>

Well I’m Canadian but I assume this thread is us based I took a read through all answers and confirmed there’s only one republican policy I agree with and that’s the banning of Chinese spy companies.
Oh. John McCain. I liked a few of the things that he said when he was around.
As someone right leaning, I think theres an argument for good healthcare in the US as an investment in the economy.  
I also think there’s an argument that we need to rein in defense spending.  We’re approaching one trillion annually in defense spending with no ongoing significant combat operations.  Folks on the right don’t seem to appreciate that we can’t have a reduction in wasteful spending without addressing the $816 billion elephant in the room. >

As a progressive, I truly appreciate this take. Universal Healthcare would likely see an increase in healthy people returning to the job market. Healthy people are more inclined to actively pursue a better life. 
And the excessive spending on defense could see more money sent to places like mental health, poverty, education, welfare, etc. >

Why do you think the government doesn't show a greater interest in keeping people healthy from a lifestyle standpoint so that the demand for treatment-based healthcare decreases? Obesity-related complications are the biggest consumer of healthcare resources, but the government is all but silent in attempting to solve that problem at the source. >

Profits. The end. For-profit healthcare, prisons, rehab etc make it so no one ever actually gets better and will inevitably return. Capitalism is a blight on humanity, at least in its current form. Also, clearly, the American government is corrupt, so we're pretty well screwed. >


Capitalism is a blight on humanity,

Capitalism works great in certain sectors.   If you and I are selling widgets and you make a luxury widget but only ten of them and I make a cheaper widget but 1000 of them, capitalism works pretty good.  
But once it touches any fundamental way that human beings are allowed to survive and be content, it becomes sociopathic. >

I can definitely agree with the left on climate & environmental sustainability. We must take care of our earth. I truly don’t understand all the conservatives who are adamantly opposed to new sources of energy, transportation alternatives, & reducing our plastics consumption. >

Odd thing is, I do know a lot of Republicans that love solar. The idea of being self-sufficent, regardless of climate change, should be non-controversial.   
Having diverse sources for power is just a huge positive overall. It limits fluctuations in markets with limited resources (like petroleum). 
Multiple power sources and decentralized distribution of electricity is also great asset for our National Security. 
There is a big difference between conservatives and modern Republicans, so the OPs post to me is impossible to answer. >

Might help to market it as being self sufficient. Like you said.
Seems like the path with least resistance in getting more support for greener climate >

"Stop relying on Big Oil to live your best American life. Buy solar, and get tax credits for doing so."
Can see this appealing to that one odd yet significant crowd that wants society to collapse so they can thrive or whatever. >

The whole tax credit thing... years ago when my area was considering allowing wind farms (spoiler alert... we did), there was a massive push back from the Republicans saying "they're only doing it for the Obama dollars!". So, even then, they'll hear some Limbaugh wannabe tell them it's morally reprehensible for anyone to accept the tax break and they'll run to the mountaintops to let everyone else know. >

While accepting agricultural tax credits… odd. >

The whole "small government/ don't tread on me" thing, then going on to demand the government do something like ban abortion, is also odd. >

Are you under the impression that one cannot logically believe that one of the duties of said "small government" should be to protect the lives of its citizens? >

Gay rights. I don’t know why this is even brought up anymore. Their lifestyle is not affecting anyone else regardless of if you agree or disagree with it >

The issue with this question is at a high enough level, there’s a lot of “positions” that most people agree with. 
People generally agree on “restricting” congress trading, and “common sense” gun control. But once you get into actual proposed legislation - they don’t agree anymore. The devils in the details >

As a disclaimer, I'm independent, I agree with the Republicans on some things and agree with a Democrats on other things. But Democrats get more support and coverage on social media and news so I tend to hate on the Democrats more.
But I think everyone would agree that there are certain people who shouldn't own guns and we should do what we can within reason to keep criminals and certain people from owning guns. 
The Democrats lose me when they try an institute bans or otherwise institute laws that would punish law abiding citizens. 
But both parties have their hard line issue that I think turns away a lot of moderate voters. Democrats try and push way too hard in the way of gun control (more thorough background checks? Sure, banning certain firearms? No) and Republicans push way too hard in the way of abortion (regardless of your stance on the issue not allowing any exceptions at all is frankly ridiculous). >


But Democrats get more support and coverage on social media and news so I tend to hate on the Democrats more

This just sounds like knee jerk contrarianism. >

It's also statistically not true. >

As a conservative practically embarrassed to brand myself as a Republican now the way the party has gone, anything on climate and abortion I would agree with the dems on. >

It’s crazy how divided we are, especially with being practically forced into two parties, that labeling yourself a member of a party makes everyone think you believe a specific set of things.
Like no everyone’s different they are parties not ideologies. They have a similar baseline but grow from there. Judge each person individually. That’s why I, a more liberal person, tend to only label myself as moderate or independent to prevent being stereotyped with the worst/most extreme of the left >

I thibk it's fair to brand someone with the policies the party they vote for enacts.  Not so much to judge them for what other voters who voted simmilarly did or said.
For example, it's shitty to judge all GOP voters because of Qanon, but acceptable to think they are ok with burning the world and subjugating women if they continue to vote for the GOP. >

Based on voting habits you can judge someone more than just the label. If someone is labeled Republican they can still vote either way. If they end up voting right in a certain election, judge them for that >

Exactly. I personally know people too embarrassed to admit they’re Republican and claim to “see both sides” yet they’ve voted straight ticket for 50 years and watch Fox News daily and repeat Q talking points. 
Their actions tell me everything I need to know about how they really feel. >

I agree with the left on prison reform. Inmates shouldn’t be in privately owned prisons, in the horrendous conditions that they are, with no way of returning to society successfully on release. 
Prison should be about reforming citizens into productive contributors to society. >

To my knowledge Trump/the gop didn’t even publish a platform for 2020 so I’m not sure what they stand for to even begin >

They did.
It was one page long and defined being a Republican as being personally loyal to him.
There is literally nothing else to being a Republican right now, at least so far as the party platform is concerned. >

Sorry, I meant a platform with objectives, policies, etc >


Sorry, I meant a platform with objectives, policies, etc

Ah, you mean the thing that details their stances on guns, taxes, foreign relations, healthcare, and the like?  This is it.
I'm not kidding, that's all there is, still. >

Did you scroll down? It gives answers to all the questions you ask because they just reused the 2016 platform. >

I can't see whereas they expressly re-adopted the 2016 platform.  (Besides, the 2016 platform document derides "the President".) >

Yes and the fact that it derided the current President was a great mocking point of the GOP. They didn’t bother changing a thing to their platform between 2016 and 2020. Laziness or incompetence? >

Both.  The 2016 platform was never actually adopted or restated by the 2020 platform document. >

I think we probably really should ban TikTok. That really just seems like it has to be a plot to track and destroy us. >

This just screams blatant sinophobia to me—we seem to not be upset that technology companies are tracking our every move and promoting disinformation (since many American counterparts are doing it as well), instead we are mad that a Chinese company is simply doing a better job of it.
Isn't that the long and short of it? Can you correct me where I'm wrong? Wouldn't it be simpler to focus on our own American giants that are doing the same exact thing? 
This isn't whataboutism, because I think we should ban them all, or strictly regulate. I just can't think of any other explanation for singling out TikTok. >

Let me put this another way: what is uniquely bad about TikTok, in a way that would justify taking action against them but not, say, Instagram? >

It's in the pocket of a hostile foreign government actively engaged in cyber warfare and espionage against the US? >

Not exactly what the question is asking, but as a left-leaning Democrat I firmly think we just need to drop the gun issue (at least for now), and never speak the words "defund the police" again. 
It's tough, because I wholeheartedly agree with the motivations behind each of these positions. They are both big issues for the country at the moment.
But sadly, they are losing issues. And at the end of the day, I feel like there are other issues that are equally or more important than these two that I'd also like to see addressed, and the electoral hit we take time and time again by pursuing these two problem issues is simply not worth losing the ability to fix all the other ones. 
Let's pick fights we can plausibly win, not ruin our reputation/electability by shouting at windmills that we'll never be able to move anyway. >

The defund the police slogan was the dumbest PR I’d ever seen. 
Straight up could’ve just been, “Reform the police” >

You're correct, but it was never a position of the Democratic party, or really any mainstream faction of it. Fox News et al simply tried to make it seem like Democrats as a whole were in favor of defunding the police. >

Lol, gaslight harder. We remember 2020. Dems have been desperately trying to reframe their support for BLM and the violence and damage that came from it since.
 I've even heard Dems try and claim it was the GOP that supported Defunding... that's the next evolutionary step for this gaslight. >


We remember 2020

Oh boy, are you one of those people who believes that a whole bunch of cities burned to the ground in 2020? >

No, there was documented billions of dollars in damages and dozens of deaths as a result from the riots you want to pretend didn't exist, despite being on film.
It's like arguing that nobody entered the capital on J6. That's the level of gaslight dems seem to always give, but it's expecially thick when trying to cover their tracts with the "summer of love" in 2020 >


expecially thick when trying to cover their tracts

if English isn't your native language, I'll go easier on you >

You have nothing. How sad >

I support nuclear energy. Also I feel like progressives are way too reactionary and hurt their own cause because of it. ”Defund the Police” is one of the worst slogans ever. When even a city like Minneapolis voted against replacing the police, you have to give it up. Progressives need to work on better messaging. >

Isn’t it funny that the one thing energy related that environmentalists managed to stop, nuclear energy, just so happened to benefit the oil and gas companies greatly. They didn’t manage to replace it with something else. Nope, just got those pesky plants out of the way for massive oil and gas profits. I’ve never met a voter on the left that is against nuclear power. Must just be a coincidence though. >

My mother was. When I was a kid growing up, we were 100 miles from it when three mile island (tmi) melted down. I remember the hype and fear surrounding that event. She was convinced (and had me convinced for a while) that it was too dangerous - even though nobody was hurt by tmi in the end. I think many older Democrats feel the same way. It was a major issue, check out the movie 'China syndrome' for a taste of the mood. >

That makes sense as the anti-nuclear stance is more a generational issue in my experience. >

I used to consider myself far more hawkish than the Democratic Party as far as military and national defense. It’s so confusing what the Republican Party stands for anymore with what’s going on in Ukraine. It seems like they are mainly siding with Russia which is clearly against democracy and our self interests. But at the same time they want massive defense funding but they don’t want to use what we have. >

Yeah it is amazing how much the republicans have shifted on Russia.
I think in the past their motivations were: National defence (Russia being an adversary), opposition to communism (hangover from USSR fears), and wanting to fund the military-industrial complex because of their donors.
Now their motivations are: Allegiance to Russia due to huge corruption (Russia supporting the GOP in exchange for all sorts of favours, trump bring entwined with them for years, etc.), and increasingly having shared objectives with authoritarian & right-wing regimes (sharing of disinformation, dismantling institutions, using intimidation and voter suppression to subvert democracy and gain power). They still want to fund the military-industrial complex but they’d rather not have to do so in a way that harms Putin’s regime or supports democracy. >

Social conservatives also like Russia going back a decade because they are seen as masculine... Putin has a harem and rides a bear into battle shirtless with an AK.
Russia doesn't have lgbtq, women are subservient, the race is white and unmixed, lots and lots of guns.
In a lot of ways, Russia has been idolized on the right. >

Worth mentioning that Russian gun ownership is extremely limited. >

i dont think republicans have their own ideas or platform anymore, the average republican probably agrees with me on the majority of actual policy ideas, its the culture war shit they disagree with, and none of that shit is real. 
bigotry toward LGBT people and racism aside what else is there? i dont think most republicans even agree with that stuff, i think most of them probably dont really care about the "culture war" i think thats an extremist thing and i dont think there are that many extremist conservatives. 
as far as what i agree with conservatives on that is explicitly not something the left already supports? i honestly cant think of anything. moderate americans share a lot more in common regardless of affiliation, its a spectrum and the averages fall in the middle. idk why people think the two parties are so different, its not possible for them to be, they would never be able to maintain control if they were. 
that being said, i think republicans have been forced to go more and more extreme with their views, the GOP kind of fucked itself with trump and are in a freefall toward outright fascism. i like to think most people have the sense to see whats going on and avoid people like desantis but i have very little faith in america these days. after trump im better off without expectations. 
i skimmed the comments and see mostly conservatives admitting they agree with pretty basic "progressive" ideas. which is not surprising to me because progressive/socialist ideas are extremely popular in general, but im not seeing many left leaning people. i dont think an answer for us exists, certainly not for leftists like me lol i dont even agree with liberals. >

I'm in North Dakota which is a Republican state. You mentioned you're not sure what Republican policies really are, so I linked our state budget and the issues that are most important to our community here,, to help give you an idea:

Ensuring pension solvency for state employees
Investing in technology and cyber security
Support for K-12 and affordable access to quality higher education
Building up our workforce (skill and training programs)
Support for behavioral health and substance abuse disorder
Investing in infrastructure
Establishing framework for long-term investing and distribution of legacy fund (state taxes collected on oil monies)