as an international encyclopedia; European perspectives quite frankly carry more weight, both because Europe is a larger region and also because Europe is more developed and advanced in this area, in relevant scholarship etc.). We describe parties in Europe that are far, far more moderate than the Republican Party as far-right, even when they're not involved in coup attempts and don't openly embrace racism and conspiracy theories to the same degree as the Republican Party. --Tataral (talk) 20:26, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps the label right-wing authoritarianism would be appropriate to describe their ideology - short of National Socialist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7F:D473:1700:98B5:514B:80B3:8668 (talk) 22:03, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Are they short of national socialist though?? We’ve seen they supported Trump building concentration camps where immigrants were tortured on American soil (yes, separating young children from their parents is tortute by any reasonable definition) and now seek to keep their fuhrer in power by ending America’s 300-year tradition of democratic elections and declaring martial law and simply magically “finding” votes for Trump that don’t exist. I could continue if you’d like. I do not think there’s a political party anywhere in the world right now that’s ideologically closer to that of the German National Socialist Party of 1933 than the 2021 Republican Party. Certainly close to none of these people are conservatives or classical liberals anymore.108.30.187.155 (talk) 17:23, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

In fact, Trump continued the policies of previous presidents including Clinton and Obama. While he locked up more people than Obama, he deported fewer. The U.S. has a long history of human rights abuses. Trump is different in that he was the first president whose record received wide media attention. TFD (talk) 04:21, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Semi-Protected Edit Request

Please add the following to the lead:

"Although nominally still a pro-democratic party, after losing the 2020 election the majority of Republican Congressmen supported ending the United States' 300-year tradition of democratic elections, overturning the election which Trump lost by nearly 10 million votes, and installing Trump as a de-facto dictator for life." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.30.187.155 (talk) 22:55, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Do you have an independent, reliable source for that suggested content? HiLo48 (talk) 01:38, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Far Right

what's the deal with the GOP being considered far right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.6.145.25 (talk) 20:40, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

I corrected it. TFD (talk) 20:48, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 January 2021

I would like to change all instances of the word ¨blacks¨ to the phrase ¨black people¨ in reference to humans and groups of humans. Dwtnt (talk) 17:08, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. RudolfRed (talk) 17:13, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Add to list of supporters

The following line needs to be updated to include women, blacks, hispanics, and orientals. The existing description may have fit the 20th-century base, but not the current one.

"The party's 21st-century base of support includes people living in rural areas, men, the Silent Generation, and white evangelical Christians.[21][22][23][24]" Billinjax (talk) 22:09, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Typo

Hi there is a typo that you made a mistake of while I googled the GOP, the Gop is in the senate minority not the majority anymore, if you have time please change that, but I perfer you to do that becuase im not a expert on wiki. Thanks

Typo error

Hi there is a typo that you made a mistake of while I googled the GOP, the Gop is in the senate minority not the majority anymore, if you have time please change that, but I perfer you to do that becuase im not a expert on wiki. Thanks Jack45678 (talk) 22:48, 20 January 2021 (UTC)