The Blue Board

Even under Reagan's definition(obviously the untold truth hand delivered by God) of conservatism you have the 3 pillars, one being religious conservatism. Since the republicans embraced those as undeniable truth it would be hard to classify any pro-choice/pro-gay marriage person as either conservative or republican.

Frankly, I think it depends on what third party emerges. Either way, a 3rd-party is going to siphon off a significant number of voters from one of the two main parties now, and I don't think there's a single party that could create a relatively even split between the three parties. I see the Libertarian party emerging over the next 16-20 years and effectively splitting the Republican vote into the evangelical Tea Party wing and the more rational conservative wing. However, since there's no equivalent division among the Democratic party, I can't see the emergence of the Libertarian party doing anything to bring balance.

Of course, I also think there are massive overhauls that need to be made to a) our voting system, b) the redistricting/gerrymandering process, c) Congressional procedure, and a million other things. Until such overhauls are made, no third party will ever make a reasonable difference.

Has there ever been any actual proof of significant voter fraud which could be combatted by making people show IDs?

Yes, term limits are a concern. I don't have a proposed solution off the top of my head though.

As for proof of identity: unless each state government provides free and easily available identification to each citizen, and takes it upon the government to ensure that each citizen has this identification, I don't think voters should have to show proof of identity beyond their signature. There have been practically no documented instances of voter fraud to justify the massive paranoia surrounding the 2012 election.

In fact, I'd be much more concerned with election fraud. I think the federal government needs to establish a department specifically charged with developing fully transparent voting methods that don't involve separate voting machine companies, each with their own political interests. Election fraud needs to be ruthlessly prosecuted.

I have a litany of complaints about the current election process, and standardized equipment is just one of them.

- Standardized equipment with transparent software is a necessity. Multiple redundant counters for every state must be instituted.
- Poll workers must be trained and vetted by a federal organization, not by local party leadership.
- Any instances of election fraud must be ruthlessly prosecuted and punishable by very harsh sentences.
- Election day must be a national holiday.
- Every state should have extensive early voting periods, as well as restrictions for the maximum amount of time a person will have to wait in line.
- Independent UN elections monitors should be allowed to observe any polling station in the United States.
- Same-day registration must be allowed.

That's all I can articulate off the top of my head at 4AM, but I guarantee I'll think up more by the morning.

Why are you not okay with it for checks and balances? The UN is largely a powerless organization - it has only as much power as its members elect to grant it. I think it's important to have someone watching the watchmen so that the existing government doesn't decide to rig elections in favor of the incumbents. Just as external election fraud is a major concern, so should be internal.

Might want to educate yourself on who is what. Tea party was not founded on religion like you say. It was founded on out of control gov. Spending. TEA stands for Taxed Enough Already. Understand. Tea party even has democrats attend there rallys. Yes some religious people belong, but where ever you get your news from is wrong & you should probably change the channel.

I said nothing about where the tea party came from or where it was founded. I'm saying that I see the overall Republican demographic splitting into two distinct factions - the Tea Party/Evangelical faction, and the Libertarian faction.

Just look at what Michelle Bachmann has said regarding the merger of Tea Party/Evangelical politics: "Well, I absolutely am a Teavangelical because I believe that we are taxed enough already. Government shouldn't spend more money than what it takes in. We should follow the Constitution. And I'm a believer in Jesus Christ, so I think that makes me a Teavangelical."

Jim DeMint has also chipped in: "I really think a lot of the motivation behind these Tea Party crowds is a spiritual component. I think it's very akin to the Great Awakening before the American Revolution."

Regardless of where the Tea Party started, the Tea Party and right wing Evangelicals have started to and continue to merge in numerous ways. I was simply saying that I foresee that merger to continue until the strict no-tax Republicans are pushed into the Libertarian faction, not that the Tea Party was founded on religion.