Reply With Quote
"Left run amok". lol okay
100%, although I would argue since 1960 and the Southern' Strategy.
You can't claim Trump is independent of the party when he just pulled 60 million votes and beat the odds to do so.
"Left run amok". lol okay
didn't notice the plural?you just tried to compare a prospective representative from the Bronx to the president of the entire United States.
So many backflips....
I agree with that.
Both statements can be true at once.
Yes, when you have riots on a university campus because someone is going to speak there, that is run amok. When comedians say they can no longer do shows on college campuses because of political correctness, that is a problem.
Trump is the complete opposite of the Republican party in most ways. I think he's done irreparable damage to it. He's a cult of personality too. There is no Trump movement. Just people that like him for some strange reason. But he's not based on ideology. He'll change his ideology depending on his audience. His followers like him because he seems like he always wins. By beating Hillary, he fed into that 100%. That's why for him, everything is about whether it is considered a win or a loss. That's everything to him. He cares nothing about the impact of his policies. He only cares if they are perceived as a win. And when they are an obvious loss, he spins it into a win or does the whole fake news thing.
I assume you're referring to Cal?
I'm liberal, but I'm mad about vandalism at California Berkeley so I'm going to vote for deregulation, massive tax cuts, conservative lifetime court appointments, the erosion of reproductive rights, the erosion of voting rights, reduction and aggressive enforcement of immigration, reversal of prison reforms, and NRA rhetoric delivered by a con artist.
I'm not saying you're wrong that there are people like that, I'm saying those people are ing morons. Riots and protests on campus aren't magically defeated by having conservatives in power. You might as well say you're voting for Republicans to spite Colin Kaepernick.
No, because you posted a possessive.
lol riots.
+1
The party of rich white guys, by rich white guys and for rich white guys. Everyone else, women, scary brown people, jews, s, poor people in general, matter not one whittle or one jot.
ing awesome, in my opinion. The open class warfare of the rich on the poor for the last 30 years and massive wealth transfers to the rich from the labor of middle class and poor need to stop.
The economy has come to serve one tiny, tiny group of people and that is ty, and no way to run a stable democracy.
It is about time someone had the stones to say what needs to be said, and actually stand up for regular people.
Well pardon my grammatical faux pas. The intention was to point out the unmistakable socialist trend of the democratic party. The parties have become too polarized right/left. It's not safe for any politician to be middle of the road and work across the aisle anymore.
Mostly agree.
If you cared about delays you must be furious at the GOP and how they handled the Merrick Garland nomination?
It's not safe because there IS no middle of the aisle when one party advocates for racism, bigotry, and inhumane treatment of human beings.
There is no, "We should only be half-humane to certain groups of people". It's all or nothing.
The Democratic party hasn't moved THAT much since the 80s. Some areas it's moved left, others it's moved to the right, actually.
But the GOP? They've swerved so far to the right it's hard to recognize them anymore, at least the core cons uents.
I mean, you actually used to support science. Now, unless there's an immediate benefit, you call scientists a bunch of liberal hacks and do everything you can to stop research that could improve the lives of people.
You've gone from a party tinged with racism to one that's seething with bile and gatekeeping ANYONE that disagrees with the hard party line.
I don't agree. I grew up in rural America and Trump absolutely represents a lot of the racism and hatred I saw strewn across America's "heartland". I don't think he's an anomaly, or if he is he's a particularly representative one.
I do think the GOP and it's cons uents in the future are going to do EVERYTHING in their power to disown Trump, but only in retrospect, because as the boomer generation dies off this presidency is going to be hung (rightfully) around their neck as a ing anchor, showing how much they were willing to sell down the river to ac ulate power.
"Trump is the complete opposite of the Republican party in most ways."
Trash is forcing no one in the Repug party to back down, forcing no one to suck up to him, forcing no one to be compliant in their silence.
The Repugs have been ing up America and Americans by fighting the Class War on the side of Capital vs Labor, of the oligarcy vs the non-oligarchy, on the side of white males vs. non-white, non-males.
Trash is a symptom of the Repug/conservative willful dysfunction, not the cause. He's not, in policy, in practice, anomalous, he's standard-issue billionaire fighting with other billionaires to continue to rig America in their favor.
I agree that Garland got a raw deal. That's one of the consequences for losing the Senate, though. I'd be more upset if the Republicans hatched a story with no evidence that could not be proved or disproved to destroy the man's reputation.
I do believe in the textualist approach to the cons ution, though I agree that there is much to debate on both sides. That's why I favor Kavanaugh more. But I also agree that those issues make up like 5% of the court's docket. Most of the work they do comes from appeals on interpreting a provision of the tax code or other stuff that never hits the papers. That's why Garland, even if he changes the outcome on social issues (which I feel should be a role of the legislature), he's still well qualified to do the job and should've been confirmed if he got a vote.
I don't buy it. Trump and Bannon correctly identified that the GOP base wanted a nationalist leader. That the Tea Party's wins were more about a scary negro in the White House than they were for conservatism. Trump is no conservative and yet he has an 88% approval rating with GOP voters. His entire early campaign was about Obama's birth certificate and his later campaign was about lies and saying racist and then explaining that he wasn't going to try to be PC. He has congressional Republicans scared as to cross him because they'll get primaried. The donor class of the GOP may be conservative but the voters are straight nativist. Kasich may run against him in 2020 but no way he doesn't get massacred.
gtfo with your conspiracy bs - this accuser is more than credible on her own - for reasons already stated - if Kavanaugh is clean he will demand an FBI investigation or he is just as corrupt as the pussy grabber in chief.
The Democrats going too far to the left is a tired meme when they nominated Clinton for president.
Wait, did I miss her getting nominated for President of the United States?
I respectfully disagree with the above. I think that the GOP is pretty much where the Dems used to be in the 80s/90s. Weren't many of the positions of Bill/Hillary regarding marriage, borders, etc. (in the 90s) where the GOP is now (or at least closer to them than the current Dems)? IMO, the entire country has move left (what I guess most of you call progress) - with the GOP going from right to more center (where Trump is) and the Dems going left toward open borders, socialism, etc.
Last edited by rmt; 09-20-2018 at 05:22 PM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions