KEMP!!!!

[Millennial_Messiah]

^^^ this is a bunch of conspiracy nonsense.

This is exactly what I mean by I didn't change, it's the GOP that changed.

I can stomach a Kasich-type of GOP, this whole crazies stuff just ensures I show up and vote (D) every time. You did it to yourselves, and the quicker you can snap out of it, the quicker it's going to end.

John Kasich...? Mitt Romney....? Barf... I'd rather have president Bernie / VP Ilhan Omar, tbh

[ElNono]

John Kasich...? Mitt Romney....? Barf... I'd rather have president Bernie / VP Ilhan Omar, tbh

But see? Your response exemplifies perfectly what I'm saying. That was the more moderate GOP 6-8 years ago. It's all gone.

Now you're a cultist or a RINO, there's no middle ground. Manchin would've been a Republican in those years, same with Sinema.

[Millennial_Messiah]

But see? Your response exemplifies perfectly what I'm saying. That was the more moderate GOP 6-8 years ago. It's all gone.

Now you're a cultist or a RINO, there's no middle ground. Manchin would've been a Republican in those years, same with Sinema.

You have it bass-ackwards. Manchin and Sinema are solid Democrats. As are Kasich and Romney, GWB and Clinton. The far left progressivist movement (AOC, Warren, Bernie et al) is what has changed, not so much the right.

America First is not a cult, but a referendum on the globalist American empire of neocons like GWB, Obama etc that got us into endless foreign wars and have imported teeming legions of awful roach immigrants from the nether regions of the world in the name of cheap labor without understanding the long term ramifications and consequences of actual Americans, those of us who have been here for generations, since pre-Civil War times and before.

Trying to imply that the overton window has shifted right and not radically left in the past 10, 20, 30+ years is absolutely ludicrous.

[spurraider21]

But see? Your response exemplifies perfectly what I'm saying. That was the more moderate GOP 6-8 years ago. It's all gone.

Now you're a cultist or a RINO, there's no middle ground. Manchin would've been a Republican in those years, same with Sinema.

never forget that Trump called Mo Brooks woke

[ElNono]

You have it bass-ackwards. Manchin and Sinema are solid Democrats. As are Kasich and Romney, GWB and Clinton. The far left progressivist movement (AOC, Warren, Bernie et al) is what has changed, not so much the right.

How do I have it backwards? Romney was a presidential candidate for the GOP, selected by a majority of GOP voters. He was the GOP standard-bearer then. Same applies to McCain, whom I believe you'll be quick to label a RINO if not straight out "Democrat" now.

AOC, Warren, Bernie, they never won the nomination. They didn't even come close, tbh... Obama was a center-right president. You're completely overrating the leftmost side of the left, and glossing over the fact that the rightmost side of the right is now running the asylum there.

America First is not a cult, but a referendum on the globalist American empire of neocons like GWB, Obama etc that got us into endless foreign wars and have imported teeming legions of awful roach immigrants from the nether regions of the world in the name of cheap labor without understanding the long term ramifications and consequences of actual Americans, those of us who have been here for generations, since pre-Civil War times and before.

Trying to imply that the overton window has shifted right and not radically left in the past 10, 20, 30+ years is absolutely ludicrous.

The overton window has opened to both sides, leaving a pretty sizeable gap in the middle. The current polarization is a faithful reflection of that.

However, within the boundaries of each party, as conservative numbers and popularity have dwindled, what remained fully embraced the more radicalized side of the right, mostly because it's the only base that's left. Your entire commentary here is a great example of that, and you have to give Dennison credit for tapping into that pool openly and defending that racist, xenophobic, misogynistic base.

On the left, the far left (which Warren is not part of, BTW) has been more vocal, but are still far from any prominent role within the party. That party is still run by ancient, centrist relics like Joe, Pelosi, Schumer. You just ate up the whole Squad boogeyman hook, line and sinker. They're largely powerless in that party.

In the overall, the overton window will continue slowly shifting towards the left, simply because that's been going on for almost a century now, and social progress is inevitable. This is why Trump had to embrace largely a liberal discourse to get elected.

[baseline bum]

You have it bass-ackwards. Manchin and Sinema are solid Democrats. As are Kasich and Romney, GWB and Clinton. The far left progressivist movement (AOC, Warren, Bernie et al) is what has changed, not so much the right.

America First is not a cult, but a referendum on the globalist American empire of neocons like GWB, Obama etc that got us into endless foreign wars and have imported teeming legions of awful roach immigrants from the nether regions of the world in the name of cheap labor without understanding the long term ramifications and consequences of actual Americans, those of us who have been here for generations, since pre-Civil War times and before.

Trying to imply that the overton window has shifted right and not radically left in the past 10, 20, 30+ years is absolutely ludicrous.

Trump tried to get us into war with Iran

[DMC]

But see? Your response exemplifies perfectly what I'm saying. That was the more moderate GOP 6-8 years ago. It's all gone.

Now you're a cultist or a RINO, there's no middle ground. Manchin would've been a Republican in those years, same with Sinema.

Look who you're talking to. Are you really going to consider him a legit cross section of the conservative voter base?

[ElNono]

Look who you're talking to. Are you really going to consider him a legit cross section of the conservative voter base?

The re ation might be all his, but I think I can pretty safely group his thinking/arguments with the majority of the conservative base these days, definitely.

[Millennial_Messiah]

never forget that Trump called Mo Brooks woke

And now he's going to have to re-endorse him in the runoff because Katie Britt is another Lisa Murkowski type.

Trump tried to get us into war with Iran

No he didn't. Nixing the awful John Kerry nuclear "deal" with Iran, that the Ayatollahs and co. were never going to abide by, was an obvious move. Murking Soleimani was controversial, but he was technically in US-controlled parts of Iraq, not on Iranian soil. Personally I wouldn't have killed him but absolutely I would have killed Baghdadi. Baghdadi was responsible for millions of innocent deaths in 3-4 years including innocent American citizens who weren't there for the war, like Kayla Mueller.

How do I have it backwards? Romney was a presidential candidate for the GOP, selected by a majority of GOP voters. He was the GOP standard-bearer then. Same applies to McCain, whom I believe you'll be quick to label a RINO if not straight out "Democrat" now.

McCain wasn't my, my folks' nor my family's choice in 2008. It was Giuliani. We all thought McCain was a war hero but an awful politician and a flip flopper (he self-proclaimed that he couldn't decide who to vote for in 2004).

As for Romney, everyone around me thought he was awful, that he was THE WORST GOP candidate in the 2012 primaries, and that the Democrats and deep state pulled some strings to get him in instead of a more populist candidate like Herman Cain or even Newt Gingrich. Romney was literally the last person we all wanted, and we had to hold back barfing to vote for him over Obama, but we all knew that when Romney was "nominated" that the 2012 presidential election was lost and Obama was guaranteed the second term. Even after Judge Roberts () voted to keep Obamacare in an apparent attempt to boost the Republican nominee over Obama.

[DMC]

The re ation might be all his, but I think I can pretty safely group his thinking/arguments with the majority of the conservative base these days, definitely.

So we could say the same for Boutons, Spurs Homer and the left?

[SnakeBoy]

I would crossover for a centrist Democrat like Boss Manchin

[ElNono]

McCain wasn't my, my folks' nor my family's choice in 2008. It was Giuliani. We all thought McCain was a war hero but an awful politician and a flip flopper (he self-proclaimed that he couldn't decide who to vote for in 2004).

As for Romney, everyone around me thought he was awful, that he was THE WORST GOP candidate in the 2012 primaries, and that the Democrats and deep state pulled some strings to get him in instead of a more populist candidate like Herman Cain or even Newt Gingrich. Romney was literally the last person we all wanted, and we had to hold back barfing to vote for him over Obama, but we all knew that when Romney was "nominated" that the 2012 presidential election was lost and Obama was guaranteed the second term. Even after Judge Roberts () voted to keep Obamacare in an apparent attempt to boost the Republican nominee over Obama.

We're not talking about your preference(s), we're talking about what the majority of GOP voters thought their standard bearer were back then. You simply can't claim that the GOP hasn't moved when every one of the main candidates in recent GOP history are to be called RINOs now.

Even ing Reagan would be a "Democrat" in this day and age. The GOP is in a race to the bottom to see who can out-Trump Trump. You can easily trace the start of this whole re ation to the choice of Sarah Palin.

I didn't generally had a problem with the GOP, until they started to finally figure out that it's really hard to win a federal election with retrograde conservative ideas, especially social ones, and so now they're basically drawing the conclusion that maybe democracy is a dead end. This is when got dangerous, in my opinion, and they certainly lost my vote.

[ElNono]

So we could say the same for Boutons, Spurs Homer and the left?

sure

[Millennial_Messiah]

We're not talking about your preference(s), we're talking about what the majority of GOP voters thought their standard bearer were back then. You simply can't claim that the GOP hasn't moved when every one of the main candidates in recent GOP history are to be called RINOs now.

Even ing Reagan would be a "Democrat" in this day and age. The GOP is in a race to the bottom to see who can out-Trump Trump. You can easily trace the start of this whole re ation to the choice of Sarah Palin.

I didn't generally had a problem with the GOP, until they started to finally figure out that it's really hard to win a federal election with retrograde conservative ideas, especially social ones, and so now they're basically drawing the conclusion that maybe democracy is a dead end. This is when got dangerous, in my opinion, and they certainly lost my vote.

Definitely the big change within the Republican Party began around 2010 with the Tea Party movement. The Tea Party Movement was a grassroots right wing populist movement that was good enough to win house and some senate seats but it didn't really have a leader back then; no real anchor, no leg to stand on... Trump became that leader tbh.

I would crossover for a centrist Democrat like Boss Manchin

No, him. He voted for impeachment hoax number two and also to confirm Ketanji Child Porn Brown Jackson to the SCOTUS. Wish him annihilation in WV in 2024

I didn't generally had a problem with the GOP, until they started to finally figure out that it's really hard to win a federal election with............

So you didn't have a problem with the GOP until they actually decided to get back into the game and stop pissing away 300+ electoral votes by nominating lousy candidates like McCain and Romney? that's like saying you didn't have a problem with the Golden State Warriors until they usurped the Spurs in 2015... etc

[pgardn]

Look who you're talking to. Are you really going to consider him a legit cross section of the conservative voter base?

Says the guy who attempts to breast feed these idiots on this site.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Says the guy who attempts to breast feed these idiots on this site.

He's not a woke liberal, so he doesn't believe men can get pregnant and breast feed like the libs on here do.

[Blake]

If it wasn't clear about Pence's distancing from Trump before..

[ElNono]

Definitely the big change within the Republican Party began around 2010 with the Tea Party movement. The Tea Party Movement was a grassroots right wing populist movement that was good enough to win house and some senate seats but it didn't really have a leader back then; no real anchor, no leg to stand on... Trump became that leader tbh.

There was nothing grassroots about the Tea Party. It was orchestrated and well funded by the Kochs. (link)

And it's goals were the exact opposite of what Trump ran on (smaller government). He certainly inherited them once he took over the party. That's certainly one of the more dumb, rabid part of the base.

So you didn't have a problem with the GOP until they actually decided to get back into the game and stop pissing away 300+ electoral votes by nominating lousy candidates like McCain and Romney? that's like saying you didn't have a problem with the Golden State Warriors until they usurped the Spurs in 2015... etc

In the past 40 years, GOP won 6 presidential contests, Dems won 5. The only recent trend here is the GOP continues to lose the popular vote, which makes it increasingly difficult to win contests, and so gerrymandering became a priority. This popular vote trend wasn't broken by probably one of the most popular candidates since Reagan either.

So I have no idea what you mean by "back into the game". The GOP has always been "in the game". Both parties had ty candidates in that period as well. With the exception of Obama, slick Willy and Dubya Sr, they were all incredibly bad candidates. So much so that in bency is nowadays largely a detriment, not a plus.

[Millennial_Messiah]

In the past 40 years, GOP won 6 presidential contests, Dems won 5. The only recent trend here is the GOP continues to lose the popular vote, which makes it increasingly difficult to win contests, and so gerrymandering became a priority. This popular vote trend wasn't broken by probably one of the most popular candidates since Reagan either.

So I have no idea what you mean by "back into the game". The GOP has always been "in the game". Both parties had ty candidates in that period as well. With the exception of Obama, slick Willy and Dubya Sr, they were all incredibly bad candidates. So much so that in bency is nowadays largely a detriment, not a plus.

This guy's a Clinton-Gore-Kerry-Obama-Obama-Trump-Trump voter based in Wisconsin. He explains it well in this video:

[ElNono]

This guy's a Clinton-Gore-Kerry-Obama-Obama-Trump-Trump voter based in Wisconsin. He explains it well in this video:

Don't watch political youtubes. Do you have an opinion or not?

[Millennial_Messiah]

Don't watch political youtubes. Do you have an opinion or not?

My opinion (and the fact) is that the Republican Party, specifically the old guard of the Republican Party, was at a dead end after the blue wave years of 2006 and 2008. (The GOP as a whole is still suffering from the lingering effects of the blue tsunami in the senate in Nov. '06, by the way. Hopefully we can finally reverse that in '24, but it's been a long time coming.) Bush 43 and his administration was considered a failure by the majority of Americans, from genuine moderate liberals to leftists to blue-dog populists to establishment Democrat types. The Tea Party and the 2010 bounce-back proved that the GOP was not completely yet dead, but in 2012 when Romney was resoundingly defeated it was painfully obvious that the electoral college map had become essentially an impenetrable brick wall for the GOP in its current pro-Bush, pro-McCain, pro-war establishmentarian state.

It was painfully obvious that the GOP, in order to ever win back enough electoral votes to have a crack at winning the White House again, absolutely MUST pick off one of the core four Democrat-voting blocs that had scored Obama comfortable (not landslide, but comfortable) victories in 2008 and 2012. By 2008, the deep state machine had turned against Bush and the GOP big time (as evidenced by the polar shift from red to blue in Virginia, the most "big brother" state in the entire country) and the suburban vote had become increasingly friendly to Democrats.

The easiest and most vulnerable of those voting blocs for the Republican party to pick off was the long-standing but soft Democrat voting bloc that was the white working class, exurban blue dog Democrat vote. They were ancestral (D) votes but generally socially conservative and economically populist (not socialist, but pro-union). But the GOP could not field a Bush, McCain, Romney, or -say- even Ted Cruz type of establishment candidate and hope to flip those types of voters, which meant abandoning previous GOP stronghold states that had flipped blue like Colorado and Virginia permanently, and focused on flipping the northern midwest blue wall to red, which only a truly populist America First candidate like Trump himself was able to do in 2016. Literally any other candidate would have lost to Hillary, by losing all three of WI, MI and PA by lean margins; even if they had managed to flip back Florida and Ohio and hold on to other old GOP strongholds like Georgia and Arizona.

The electoral college justified the movement from neocon conservatism to Trumpism, i.e. America First populism. With a Romney or other Mitch McConnell-ite type candidate at the top of the (R) ticket, there was simply never going to be any path to 270 ECV for the Republican Party with Colorado and Virginia firmly and squarely in the Democratic column for good.

[Blake]

This guy's a Clinton-Gore-Kerry-Obama-Obama-Trump-Trump voter based in Wisconsin. He explains it well in this video:

Not gonna watch either; what's "Trumpsim"?

[ElNono]

My opinion (and the fact) is that the Republican Party, specifically the old guard of the Republican Party, was at a dead end after the blue wave years of 2006 and 2008. (The GOP as a whole is still suffering from the lingering effects of the blue tsunami in the senate in Nov. '06, by the way. Hopefully we can finally reverse that in '24, but it's been a long time coming.) Bush 43 and his administration was considered a failure by the majority of Americans, from genuine moderate liberals to leftists to blue-dog populists to establishment Democrat types. The Tea Party and the 2010 bounce-back proved that the GOP was not completely yet dead, but in 2012 when Romney was resoundingly defeated it was painfully obvious that the electoral college map had become essentially an impenetrable brick wall for the GOP in its current pro-Bush, pro-McCain, pro-war establishmentarian state.

It was painfully obvious that the GOP, in order to ever win back enough electoral votes to have a crack at winning the White House again, absolutely MUST pick off one of the core four Democrat-voting blocs that had scored Obama comfortable (not landslide, but comfortable) victories in 2008 and 2012. By 2008, the deep state machine had turned against Bush and the GOP big time (as evidenced by the polar shift from red to blue in Virginia, the most "big brother" state in the entire country) and the suburban vote had become increasingly friendly to Democrats.

The easiest and most vulnerable of those voting blocs for the Republican party to pick off was the long-standing but soft Democrat voting bloc that was the white working class, exurban blue dog Democrat vote. They were ancestral (D) votes but generally socially conservative and economically populist (not socialist, but pro-union). But the GOP could not field a Bush, McCain, Romney, or -say- even Ted Cruz type of establishment candidate and hope to flip those types of voters, which meant abandoning previous GOP stronghold states that had flipped blue like Colorado and Virginia permanently, and focused on flipping the northern midwest blue wall to red, which only a truly populist America First candidate like Trump himself was able to do in 2016. Literally any other candidate would have lost to Hillary, by losing all three of WI, MI and PA by lean margins; even if they had managed to flip back Florida and Ohio and hold on to other old GOP strongholds like Georgia and Arizona.

The electoral college justified the movement from neocon conservatism to Trumpism, i.e. America First populism. With a Romney or other Mitch McConnell-ite type candidate at the top of the (R) ticket, there was simply never going to be any path to 270 ECV for the Republican Party with Colorado and Virginia firmly and squarely in the Democratic column for good.

Thanks. "America-first" is a misnomer though. It's really anti-globalization, anti-market economy, isolationism, pro-union... which is really neither fundamentally conservative nor realistic in any way shape or form. Is not how Trump governed either.

But I do agree that conservative ideas are an electoral loser in this day and age, tbh. They can't realistically run on that and expect to win. The core problem though is that things like "bringing manufacturing back", you can only run on that once and when you inevitably fail to deliver, the con is up. Really what happened to Trump and what's going to happen to anybody running on it. Also worked well that time because Shillary was a horrendous candidate while Trump was also horrible, but was less of a known quan y.

It's just a different situation from Democrats. There, there's doubt and inep ude on how to engage with the base in things that matter to them, and ultimately that's the biggest saving grace for the GOP, IMO.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Thanks. "America-first" is a misnomer though. It's really anti-globalization, anti-market economy, isolationism, pro-union... which is really neither fundamentally conservative nor realistic in any way shape or form. Is not how Trump governed either.

But I do agree that conservative ideas are an electoral loser in this day and age, tbh. They can't realistically run on that and expect to win. The core problem though is that things like "bringing manufacturing back", you can only run on that once and when you inevitably fail to deliver, the con is up. Really what happened to Trump and what's going to happen to anybody running on it. Also worked well that time because Shillary was a horrendous candidate while Trump was also horrible, but was less of a known quan y.

It's just a different situation from Democrats. There, there's doubt and inep ude on how to engage with the base in things that matter to them, and ultimately that's the biggest saving grace for the GOP, IMO.

The infighting is bigger with the Dems than the GOP imo. Look at Tx-28 with Cuellar-Cisneros. The establishment Dems and far leftists don't want to concede one inch to another. AOC and Pelosi hate each other's guts. While Trump might not like some of the old guard Republicans, especially those who voted for his impeachment once or twice or those who supported the 1/6 hoax commission... those people are rapidly retiring and getting primaried out. The only thing that Trump appears to be losing his argument on is the "2020 election was stolen" argument. Trump is generally slowly but surely winning the battle to get back to the white house but he needs to shut up on a few things like calling people woke liberals for not voting to overturn the 2020 election results. Regardless of whether there was cheating or not, 2020 is the past and Trump needs to get the over it, like the Spurs did after getting jobbed in the 2013 Finals. Right now Trump's acting a lot like the post-2002 Sacramento Kings on that particular issue and it's not a good look. But in general the Republicans, minus a couple loose ends like Romney and Murkowski, vote as one... while the Democrats can't quell the squad and the other far leftists from within their own ranks. Even Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham, who are as establishment as it gets, generally vote with Trump. Brian Kemp, the GA governor, will easily win re-election and vote with Trump just as he did 98% of the time he's been governor, with the only real issue of note being that he refused to overturn the 2020 election even though he's no less conservative than, say, Perdue. Trump was just being spiteful there and the GA GOP and voters saw right through him on that. Trump's endorsement record is pretty good but it's not perfect. Kemp was the right choice and it's up to Trump to work with Kemp to pass Florida-esque election integrity and voting counting laws like you'd see in a Florida or Texas.

[ElNono]

The infighting is bigger with the Dems than the GOP imo. Look at Tx-28 with Cuellar-Cisneros. The establishment Dems and far leftists don't want to concede one inch to another. AOC and Pelosi hate each other's guts. While Trump might not like some of the old guard Republicans, especially those who voted for his impeachment once or twice or those who supported the 1/6 hoax commission... those people are rapidly retiring and getting primaried out. The only thing that Trump appears to be losing his argument on is the "2020 election was stolen" argument. Trump is generally slowly but surely winning the battle to get back to the white house but he needs to shut up on a few things like calling people woke liberals for not voting to overturn the 2020 election results. Regardless of whether there was cheating or not, 2020 is the past and Trump needs to get the over it, like the Spurs did after getting jobbed in the 2013 Finals. Right now Trump's acting a lot like the post-2002 Sacramento Kings on that particular issue and it's not a good look. But in general the Republicans, minus a couple loose ends like Romney and Murkowski, vote as one... while the Democrats can't quell the squad and the other far leftists from within their own ranks. Even Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham, who are as establishment as it gets, generally vote with Trump. Brian Kemp, the GA governor, will easily win re-election and vote with Trump just as he did 98% of the time he's been governor, with the only real issue of note being that he refused to overturn the 2020 election even though he's no less conservative than, say, Perdue. Trump was just being spiteful there and the GA GOP and voters saw right through him on that. Trump's endorsement record is pretty good but it's not perfect. Kemp was the right choice and it's up to Trump to work with Kemp to pass Florida-esque election integrity and voting counting laws like you'd see in a Florida or Texas.

I don't dispute that there's more infighting there. It's just, different. One thing Trump did was completely neuter the Republican party, with the exception being people like DeathSantis, who really is a Trump wannabe. Very few exceptions to this, like the GA people.
As much as you claim AOC hates Pelosi, she's been voting with the party on pretty much everything, and the House has never really been a problem for Dems. I suppose she hates Republicans more.

But I agree the Dems can be incredibly inept managing their position of power and stated so many times. Unlike the GOP who has a kingmaker now, there's a very shady process on who gets ahead in the party as well. Lots of new faces, but who gets a prominent role seems very calculated.
There's no way terrible candidates like Shillary and Old Joe win the nomination without all sorts of political backroom deals.