Don't get me wrong.  I think anyone receiving govt assistance should be required to take a drug test.   And, if able-bodied, show up to work at whatever "job" the govt assigns them.   That "job" could be training, schooling or actual work.   But you'd have to show up for those three hours a week to sort mail, dump trash cans, take a class, whatever.

But that policy will NOT get you elected.  

Forcing drug tests for government assistance is a waste of money and just pandering to the base, not to mention already been found unconstitutional in multiple cases. If something like that is implemented, I would like to see ANYONE who gets government assistance take the test. Including those corporations who receive any sort of subsidy. I'd love to see how many people would have tested positive for coke that were involved with the Wall Street bailouts.

Fine by me.   Test everyone if you'd like.   I don't think it's a waste of money.   If you're living off my tax money, I'd rather you not spend it on weed.

Well, Florida lost money when they tried it. I'd call that a waste.

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/4/2015 12:20:00 PM (view original):
Fine by me.   Test everyone if you'd like.   I don't think it's a waste of money.   If you're living off my tax money, I'd rather you not spend it on weed.

I don't think you can buy weed with food stamps. And it isn't your money once it's collected as taxes.

Swinging this back to the topic...

When I mention Scott Walker as an "establishment-conservative" I mean that he has the national establishment conservative money. That recall election was a national election with people flying in from all over the country to stump for him. He doesn't have to pander to try and get the deep red conservative base, he already has them.

I don't know that the deep red conservative base is nearly enough to get him elected.  Like it or not, the only way a conservative gets elected is if he's more "light red".   Sort of a purplepink red.

What's up with the redlines?

Keep it somewhat on topic. If you want a long debate of some Obama thing, take it elsewhere. I'll also delete pictures that don't relate to the topic.

Moy kind of lays out platform that Walker could use. George W. Bush used a "compassionate conservatism", perhaps Walker could use a "smart conservatism" theme. I don't know if it would work in a General Election though.

Lighter red. 

I'd categorize people as "slightly dissatisfied" with Obama's Presidency.   He's been between 45-55% approval rating forever.   They've been very successful with the "Bush's fault" message which has let the bad slide off Teflon Obama and the good has stuck.    A drastic change in policy isn't going to get someone elected.  What you propose will allow a candidate to run thru the Republican primaries but won't work in the general election.    Too many are "OK" with the way things are.  Not enough "I hate this". 

How about a solid red when it comes to fiscal matters and a solid blue when it comes to social issues. Does that person exist? Why doesn't that person exist?

That person can't exist because he has no political backing.    And I think there's some conflicting issues.    You can't insist on a balanced budget without cutting some govt assistance and some of the strong red faves like the military.