Talk:Republican in Name Only/Archive 1

message: I just added a cleanup tag. The article looks like it's been cut and pasted and re-edited over time so that there is a lot of repetition, incorrect wikification, etc. I think I needs a good going over, which I'll try to get to, but if someone else can get to it, great. Alcarillo 18:40, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment

message: :RINO stands for Republican In Name Only, a disparaging term for a member of the United States Republican Party whose words and actions are thought to be too fiscally or socially moderate or liberal.
I second that. The intro is way off. "RINO" is almost exclusively used to bash liberal Republicans like Randall "Pro-life" Terry" is bashing Jim "The Suicide" King over the FL, 8th District (randallterry.com). Gopchristian
Isn't "RINO" also used to describe Republicans who are too fiscally conservative these days, like Sen. McCain, given the Party's meandering into fiscal irresponsibility? — ceejayoz ★ 20:26, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Change the Intro Wording 

message: Cut from discussion of etymology: "or possibly the term 'wino,' a dated (but still well-known) term for alcoholics." There is no citation for this, and I don't believe it. If it were true, "RINO hunter" would be in particularly poor taste. If someone actually has citation, fine, attribute it, but without that it doesn't belong in the article. -- Jmabel | Talk 22:58, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wino]]?  

message: "Note that in the 1950s conservatives like Barry Goldwater were considered RINO's because they dissented from the mainstream at the time."
1) The term didn't exist at the time.
2) As far as I remember, no one ever suggested at the time that Goldwater was only nominally a Republican. There were certainly those who felt that the party would be better off without him, but (in particular) there was no suggestion that there was some other party to whom he was closer. 
I am removing this, unless someone has a citation to back it up. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:33, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Better read Perlstein. The term RINO is recent but the concept is much older. The issue in early 1950s was should conservative Republicans quit the GOP because they were so marginalized & form new party.  In Dem party there was a big fuss along same lines in 1908. Rjensen 19:01, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Is it true that conservative Republicans are trying to keep the RINOs todau (or that the liberal GOP tried to keep Goldwater's people?) I doubt that very much. One of the reasons to ridicule a faction is so it will leave. Rjensen 19:59, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Of course, what the conservative Republicans today would like is to lose the RINOs from public office but somehow keep the votes of their supporters. (Not very likely. New York City, for example, has now had two rather centrist Republican mayors in a row; it's pretty hard to believe that that means that a mainline Republican could win that office.) If my memory serves me, I don't remember many Republicans being unhappy about Goldwater being the Republican senator from Arizona, though some were pretty distraught over his being the party's presidential candidate. But today's "RINO hunters" want the likes of Olympia Snowe and Chuck Hagel out of the Senate, which is a different phenomenon. - Jmabel | Talk 05:44, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

text:  I agree that the Barry Goldwater comment has no relevance to the article. RINO is a recent charge against liberal Republican... not "out of the mainstream." The article is poorly written and conveys a POV that those who call people RINOs are stupid.  Barney Gumble 18:29, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Silly extrapolation 

message: Lots in the media compare Reagan's policies to todays 'tea party' and see him as more on the centre or left (Eisenhower too with the very high taxes) http://www.salon.com/2016/01/25/bernie_sanders_could_be_the_next_ronald_reagan/
Bill Maher and Reagan's own son have called him a RINO  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.242.81.170 (talk) 00:19, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reagan 

message: I would oppose.  One, I have never heard it before.  At the same time, its a different animal in that this is an entirely pejorative term.  Is neo-mugwump used in the same context?  It would seem odd if it was since RINO seems to be more common and more prevalent.
Also oppose, Neo-Mugwump is a much less common term and has a different meaning. JoshuaZ 22:27, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "neo-Mugwump" does not work. It's rarely used and it's wrong-headed. The 1884 Mugwumps were Republicans who campaigned for Democrat Cleveland because the GOP candidate (Blaine) had a record of corruption. To use neo-Mugwump implies some Republicans are campaigning for Kerry/Gore, which is rare. Rjensen 03:03, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I certainly wouldn't merge to neo-Mugwump, but it might be reasonable to merge neo-Mugwump into this article. - Jmabel | Talk 04:19, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Nay to merging in either direction. —Joseph/N328KF (Talk) 04:36, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Merge Neo-Mugwump into RINO with perhaps a mention of the term. Give it a redirect, but Neo-mugwump is not a well-known or commonly used term, and IMO, doesn't need it's own page with a see-also. Umdunno 06:00, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Neo-Mugwump? Is someone joking. That term is never used. One of the dishonest tactics on Wikipedia is to merge popular pages onto obscure pages so people can't find them. Like as some RINO staffer wants to draw attention away from his boss, he doesn't ask to deleted it, but he tries to get the page moved to someone obscure.  Barney Gumble 18:48, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merging to Neo-Mugwump

message: The ratings grid on the page tends to be deceptive in that it looks at votes alone (after those votes are subjectively catagorized and weighted), and does not look at the whole Republican.
Defining whether or not a Republican is a RINO also should also include public statements, donations to ideological PACs, activity during GOP primaries, etc.
For example, if you look at the list you may think that Ron Paul is the 2nd biggest liberal republican in the House.  Paul often votes against GOP-oriented stuff (i.e., naming things after Reagan) not because he is a liberal, but because he is a constitutionalist.  Paul is actually one of the most Pro-Life, Pro-2nd Amendment, and Pro-Sovereignty members of the House.  But a person who looks at the grid would never know this.
In addition, you could have a Congressman who has reasonable ratings (perhaps very fiscally conservative and somewhat socially moderate).  But they work actively in Republican primaries for the most liberal candidates and/or start/control liberal republican advocacy PACs.
We should endeavor to find a method of listing Republicans that takes into consideration all of these factors.  Perhaps even a pro-and-con column, something that would list reasons for being labeled RINO and reasons against being labeled a RINO.
Just my 2 cents. 
69.39.172.79 14:16, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The list = the most comprehensive and nonpartisan voting list that exist--the National Journal scores. It deals with major issues and is considered highly reliable. There is no better listing. Rjensen 16:35, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Ratings of Congressmen Deceptive

message: The RINO list from Human Events (HE) magazine should stay in the article.  Moreover, RINO lists from other publications, advocacy groups, etc. should be added to the section labeled "Lists of RINOs".
On 17 July 2006, Montco deleted the HE list saying "(rv. removing the arbitrary list was discussed in the talk page. If you want it back, there should be some disccussion)" (emphasis mine).
MontCo deleted just the HE RINO list, but left the National Journal (NJ) RINO list in the article.
I should point out that if we are to label the HE RINO list 'arbitrary' then we have to label the NJ RINO list 'arbitrary' as well.  Both are subjective lists (see the citation links for both lists) and as such vunerable to arbitrary biases.  The HE RINO list is from the editorial staff of HE magazine and the NJ RINO list is of U.S. House of Representatives Republicans based on roll call votes that have been subjectively weighted (read: arbitrarily weighted) and catagoryied (read: arbitrarily catagoryied).
(Subjectively more or less means somebody guessed.  Read both the subjectivity and the objectivity articles to learn more.)
If we display any RINO lists, then to be fair we should display other RINO lists as well (at least from publications, advocacy groups, etc.).
P.S. The NJ RINO list is only of House Republicans in office in 2005 and quite clearly RINOs and RINOism do and does not stop at the south side of the United States Capitol.
72.82.170.135 10:54, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Let's keep both lists. The NJ is widely accepted by scholars and politicians of all perspectives, and has never been criticized as biased. Their method is to ask reporters and staffers what are the 75-100 most important roll call votes. After that the statistical methods are straight forward. (Every member gets a %liberal and then each member is assigned a percentile.) 
The Wiki article itself is about exclusion: who is considered outside the Republican realm. In that sense the HE list shows what one large group of conservatives (who are not necessarily Republicans!) wants to be outcast.  HE of course assumes that its conservative positions are what the GOP ought to hold. I think the HE list reasonably represents a consensus in the right wing of the GOP. The alternative of course is to have no article at all--or an article that is afraid of mentioning a single name. It is not POV to say that "here are the people that conservatives reject". Of course Wiki did not make up the list--we are reporting the HE list. Rjensen 00:13, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: RINO Lists-Arbitrary?

message: Some of you have no idea what a RINO is and we ought to have the discussion here to prevent editing wars. The term RINO is slang!! It is not a Republican out of the mainstream. It is not Barry Goldwater in 1962. You cannot take a slang term and then try to define it by it's literal meaning. It is a slang term given BY CONSERVATIVES for Republicans who vote heavily for liberal issues. It is a new term and cannot be retroactively applied! The term should not be convoluted to mean something it doesn't. 
It's like arguing that the definition of a "four letter word" should be "any word with four letters. Thus words like 'wind' and 'type' are four letter words." Barney Gumble 14:16, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "slang" --probably not but that is not the issue. RINO is a term often used and needs definition. The meaning is simple: out of the mainstream of the GOP. Rjensen 14:24, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, RINO needs definition but you are not giving the correct definition. It does not mean "out of the mainstream" in the colloquial sense any more than 'wind' is a four-letter word. It is 'out of the mainstream' in a sense, but only in the current view. It cannot be retroactively applied to Barry Goldwater. Barney Gumble 17:24, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The "name only" part of RINO means the ciritc does not like a person's positions and thinks they are too far from the party as a whole, that is "the party mainstream". Exactly the same criticism (without the actual term RINO) was levelled at Barry Goldwater (and Ronald Reagan) circa 1952-64, as the Perlstein citation shows. A little historical perspective helps explain the present. RINO is not quite standard English, it is true, but that does not mean it is meaningless andwithout history  Rjensen 18:16, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Barry Goldwater and Reagan may have been criticized but the term RINO is only a modern term...from conservative Republicans demeaning liberal Republicans. Tom Tancredo is "out of the Republican mainstream" on illegal immigration, but he is NOT called a RINO. RINO's literal interpretation is different from its slang meaning. The definition of a four letter word doesn't say "any word with four letters." Barney Gumble 20:01, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Let's get over the "slang" issue--it's not important. Fact is the GOP for over 90 years (since 1912) has been trying to draw boundaries to exclude some members. Biggest fight came in 1912, and it never went away. Dems are doing the same thing today in Connecticut/Lieverman race. Rjensen 20:39, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: But this is the definition of a term!! It's a modern term only applicable to the present condition. It has no retroactive application! Current wording though, is okay comprimise as it includes some wording disclaimers and present context. Barney Gumble 22:04, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "Liberal" -- no that is not part of the term: there is a very different term: "Liberal Republican," The definition of RINO is people who call themselves Republican but do not vote the way most Republicans vote.  Note the term is used by people who are not themselves GOP leaders --it's used by conservative leaders. In terms of Congress, none of the RINOs are among the 40% most liberal Congressmen--they are actually in the middle of the road. Take Olympia Snowe. (average her 2003-2004 votes), we have American Conserv Union = 47% Conservative; Ntl Taxpayer Union = 51%; Chamber of Commerce = 68%. Ntl Journal = from 46% to 51% conservative on social, economic and foreign policy votes. [Almanac Am Pol 2006 p 760].  ACU gives Snowe a lifetime rating of 50% conservative. Rjensen 23:52, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

text: RINOs are liberal Republicans. You said it yourself. It's a term used by conservative leaders. Against who?.... the liberals. In the eyes of a conservative, a Republican with a ACU rating of 47 is not middle of the road, it's horribly liberal. In addition to Snowe, Lincoln Chafee had a 2005 rating of 12, and has a lifetime 37 rating.  Specter's lifetime is 45, and Collins is 55.  These four are the four lowest rated Republicans in the eyes of the ACU. They are also the top four on the Human Events Top 10 RINOs. . Wow, what a coincidence!!! Barney Gumble 12:38, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I am completely with Barney Gumble here. Etymology is not definition. This word has been used only recently, and only to criticize people who are considered too liberal. You never hear it applied to David Duke, who is also a nominal Republican and presumably also repugnant to the values of many of the the people who use the term. - Jmabel | Talk 00:07, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

text: But people keep adding back "out of the mainstream". Can you give an example of even one use from a generally citable source that uses it for someone who is perceived as being too far right rather than too far left? - Jmabel | Talk 18:48, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

text: people keep adding incorrect words like 'liberal' or 'Democrat'. The lists of Rinos do nopt list ANY liberals or pseudo-Democrats-- Olympia Snowe for example--they are close to 50-50 not close to Kerry or Kennedy.  Rjensen 07:24, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  What I have added is "perceived as liberal". I assure you, the "RINO hunters" don't go around saying "That Olympia Snowe: she's soooo centrist." - Jmabel | Talk 19:26, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No need to assure us--find a reliable source. Am Cons Union says she's a centrist.Rjensen 19:45, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

text: good point re 1994, so I dropped 1994 in favor of "recent years" Rjensen 07:18, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What a RINO is 

message: "There is a suggestion…" by whom? "that RINOs are only in their party for a political advantage (the critics…" who? "…claim…"… - Jmabel | Talk 18:52, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Goldwater was repeatedly called out of the GOP mainstream in the 1950s (see Perlstein and Edwards bio of Goldwater). The term "out of the mainstream" meant pretty much the same as RINO today--as the article explains the terminology has changed but not the issue involved. (see also: David W. Reinhard, The Republican Right since 1945 - (1983), noting the 1964 anti-Goldwater slogan "Do You Want a Leader or a Loner?" which said Goldater was extreme and out of the GOP mainstream. (p 186, 190). Reinhard says, "In the case of Goldwater, the persistent feeling that he was not a bona fide conservative in 1964, but a "radical," showed that many considered him outside the mainstream even of the Republican Right." (pp 207-8)Rjensen 00:33, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This isn't an article about being out of the mainstream of the Republican party. This is (or at least ought to be) an article circumscribed by its title. Perhaps it should be expanded to a history of the various historic rifts and factions in the party (and similarly for the corresponding article on the Democratic Party): frankly, I think those would be much more interesting articles. But then this would be the wrong title. - Jmabel | Talk 06:10, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Let's not take a narrow view. It is common language to say "X is a Y in name only" where Y refers to a party, religion, or roup of some sort. That common phrase certainly does not by itself deserve an an article. The only reason RINO gets an article is because there is a long history of this kind of intramural fighting.  Otherwise we have a very short article: "RINO stands for "Republican in name only" referring to the US Republican party." Rjensen 06:24, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weasel words 

message: Wtah other important RINOs? An examples:
* Senator John Warner of Virginia, who is pro-choice, gun control and voted not guilty in President Clinton impeachment trial, and was possible nommine for Secretary of Defense during Clinton's first time
* Senator and current President pro tempore Ted Stevens od Alaska, who is pro-choice and also voted not guilty in President Clinton impeachment trial
* Senator Richard Shelby of Alabama, who is a conservative, but also voted not guilty 83.24.250.99 19:57, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Richard Shelby? Speaking as a Democrat, I'm kind of amazed: is this now saying that you cannot be a real Republican unless you think a blow job is an impeachable offense? - Jmabel | Talk 02:48, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Other important RINOs

message: As of just now, the first two sentences of this article were:
Republican In Name Only or RINO refers to a member of the United States Republican Party who votes more with the majority of Democrats than with the majority of Republicans. It is a disparaging term for a person whose political ideology is criticized as too far outside the conservative mainstream. 
The first sentence was simply not true: plenty of people who vote more often with the Republicans than not have been called RINOs over a handful of votes, sometimes over a single vote. And the citation doesn't bear out either definition, it is simply an opinion column that uses the term. 
I am removing the false first definition and the citation that gives an illusion of this being referenced; I am keeping the second definition. No problem with someone editing further, I'm just "taking out the trash" right now. - Jmabel | Talk 00:27, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I revised the intro and the first two sections. See my comment above. Alcarillo 17:45, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Intro again 

message: I changed the headers for those two sections. I especially have a disagreement with labelling a group "Pro-RINO". I'm quite sure that the members of those GOP-affiliated groups consider themselves to be more than just Republicans-in-name-only. If anything, only a Democrat or other GOP political opponent could accurately be called "pro-RINO". Also, "RINO-ism" doesn't make any sense. It's enough to say "anti-RINO". Alcarillo 17:49, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: "Pro- and Anti-RINO" misleading

message: I added this tag because the terms RINO/DINO are pejorative and subjective, yet the article states that 'candidate X is a RINO/DINO' without attribution. A term like this is easy to abuse and it is commonly used by status quo politicians and wonks who disagree with a trend they dislike within their party. This is the same rhetorical device as arguing that 'a true Christian would never...' or 'if you really loved me...' because assumes that the speaker's definition of a Republican/Democrat/Chritian/love is the only correct one. Attributing the terms to the politician or interest group that uses it is essential as is eliminating the 'many critics say X is a RINO' style of writing (See WP:AWW and WP:WTA). Antonrojo 19:03, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: At least most of the putative "RINOs" are attributed. Who exactly are you saying is referred to without attribution? - Jmabel | Talk 21:24, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Examples are Bloomberg and Lieberman. The article makes a strong case that they should be labeled as such due to changing parties and the like, and this is WP:OR at best unless it is attributed to a conservative critic or group...which shouldn't be hard to do. After perusing the article again, it expresses the idea that 'RINO/DINO' is relative based on who's using the label better than I had thought at first read and it's still important to state who the label is being applied by (e.g. Evangelicals v. environmentalists v. neoconservatives, etc.). Antonrojo 21:59, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV Tag

message: shouldnt rino go to a disambiguatiopn page, not the page for "republican in name only". I think most people why search for rino are looking for rinocerouses. 130.64.128.97 02:51, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  RINO and rhino

message: Calling it the "Grand Old Party" is far from neutral.  It's an advertising slogan.  Suggest all usage of "GOP" be changed to "Republican" or "Republican Party." 207.166.220.174 21:55, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: GOP is commonly used in the U.S. the same way that initials of parties are used in Europe. Most people don't even know what it originally stood for a century ago; it doesn't particularly have any connotations, neutral or otherwise. See for example Well-known GOP activist held in sex-predator sting (Seattle Times headline), Senate GOP Blocks Debate on Iraq Resolution (NPR headline), both in the first 30 Google hits on "GOP". - Jmabel | Talk 00:17, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "GOP" is not npov 

message: Shouldn't all of these be sourced? Granola Bars 23:27, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, per WP:BLP, they should be.  The appelation is clearly intended to be negative when it is used, so any inclusion must be sourced by our policies.   I'm removing. GRBerry 03:27, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: "More RINOs, according to various organizations"

message: Under the "Origin" section, there is one story given of the origin of the RINO acronym, but under "Regional differences and political history" another history of the acronym origin is given.  The first is unsourced and the second uses hedging language and the sourcing is questionable.  
I propose that the origin of the acronym be stated as "unclear" until we can find some respected sources that give a more definite origin of the acronym.  Thoughts?  I'm not extremely experienced with internal conflicts in articles, so I'm not sure what convention dictates in this situation.  Panchitavilletalk 07:36, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: RINO origins

message: This section is non-encyclopedic, as it will continue change as the Top 10 lists are updated and during and after election years. It is the main reason for the claims POV in the latest AfD discussion. Having a link to the lists in the Ext Link section may be a good compromise. --Evb-wiki (talk) 18:53, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  nix Individuals claimed to be "RINOs" section 

message: The explanation in this is a point-by-point refutation of the accusation. Far far off NPOV. I'm going to change it a bit (assuming, perhaps unsafely that the facts themselves are correct) but for reference, here is the original: 
Giuliani has, ironically, engaged in an exchange of RiNO accusations with Mitt Romney, competing challenger for the 2008 presidential nomination. Romney also raised state fees (which was offset by cutting other taxes), supported "gay rights" (but opposed "gay marriage"), did not fight pre-existing gun control laws in Massachusetts, created comprehensive health care State system ("based on free market principles" - contrary to Democratic government care proposals), et cetera. Many earlier “liberal” overtures, attributed to Romney, were mostly of tactical nature – in order to win the most liberal US state election. As a Governor of Massachusetts Romney was perceived by observers as rather conservative.
At the later stage of the 2008 primary season, Mitt Romney is considered by some to be the most Conservative Republican candidate as opposed to McCain and Huckabee.  
K/—Preceding unsigned comment added by Wcoynelloyd (talk • contribs) 20:55, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mitt Romney? 

message: Most of the external links are broken.  Does anyone have any updated links? 24.98.26.139 (talk) 05:37, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Links 

message: I could have sworn that I heard that McCain was bestowed with the title of "RINO" somewhere between 2000 and 2006. Ironic, considering his current position as GOP nominee. Does anyone else recall this? And do any of the archives back it up? --76.188.97.238 (talk) 22:43, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  John McCain considered a RINO? 

message: In addition, most of the primary source links at the bottom of the page seem to be down. Doesn't surprise me; if McCain was on the RINO list, might be an attempt at whitewashing the Internet record before the election. --76.188.97.238 (talk) 22:49, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  In addition - Primary Source Links are down 

message: In my opinion, this article does not provide any definition of what a RINO is but makes allusions to those who are considered a RINO. It's completely useless information without any attempt to define the platform of a RINO in more depth than not holding traditional republican views.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Netkatarina (talk • contribs) 04:26, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Still don't understand exactly WHAT a RINO or an anti-RINO believes in 

message: From WordSpy.com: <http://www.wordspy.com/words/RINO.asp>
Earliest Citation:
Bill Clinton would have been proud of what was happening on the third-floor Senate corner at the State House this week.
The Republicans were moving out and the Democrats and "RINOs" (Republicans In Name Only) were moving in.
—John DiStaso, "Merrill Taps Scamman, Strome and a Thomson," The Union Leader (Manchester, NH), December 31, 1992 
209.169.77.206 (talk) 09:48, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Added. Thanks much! / edg ☺ ☭ 12:46, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Earlier Citation - predates Celeste Greig 

message: RINO is a derogatory term (see Rockefeller Republican 17:04, 18 April 2010)
It is unnotable to make a WHOLE ARTICLE about such a thing.  
It is UNENCYCLOPEDIC to give credibility to name-calling like this.
The mere existence of this article is NON-NEUTRAL.
Wikipedia at its WORST!
108.7.9.7 (talk) 06:23, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Despite the prior author's tone, I agree that this article is of no encyclopedic value.  If it isn't already in the nominated for deletion page, I will place it there.  Spiral5800 (talk) 09:21, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestion 2 

message: Wikipedia itself says that "RINO" is a disparaging term (see Rockefeller Republican 17:04, 18 April 2010).  This is a WHOLE ARTICLE about NAME CALLING.  Such a term is used, true, but a WHOLE ARTICLE?!!???!!  It can be mentioned surely, but WITHIN some other article.  Elevating it with its own article gives credibility to the wrong kind of thing.  Delete it, merge it, change the name, DO ANYTHING!  It degrades Wikipedia to retain it under it's current form (name).  UTTERLY UNENCYLOPEDIC!  If no one responds to this in a few days, I'll get your attention by drastic measures.  I will delete it myself, and/or merge it, and/or change the name SUMMARILY!  And I'll do a crude job of it too.  So somebody do it well or I'll do it badly!
108.7.9.7 (talk) 02:15, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestion 3 

message: I can't believe all the passionate attention given to this article.  A RINO is a perjorative hurled by conservative Republicans toward moderate/liberal Republicans.  Who is considered a RINO depends upon who's doing the hurling; trying to define it more is pure folly.  It's like saying someone is a jackass.  My definition of who is a jackass may be different that yours.
I think it's fair to say, however, that the overwhelming majority of conservatives who use the term would have no objection to having it hurled at elected officials such as Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe.
I notice that Celeste Greig was mentioned.  I first met Celeste during the 1993 mayoral campaign of Dick Riordan (probably 95% of conservatives would concur that Riordan is a RINO).
Later that year, I saw her at a meeting of the Republican Party of Los Angeles County, where she gave me a button with the word RINO on it, crossed off by a red slash.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.90.187.27 (talk) 21:40, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Could you get us a (GFDL/free use) photograph of that button? (I suppose it's similar this one.) It would be nicer than relying on a written explanation of the button's appearance. Wikimedia Commons does not have this button, and the only ones I can find online are non-free sources. / edg ☺ ☭ 17:35, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  LOL 

message: If we can include Democrats that other Democrats think are too conservative, why can't we keep this list? J390 (talk) 07:48, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  How come the list of "DINO"s is kept but this one doesn't have a list? 

message: The page Neo-Mugwump, which currently redirects here, has been nominated for deletion. Your views would be welcome in the discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2013 April 22#Neo-Mugwump. Thryduulf (talk) 21:19, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neo-Mugwump 

message: added the image :File:RINO.png, his/her own work. Also :File:DINO.png at Democrat In Name Only. While it looks like good work, and does sort of convey the meaning by borrowing from other political imagery, I'm a little concerned about using original visual interpretations in this kind of way. We use illustrations to help to explain concepts or to visualize something for which no free image exists (and a few other reasons), but here the image doesn't help to clarify beyond what the text says and isn't substituting for non-free material. In other words, the image has no official connection to the term "Republican In Name Only" and is more along the lines of an artist's interpretation of what the logo should be. Anyway, if it's a problem (I don't know), and to the extent it is a problem, it didn't seem urgent enough to revert, so just leaving it here to see what others think. Definitely a thanks is in order for Spartan7W either way, though, for producing and sharing the image. I wonder if it's not used in the article, if there's another place it could be used (a Portal, say). — Rhododendrites talk \\ 05:23, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I understand the issue raised. However I have taken a Rhino silhouette, used in African traffic signs, which is absent of artistic perversion. It includes elements seen by both parties. The terms RINO and DINO are both, in many respects, names used to poke fun, and this is representative. Spartan7W § 00:06, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

text: Rhododendrites That's fine with me, I didn't check the page history or talk page before adding it. MB298 (talk) 00:09, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  image? 

message: The currently cited sources make it clear that "cuckservative" is used exclusively by white supremacists to attack Republicans for not being racist. When I tried to clarify this, the change was immediately reverted as "not constructive".
Cite 11: The term has emerged out of the white supremacist movement as a term of abuse for white conservatives deemed race traitors unwilling to forthrightly defend the interests of white America.
Cite 12: The danger is that otherwise well-meaning grassroots conservatives might mistakenly think‬ this term, which, at best, is meant to be emasculating, was merely an‬ anodyne synonym for RINO. Instead, it’s a rallying cry for white supremacists and “neoreactionaries” who, for whatever reason, seem to back Trump.
Cite 13: I'll defer to Richard Spencer, president of the white nationalist National Policy Institute.
"#Cuckservative” is a full-scale revolt, by Identitarians and what I’ve called the 'alt Right,' against the Republican Party and conservative movement," Spencer explained in an e-mail. "The 'cuck' slur is vulgar, yes, but then piercingly accurate. It is the cuckold who, whether knowingly or unknowingly, loses control of his future. This is an apt psychological portrait of white 'conservatives,' whose only identity is comprised of vague, abstract 'values,' and who are participating in the displacement of European Americans — their own children."
I'm going to make the alteration again, to improve the clarity of the article, avoid possible confusion with the term and prevent the obscuring of it's history. 
71.179.106.200 (talk) 05:14, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: That seems to be in the imperative tense. Sorry, no, I will not obey that command. I will revert your latest nonsense edit without comment. Sorry, - Wikidemon (talk) 09:50, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cuckservative 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Republican In Name Only. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110831145736/http://datcp.wi.gov/Environment/Gypsy_Moth/index.aspx to http://datcp.wi.gov/Environment/Gypsy_Moth/index.aspx
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:22, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified