(05-11-2021 01:54 PM)EigenEagle Wrote: The GOP has told their base "you can choose either Trump or an establishment that arse kisses woke corporate America that despises you", and they're aghast that they're making the entirely predictable choice.
It's really entertaining to watch. They are imploding and it's crazy.
Meanwhile you are worried of the discovery of election fraud that could start a coup.
(05-11-2021 01:54 PM)EigenEagle Wrote: The GOP has told their base "you can choose either Trump or an establishment that arse kisses woke corporate America that despises you", and they're aghast that they're making the entirely predictable choice.
It's really entertaining to watch. They are imploding and it's crazy.
Meanwhile you are worried of the discovery of election fraud that could start a coup.
She's a neocon like her father, and that's the wrong way to go. I'll gladly give the neocons back to the democrats in exchange for the blue-collar working class. Let democrats have the patrician finance class and the non-working welfare class, let republicans have the doers and makers who actually make the country run.
As far as the stolen election, nobody knows whether that is true or not, and it is not possible to know, because there are no controls in place to allow us to know. Nobody has actually looked at where the real problems are, the proliferation of unverified and unverifiable ballots, and until that can be analyzed, I'm not willing to accept the assertion that the election was on the up and up. The problem obviously is that it can't be done after the fact. Once ballots are in the box, they stay there. How they are counted is a relatively minor problem. The only thing that can be done is to place adequate controls on future elections. Democrats clearly don't want that, because that impacts their ability to cheat. There is no other viable reason for opposing adequate election controls except the desire to cheat.
And she opposed some incumbents. She hasn’t voted with the majority of the party in other areas but it’s her attacks on party members and repeating dem talking points that is the problem
She refused to toe the line & support Trump’s stolen election lie & is one of a handful of republicans willing to put party before country.
When the Democrats elevate Joe Manchin up to a leadership position in the Democrat Party---then we can talk. Until then, the Nazi Democrat totalitarians that want to block all free speech that differs from the fake propaganda spewed forth from the goose stepping Democrat leadership should probably remain quiet on the issue of dissent within the party.
Joe Manchin is Chair of the Senate Energy Committee & a member of the Senate Democratic Party leadership…
(05-11-2021 08:31 AM)bullet Wrote: And she opposed some incumbents. She hasn’t voted with the majority of the party in other areas but it’s her attacks on party members and repeating dem talking points that is the problem
She refused to toe the line & support Trump’s stolen election lie & is one of a handful of republicans willing to put party before country.
When the Democrats elevate Joe Manchin up to a leadership position in the Democrat Party---then we can talk. Until then, the Nazi Democrat totalitarians that want to block all free speech that differs from the fake propaganda spewed forth from the goose stepping Democrat leadership should probably remain quiet on the issue of dissent within the party.
Joe Manchin is Chair of the Senate Energy Committee & a member of the Senate Democratic Party leadership…
Liz Cheney opposes Donald Trump, whose personality, I suppose, is now the platform of the GOP.
Liz Cheney used the Russian Bounty lie to attack Trump. Disagreement is fine, but using a lie is not forgivable.
… yet spreading the lie of election theft and encouraging insurrection is rewarded? Liz Cheney’s questioning the WH over Russian bounties was from June of 2020 & is just an excuse being provided to the loyalists to try and rationalize her removal. Her conservative credentials are far more ingrained than her replacements’… yet her loyalty to the Leader is not.
There is no room for questioning Trump in his political party.
(This post was last modified: 05-12-2021 06:57 AM by Marc Mensa.)
(05-12-2021 06:55 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote: Her conservative credentials are far more ingrained than her replacements’… yet her loyalty to the Leader is not.
Her conservative credentials, and for that matter those of her father?
I think most on here would consider me to be a conservative, but neocon credentials--never saw a war that they didn't like--are not mine. When GWB picked Dick Cheney to be his running mate was the moment I decided that I could not vote for him. Of course, I knew too much about Al Gore to be able to vote for him ever, so I did my usual Libertarian thing.
Neocons are not conservatives. They are basically big government democrats who thrived in the FDR years but changed parties in a hissy fit over the anti-war and pro-drug elements in the 60s and 70s. I was fighting in that war, and I saw the immense damage that can be done by fighting in a war that we don't intend to win. We've gotten what should have been a pretty good refresher in the last 20 years, but don't seem to have learned much. Even worse, while we've had our heads buried in the sands of the Mideast, and sacrificing the lives and limbs of our young people in a series of winless wars, China has outflanked us primarily by extending their economic influence and they now pose the greatest threat to our democracy and economy.
Dick and Liz Cheney are about as far from Barry Goldwater as it is possible to be and remain part of the same party. I don't have much use for her replacements either, but I have none for her and the neocon line of thinking she represents.
(This post was last modified: 05-12-2021 07:44 AM by Owl 69/70/75.)
(05-12-2021 06:55 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote: Her conservative credentials are far more ingrained than her replacements’… yet her loyalty to the Leader is not.
Her conservative credentials, and for that matter those of her father?
I think most on here would consider me to be a conservative, but neocon credentials--never saw a war that they didn't like--are not mine. When GWB picked Dick Cheney to be his running mate was the moment I decided that I could not vote for him. Of course, I knew too much about Al Gore to be able to vote for him ever, so I did my usual Libertarian thing.
Neocons are not conservatives. They are basically big government democrats who thrived in the FDR years but changed parties in a hissy fit over the anti-war and pro-drug elements in the 60s and 70s. I was fighting in that war, and I saw the immense damage that can be done by fighting in a war that we don't intend to win. We've gotten what should have been a pretty good refresher in the last 20 years, but don't seem to have learned much. Even worse, while we've had our heads buried in the sands of the Mideast, and sacrificing the lives and limbs of our young people in a series of winless wars, China has outflanked us primarily by extending their economic influence and they now pose the greatest threat to our democracy and economy.
Dick and Liz Cheney are about as far from Barry Goldwater as it is possible to be and remain part of the same party. I don't have much use for her replacements either, but I have none for her and the neocon line of thinking she represents.
I am old enough to remember how these lump heads hated Cheney.
(05-12-2021 06:55 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote: Her conservative credentials are far more ingrained than her replacements’… yet her loyalty to the Leader is not.
Her conservative credentials, and for that matter those of her father?
I think most on here would consider me to be a conservative, but neocon credentials--never saw a war that they didn't like--are not mine. When GWB picked Dick Cheney to be his running mate was the moment I decided that I could not vote for him. Of course, I knew too much about Al Gore to be able to vote for him ever, so I did my usual Libertarian thing.
Neocons are not conservatives. They are basically big government democrats who thrived in the FDR years but changed parties in a hissy fit over the anti-war and pro-drug elements in the 60s and 70s. I was fighting in that war, and I saw the immense damage that can be done by fighting in a war that we don't intend to win. We've gotten what should have been a pretty good refresher in the last 20 years, but don't seem to have learned much. Even worse, while we've had our heads buried in the sands of the Mideast, and sacrificing the lives and limbs of our young people in a series of winless wars, China has outflanked us primarily by extending their economic influence and they now pose the greatest threat to our democracy and economy.
Dick and Liz Cheney are about as far from Barry Goldwater as it is possible to be and remain part of the same party. I don't have much use for her replacements either, but I have none for her and the neocon line of thinking she represents.
I learned more in this one post than I have since I've been on this forum. I look forward to learning more about Republicans from you. I've never really understood the transformation of the Republican Party and this post has me intrigued.
I have always been a fan of Ronald Reagan and could never understand why Republicans looked to him as their champion while at the same time being so different from him in policy.
I have my theories but perhaps you could shed light on that some time.
(05-12-2021 06:55 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote: Her conservative credentials are far more ingrained than her replacements’… yet her loyalty to the Leader is not.
Her conservative credentials, and for that matter those of her father?
I think most on here would consider me to be a conservative, but neocon credentials--never saw a war that they didn't like--are not mine. When GWB picked Dick Cheney to be his running mate was the moment I decided that I could not vote for him. Of course, I knew too much about Al Gore to be able to vote for him ever, so I did my usual Libertarian thing.
Neocons are not conservatives. They are basically big government democrats who thrived in the FDR years but changed parties in a hissy fit over the anti-war and pro-drug elements in the 60s and 70s. I was fighting in that war, and I saw the immense damage that can be done by fighting in a war that we don't intend to win. We've gotten what should have been a pretty good refresher in the last 20 years, but don't seem to have learned much. Even worse, while we've had our heads buried in the sands of the Mideast, and sacrificing the lives and limbs of our young people in a series of winless wars, China has outflanked us primarily by extending their economic influence and they now pose the greatest threat to our democracy and economy.
Dick and Liz Cheney are about as far from Barry Goldwater as it is possible to be and remain part of the same party. I don't have much use for her replacements either, but I have none for her and the neocon line of thinking she represents.
I learned more in this one post than I have since I've been on this forum. I look forward to learning more about Republicans from you. I've never really understood the transformation of the Republican Party and this post has me intrigued.
I have always been a fan of Ronald Reagan and could never understand why Republicans looked to him as their champion while at the same time being so different from him in policy.
I have my theories but perhaps you could shed light on that some time.
Reagan was the ultimate pragmatist.
He ran California with Willie Brown as speaker of the house. When Willlie wasn't doing you-know-what with Kamala, he ruled the California democrats with an iron fist.
I think one of Reagan's problems was that he thought Tip O'Neill was the same kind of leader, so he did the immigration compromise expecting that Tip could deliver the democrat votes to hold up his end of the deal.
When Reagan realized that Tip could not deliver, he went around the democrat leadership and found pragmatic democrats like Bill Bradley and Dick Gephardt to push the 1986 tax cuts through.
Reagan was a huge believer in having the strongest military in the world but never wasting it in no-win wars. That part of the Reagan message got badly corrupted by the neocons.
(05-12-2021 11:19 AM)swagsurfer11 Wrote: Looks like we start a new party tomorrow. Freedom.
Legalize Freedom! Vote Libertarian!
This is good. I feel like the Dems (at least the younger ones) have gone too far left. The Republicans have become a cult. I would like some different options.
(05-12-2021 11:19 AM)swagsurfer11 Wrote: Looks like we start a new party tomorrow. Freedom.
Legalize Freedom! Vote Libertarian!
This is good. I feel like the Dems (at least the younger ones) have gone too far left. The Republicans have become a cult. I would like some different options.
I've laid out my policy approaches before, which I would describe as pragmatic libertarian. Maybe we could find some common ground.
Right now, democrats are the evil party and republicans are the stupid party works fine for me.
![[Image: tenor.gif]](https://media.tenor.com/images/8ace8220f3de17027b2b25dec1ab1174/tenor.gif)
