Thoughts About Trump

[NightTrain]

I've been watching pretty closely the maneuvering and statements as the primary heats up, and I have to say I don't like it. At all.

I know his style, he's extremely aggressive and his competitive instinct is second to none. But there has to be some longer-range thought involved instead of short term immediate gratification by firing off blistering salvos at people who took bullets for you previously, and powerful political allies who are extremely popular.

Kayleigh McEnany was under unreal hostile pressure from 99% of the media and she handled it with grace, skill and professionalism. She backed him as a loyal trooper whenever possible, but now he's added her to the DeSantis treatment over a misquote on polling numbers by a few points.

DeSantis is a real force to be reckoned with, he's got a lot going for him - but he's been under constant attack for almost a year now. Ideally the smart move would have been to approach DeSantis and get him to run as VP and then go for the Brass Ring in '28. But that didn't happen because any competitors are to be attacked viciously and DeSantis was alienated before the campaigns even got underway.

You all know that I loved Trump as President, he was very great - but the competitive drive was his downfall. He constantly made mortal & lifelong enemies when it wasn't needed, and in the political world you occasionally need a helping hand. Yeah, I'll admit that quite a few stunts he pulled that enraged the libs made me laugh, but unnecessarily pissing off Schumer and Pelosi right from the start fueled their undying hatred for him and directly resulted in the chickenshit impeachments and a host of other obstructionist behavior that plagued his presidency. Yes, they're vile - but those vile politicians were elected and have to be negotiated with. That's the biz.

I'll vote for either Trump or DeSantis, whoever comes out on top, of course. But in the primary I'm going to vote DeSantis - the over-the-top friendly fire has to stop. I doubt that'll happen, but I'm disappointed and sick of it. If you somehow win in '24, you're going to need actual allies - not just people afraid they're next for a new nickname and unwarranted public attacks.

The chaotic nature of Trump's style was great for foreign policy because all of the bad actors legitimately feared him and how he would respond to any misdeeds. But the downside was a revolving door of aides, advisors and appointments who almost invariably engaged in verbal warfare with their former boss. It was too much, and I think now that Trump doesn't really have friends & allies, just temporary beneficial partnerships and any one of them will be quickly cast aside for any slight, real or imagined.

I don't know if Trump can win this - not because of his executive skills, but because fully half of the country hates him passionately - and that's why we currently have a senile buffoon running the show.

[Gunny]

I've been watching pretty closely the maneuvering and statements as the primary heats up, and I have to say I don't like it. At all.

I know his style, he's extremely aggressive and his competitive instinct is second to none. But there has to be some longer-range thought involved instead of short term immediate gratification by firing off blistering salvos at people who took bullets for you previously, and powerful political allies who are extremely popular.

Kayleigh McEnany was under unreal hostile pressure from 99% of the media and she handled it with grace, skill and professionalism. She backed him as a loyal trooper whenever possible, but now he's added her to the DeSantis treatment over a misquote on polling numbers by a few points.

DeSantis is a real force to be reckoned with, he's got a lot going for him - but he's been under constant attack for almost a year now. Ideally the smart move would have been to approach DeSantis and get him to run as VP and then go for the Brass Ring in '28. But that didn't happen because any competitors are to be attacked viciously and DeSantis was alienated before the campaigns even got underway.

You all know that I loved Trump as President, he was very great - but the competitive drive was his downfall. He constantly made mortal & lifelong enemies when it wasn't needed, and in the political world you occasionally need a helping hand. Yeah, I'll admit that quite a few stunts he pulled that enraged the libs made me laugh, but unnecessarily pissing off Schumer and Pelosi right from the start fueled their undying hatred for him and directly resulted in the chickenshit impeachments and a host of other obstructionist behavior that plagued his presidency. Yes, they're vile - but those vile politicians were elected and have to be negotiated with. That's the biz.

I'll vote for either Trump or DeSantis, whoever comes out on top, of course. But in the primary I'm going to vote DeSantis - the over-the-top friendly fire has to stop. I doubt that'll happen, but I'm disappointed and sick of it. If you somehow win in '24, you're going to need actual allies - not just people afraid they're next for a new nickname and unwarranted public attacks.

The chaotic nature of Trump's style was great for foreign policy because all of the bad actors legitimately feared him and how he would respond to any misdeeds. But the downside was a revolving door of aides, advisors and appointments who almost invariably engaged in verbal warfare with their former boss. It was too much, and I think now that Trump doesn't really have friends & allies, just temporary beneficial partnerships and any one of them will be quickly cast aside for any slight, real or imagined.

I don't know if Trump can win this - not because of his executive skills, but because fully half of the country hates him passionately - and that's why we currently have a senile buffoon running the show.I don't get it. His scorched Earth way of thinking, that is.

Hypothetically, let's say he wins in 24. He's then going to turn to the same Republicans he's torching and expect support? Not even getting that far, he's going to expect the people he's torching to turn around vote for him?

I'd like to know where he gets his info. Enough conservatives/Republicans/independents/moderates won't vote for him to cost the GOP the 24 election. Who's telling him he's going to win? Somebody needs to tell the emperor about his new clothes :rolleyes: He doesn't have even the support he had in 2020; which, wasn't enough.

Just a petty little man that can't accept losing and will destroy what's left of the Republican Party and stick the American people with four more years of the current admin taking this country straight down the shitter.

[Kathianne]

I don't get it. His scorched Earth way of thinking, that is.

Hypothetically, let's say he wins in 24. He's then going to turn to the same Republicans he's torching and expect support? Not even getting that far, he's going to expect the people he's torching to turn around vote for him?

I'd like to know where he gets his info. Enough conservatives/Republicans/independents/moderates won't vote for him to cost the GOP the 24 election. Who's telling him he's going to win? Somebody needs to tell the emperor about his new clothes :rolleyes: He doesn't have even the support he had in 2020; which, wasn't enough.

Just a petty little man that can't accept losing and will destroy what's left of the Republican Party and stick the American people with four more years of the current admin taking this country straight down the shitter.

I agree with all you wrote regarding Trump, no surprise there. I am not certain there is 'a little' of the Republican Party to save, I do think it was attacked in real time in 2016 and finished off by 2020-Covid didn't help at all.

The rifts in 'conservative movement' are real. I don't think the tent is big enough or should be for the far right-those that believe that the 'left' needs to be annihilated and those that believe that not just the party, but the country has lost its way. The problem isn't just the left, but a right that feels that the only solution is tit for tat-regardless of how big or small the issue. Compromise is always wrong. This has made it possible for the far left to now go so far as to publicly reveal their agenda of revolution of family, culture, religion or ridding society of such, and parental rights. The far left and far right have become the perfect foil for each other, the rest of us are just collateral damage.

[NightTrain]

Well, the polls are showing Trump beating Biden by 1 point right now, and DeSantis losing by ~4 points. But DeSantis just declared, so obviously those numbers are relatively meaningless. Those DeSantis numbers will pick up, and Trump knows this, which is why he's full-throttle attacking any support for his only real competitor in the primary.

I'm convinced DeSantis will carry a great many more independents & moderates in the General, and I'm not quite understanding how his numbers against Biden could possibly be lower... assuming they're legitimate.

Naturally the libs want Trump as the candidate, so DeSantis has been under assault for a year now with the usual smears & lies, and he's handled them like a pro. Christina Pushaw has been hell on wheels shutting them down.

Of course the integrity of the election is going to be a real concern. There have been improvements but I definitely did not get a warm & fuzzy in '22. That should have been an utter wipeout for the libs, but we just barely eked out a House win.

Arizona was a complete shitshow, along with Pennsylvania - how anyone could believe those two 'won' is beyond me, unless the majority of voters are still sick and disgusted with the fraud from '20. Fetterman is the very image of the incompetent democrat party, unable to string 3 words together - and he won? WTF?

It's particularly telling as he stands there in the US Senate, dressed like he's a 12 year old fresh out of the skate park, mumbling, drooling and slurring incompetently along, sounding almost exactly like the president - and no one bats an eye. This is normal.

Has anyone seen Feinstein? She's a bit past her prime. As in, wheeled around in a wheelchair wondering why Cackles is present in the Senate.

This whole shitshow we've got going should be a slam dunk to sweep the elections in historic fashion. I mean, we should top Reagan's beat down of Jimmy Carter in '80, because the other party is a total clownshow.

But I'm not seeing anything like what should be happening. I know it's early, but it shouldn't even be close in any poll.

[Gunny]

I agree with all you wrote regarding Trump, no surprise there. I am not certain there is 'a little' of the Republican Party to save, I do think it was attacked in real time in 2016 and finished off by 2020-Covid didn't help at all.

The rifts in 'conservative movement' are real. I don't think the tent is big enough or should be for the far right-those that believe that the 'left' needs to be annihilated and those that believe that not just the party, but the country has lost its way. The problem isn't just the left, but a right that feels that the only solution is tit for tat-regardless of how big or small the issue. Compromise is always wrong. This has made it possible for the far left to now go so far as to publicly reveal their agenda of revolution of family, culture, religion or ridding society of such, and parental rights. The far left and far right have become the perfect foil for each other, the rest of us are just collateral damage.

Agreed. There pretty much is no "right" as we remember it. What's left of traditional conservatives in government have no voice. I'm not sure what it is these people claiming to be Republicans/conservatives think being nothing but antagonistic obstructionists to the psycho's on the left has to do with conservative, when they behave alike.

And yep, we're stuck in the middle screwed.

[revelarts]

okkk
Trump was never a conservative,
and never a decent person with any pretense of real loyalty to People or Principals except vague notions of "America" that lean conservative.
He's appealed to those looking for a "strong" stance for those notions.

He's been unfaithful and cutting to his wives & biz associates, should anyone expect loyalty from him in politics?

Concerning the Republicans overall.
The leadership hasn't leaned hard into their TALK of conservatism since Reagan. (if then)
EXCEPT when it comes to BS WARs.

And many (most?) of the 'rank and file' Republicans over the years have bought into the idea of "electability" and compromise of every conservative issue (economic & social) as long as a Republican does it.
And complain that those who don't want compromise on principals are crazy, zealots, bigots & are hurting the party. Accusing Conservatives and libertarians of 'helping the Dems win!' complaining of "litmus test" and the like.
But if you ask those who complain about "test" to name ONE conservative value or issue they think it's worth drawing line at for a qualified R, there seems to be NONE.
Except the willingness to go into every BS War.
And Being able to have a beer with them.



I'm not sure what republican party some are mourning over.

[Gunny]

okkk
Trump was never a conservative,
and never a decent person with any pretense of real loyalty to People or Principals except vague notions of "America" that lean conservative.
He's appealed to those looking for a "strong" stance for those notions.

He's been unfaithful and cutting to his wives & biz associates, should anyone expect loyalty from him in politics?

Concerning the Republicans overall.
The leadership hasn't leaned hard into their TALK of conservatism since Reagan. (if then)
EXCEPT when it comes to BS WARs.

And many (most?) of the 'rank and file' Republicans over the years have bought into the idea of "electability" and compromise of every conservative issue (economic & social) as long as a Republican does it.
And complain that those who don't want compromise on principals are crazy, zealots, bigots & are hurting the party. Accusing Conservatives and libertarians of 'helping the Dems win!' complaining of "litmus test" and the like.
But if you ask those who complain about "test" to name ONE conservative value or issue they think it's worth drawing line at for a qualified R, there seems to be NONE.
Except the willingness to go into every BS War.
And Being able to have a beer with them.



I'm not sure what republican party some are mourning over.Agree with some, not all. The notion of "America" as you use it, means in plain English refusing to let go of the past and trying to hold it in place. Those pushing to the extreme trying to maintain such a notion are and always have been THE main issue with "conservatism". True conservatism wants no progress, while progressive leftwingnuts want change for the sake of it. There's no happy medium in government, politics not the controversy-seeking/inventing media; however, I suggest it is where the majority reside. In that regard, that "majority" truly is and has always been silent. Silence is deadly in politics.

A secondary issue with "conservatives" is the notion of personal beliefs and standing on principle like Day Crocket at the Alamo instead of learning to fight how one must. Even Abraham Lincoln knew to preserve the Union he had to violate the Constitution for the duration.

I don't see that last happening here. I see haters who have become the haters they hate.

I disagree with your simplistic view of wars. It is and always has been in the nature of all governments since the first caveman decided to declare one. There has to be a reason to sell to the people who fight them and that reason is always "difference", regardless which side of which war you choose to discuss. Government is and always has been based on sleight of hand, and real or imagined enemies.

As long as there are differences between peoples, there are those that will use it keep shit stirred up. While you're looking at where the Dem's are pointing, they're waging an effective war here in our country to completely disenfranchise those that believe anything other than what government tells them to believe.

Donald Trump is no different than the rest of us "conservatives". He liked the way things were when they made sense. He didn't become a conservative. When the paradigm shifted left, it yanked the rug out from under his feet as it did everyone else's. He want(ed)(s) the 80s back when the rules allowed him to be on top. The Dems are just in his way.

I grew up as a "liberal" and considered myself one until I found that label no longer a tenable one. I didn't change. My core beliefs have not. The politicians and the parties have.

Be all that as it may, if Trump was all he claims to be, he would withdraw himself and throw his support behind someone more acceptable to a majority of people that would put an end to the current train ride to Hell we're on. Instead, he's doubling down on what has driven people away.

[revelarts]

mmm, well, politics is always politics.
And Trump is Trump. seems he cares a bit more about Trump the more than "America"

I'll give Trump credit for putting some breaks on some of the liberals more extreme social agendas and even slowed some of the war actions some republicans were pushing in Syria, Venezuela & Iran.
And seemed not to completely embrace the World Economic Forum/U.N. type one world gov't schtick that several Republican 'Leaders' of late seem fine with.


But my question to most of the Rank & File Republicans still stands.
What conservative or "old" 80s republican issues are the one's that there's NO compromise on? are there any?

I really have a hard time getting a clear picture of what POLICIES you and Kath and others are yearning for.
Or is it more just a softer more competent feeling, style or face you'd like to see?

What policies do you guys think are OK to compromise with the left on and which ones aren't ... if any?

you and others keep talking "tit for tat" but in your last post you said the the left MOVED away from you?
And you didn't move. why didn't you compromise to stay with them? Why such a zealot?
Is what you did "tit for tat" or just standing your ground?

If we're suppose to be able to compromise and talk with the 'other side' maybe we can we start by compromising and working with people who are mostly on our own side? And not assuming the worse of them?
And if the silent "middle ground" has slid WAY left. what do you hope to compromise with there exactly?

when I hear or read the laments of some Republicans over Trump and the ol' party I'm not sure what folks are talking about.
Are you really yearning for Herbert W Bush, GWB, John Bolton, Dick Chenney, Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney, John McCain, Jeb Bush?
folks like that?

Im guessing Sarah Palin, Ron Paul, Alan Keyes, Michele Bachmann, Ben Carson are too extreme. & "unelectable" and not good for war, beer drinking... or the party?

I have to wonder if folks like Trey Gowdy & Ted Cruz are too extreme and uncompromising for the kind of Republican party some folks want "back".

what exactly are the kind people and Policies that you want?

What policies do you want DeSantis or others to promote?
And what do want them to compromise, that the bad ol 'tit for tat' republicans wont. examples please.

Or do you just want the non-trump R to win despite any policies. And NEVER react/reply/counter/ or even stand firm against more liberal advances?
I'm not sure why people won't be clear here. you know I'm not to type to bite your head off or try to run you off the board :cool:

[Gunny]

mmm, well, politics is always politics.
And Trump is Trump. seems he cares a bit more about Trump the more than "America"

I'll give Trump credit for putting some breaks on some of the liberals more extreme social agendas and even slowed some of the war actions some republicans were pushing in Syria, Venezuela & Iran.
And seemed not to completely embrace the World Economic Forum/U.N. type one world gov't schtick that several Republican 'Leaders' of late seem fine with.


But my question to most of the Rank & File Republicans still stands.
What conservative or "old" 80s republican issues are the one's that there's NO compromise on? are there any?

I really have a hard time getting a clear picture of what POLICIES you and Kath and others are yearning for.
Or is it more just a softer more competent feeling, style or face you'd like to see?

What policies do you guys think are OK to compromise with the left on and which ones aren't ... if any?

you and others keep talking "tit for tat" but in your last post you said the the left MOVED away from you?
And you didn't move. why didn't you compromise to stay with them? Why such a zealot?
Is what you did "tit for tat" or just standing your ground?

If we're suppose to be able to compromise and talk with the 'other side' maybe we can we start by compromising and working with people who are mostly on our own side? And not assuming the worse of them?
And if the silent "middle ground" has slid WAY left. what do you hope to compromise with there exactly?

when I hear or read the laments of some Republicans over Trump and the ol' party I'm not sure what folks are talking about.
Are you really yearning for Herbert W Bush, GWB, John Bolton, Dick Chenney, Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney, John McCain, Jeb Bush?
folks like that?

Im guessing Sarah Palin, Ron Paul, Alan Keyes, Michele Bachmann, Ben Carson are too extreme. & "unelectable" and not good for war, beer drinking... or the party?

I have to wonder if folks like Trey Gowdy & Ted Cruz are too extreme and uncompromising for the kind of Republican party some folks want "back".

what exactly are the kind people and Policies that you want?

What policies do you want DeSantis or others to promote?
And what do want them to compromise, that the bad ol 'tit for tat' republicans wont. examples please.

Or do you just want the non-trump R to win despite any policies. And NEVER react/reply/counter/ or even stand firm against more liberal advances?
I'm not sure why people won't be clear here. you know I'm not to type to bite your head off or try to run you off the board :cool:

Rhetorical argument that dances in and out of real politics vs ideals. Compromise is the means used to avoid war. You're ALWAYS, without fail, against war no matter what, remember?

The time for a war that might have worked is water under the bridge. Now it's just a matter of slowing down the descent into a man-made Hell. In reality, most legislation is the result of propping the weak at the expense of the strong, and politicians trying to justify their paychecks, and lawyers skewing the law and screwing the people.

My personal idealism has anything to do with political reality solely by coincidence. Political reality couldn't survive my idealism starting with the lack of stupid and lack of drama.

[revelarts]

Rhetorical argument that dances in and out of real politics vs ideals. Compromise is the means used to avoid war. You're ALWAYS, without fail, against war no matter what, remember?

The time for a war that might have worked is water under the bridge. Now it's just a matter of slowing down the descent into a man-made Hell. In reality, most legislation is the result of propping the weak at the expense of the strong, and politicians trying to justify their paychecks, and lawyers skewing the law and screwing the people.

My personal idealism has anything to do with political reality solely by coincidence. Political reality couldn't survive my idealism starting with the lack of stupid and lack of drama.




...The problem isn't just the left, but a right that feels that the only solution is tit for tat-regardless of how big or small the issue. Compromise is always wrong. This has made it possible for the far left to now go so far as to publicly reveal their agenda of revolution of family, culture, religion or ridding society of such, and parental rights. The far left and far right have become the perfect foil for each other, the rest of us are just collateral damage....


Agreed. There pretty much is no "right" as we remember it. What's left of traditional conservatives in government have no voice. I'm not sure what it is these people claiming to be Republicans/conservatives think being nothing but antagonistic obstructionists to the psycho's on the left has to do with conservative, when they behave alike.

And yep, we're stuck in the middle screwed.

...when I hear or read the laments of some Republicans over Trump and the ol' party I'm not sure what folks are talking about.
Are you really yearning for Herbert W Bush, GWB, John Bolton, Dick Chenney, Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney, John McCain, Jeb Bush?
folks like that?

Im guessing Sarah Palin, Ron Paul, Alan Keyes, Michele Bachmann, Ben Carson are too extreme. & "unelectable" and not good for war, beer drinking... or the party?

I have to wonder if folks like Trey Gowdy & Ted Cruz are too extreme and uncompromising for the kind of Republican party some folks want "back".

what exactly are the kind people and Policies that you want?

What policies do you want DeSantis or others to promote?
And what do want them to compromise, that the bad ol 'tit for tat' republicans wont.

examples please. ....

Or at least give me examples or suggestions on HOW to handle the far left better than the "far" right has.
And examples of what the "far" right fighting the far left on every "small" issue. Please give me examples of the "small" issues that you wish would not be addressed or compromised.
and what exactly are the extremes replies you don't like.
I might agree, but i'm not sure. since you and kath aren't being clear or specific.

Also what kind of collateral damage have you taken because of it exactly? (the "Support Trump or You're the Enemy!" stuff was definitely horrific and painful)

If i'm reading you right in Your last post you say your ideals are more extreme than what you think needs to be done in "real politics".
OK, fine, so what should be done in real politics? standing ground? compromise? nothing? other?

[Gunny]

...when I hear or read the laments of some Republicans over Trump and the ol' party I'm not sure what folks are talking about.
Are you really yearning for Herbert W Bush, GWB, John Bolton, Dick Chenney, Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney, John McCain, Jeb Bush?
folks like that?

Im guessing Sarah Palin, Ron Paul, Alan Keyes, Michele Bachmann, Ben Carson are too extreme. & "unelectable" and not good for war, beer drinking... or the party?

I have to wonder if folks like Trey Gowdy & Ted Cruz are too extreme and uncompromising for the kind of Republican party some folks want "back".

what exactly are the kind people and Policies that you want?

What policies do you want DeSantis or others to promote?
And what do want them to compromise, that the bad ol 'tit for tat' republicans wont.

examples please. ....

Or at least give me examples or suggestions on HOW to handle the far left better than the "far" right has.
And examples of what the "far" right fighting the far left on every "small" issue. Please give me examples of the "small" issues that you wish would not be addressed or compromised.
and what exactly are the extremes replies you don't like.
I might agree, but i'm not sure. since you and kath aren't being clear or specific.

Also what kind of collateral damage have you taken because of it exactly? (the "Support Trump or You're the Enemy!" stuff was definitely horrific and painful)

If i'm reading you right in Your last post you say your ideals are more extreme than what you think needs to be done in "real politics".
OK, fine, so what should be done in real politics? standing ground? compromise? nothing? other?

Bored? While you may have time for an inquisition, I definitely do not. If you have that much time on your hands, my response to your every query is on this board. Probably more than twice :poke:

You've provided your own examples. Ironically, most of the names you list are Republicans I do not/have not supported. One could easily start with the simplest litmus test:

Small government at the lowest level. A basic tenet of conservatism the GOP allegedly represents. Right?:rolleyes: Those individual politicians in business for themselves rather than the people could start there. None (with the usual exceptions, of course) of these politicians on either side of the aisle represent their respective constituencies.

When politicians represent government over the people, then neither party nor any individual I recall at this minute represent me.

[revelarts]

okk you don't have to answer all questions... but one or 2 would be nice.
It's not like there's a lot going on on the board.

look all I'm saying is the the republican party you and Kath seem to be lamenting over NEVER really represented you guys or conservatives or most of the R voters ideals for the past 40 years or so.
Cause it seems you guys don't like the RINOs or the "Far" right or the Libertarians of the party (except for going to war).

And I'm still not clear what "SMALL" issues you and Kath don't want the "FAR" right to reply to "tit for tat".
But you guys have no time to tell me, so I guess neither I... nor the Far right... will ever know when they've gone too far since no one has time to make it clear.

oh well


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3j_OtZhJzzA

[Gunny]

okk you don't have to answer all questions... but one or 2 would be nice.
It's not like there's a lot going on on the board.

look all I'm saying is the the republican party you and Kath seem to be lamenting over NEVER really represented you guys or conservatives or most of the R voters ideals for the past 40 years or so.
Cause it seems you guys don't like the RINOs or the "Far" right or the Libertarians of the party (except for going to war).

And I'm still not clear what "SMALL" issues you and Kath don't want the "FAR" right to reply to "tit for tat".
But you guys have no time to tell me, so I guess neither I... nor the Far right... will ever know when they've gone too far since no one has time to make it clear.

oh well


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3j_OtZhJzzA

Must not read the other threads where I point out to one member that silence on the internet means you don't know, or you lose, or words to that effect. I will reiterate: I have answered/commented on every one of your questions more than twice. The info's already there. I do not have the time, nor any longer the inclination, to go line by line through one of your novellas that cover a myriad of nitnoid rabbit holes but never address the elephant in the room.

To clarify (again for the billionth time since I started posting on internet message boards): I am NOT and never have been a Republican. I have been a Democrat, that didn't even make it to the first time I voted for President. I have voted Republican because the Republican party more represents my beliefs than the Democrat party. As water has rolled under the bridge, that gap has done nothing but get wider as the Dems have steamrolled leftward.

The Republican party has followed the Dems in its never ending quest for that "moderate/independent" vote; but, shifted left all the same. That disorganized bunch of grabastic politicians currently labeled the Republican party represent the same thing to me they always have: less dangerous to our freedom and the Constitution than the Dems.

They have however reached a point where they represent little more than what the Dems do: We're not the other guy. When was the last time the Republicans, as a party or members of Congress, came out with a hard list of principles, goals? Something they actually stand for in a united manner that outlines stark differences between themselves and the Dems/conservatives-liberals? Attainable goals that can be delivered on?

First thing they did in 2016 with control of Congress and the Presidency was start fighting the President and each other because of the President. Individual, personal likes and dislikes took precedent over serving the United States and its people. To this day, the Republicans have a handful of Reps and Senators that place putting on a show of "bipartisanship" above policy and will backstab their own party in a second if they think they'll be noticed for "reaching across the aisle" when no one gives a F-.

What are they doing now? Fighting over a candidate who should recuse himself for what's best for the Country and the party but his ego won't allow it instead of just expelling his ass. Going hard after Joe Biden and doing the Dem's dirty work getting rid of him for the Dem's who will turn around and cry foul the second its done and their hands are washed of him.

So exactly what is it you are calling a political party that allegedly represents half the voters in this Nation? I've picked up a platoon of 80 recruits fresh off the bus at receiving barracks that were more organized than this bunch of nitwits. SO you tell me what there is to support?

[Kathianne]

Must not read the other threads where I point out to one member that silence on the internet means you don't know, or you lose, or words to that effect. I will reiterate: I have answered/commented on every one of your questions more than twice. The info's already there. I do not have the time, nor any longer the inclination, to go line by line through one of your novellas that cover a myriad of nitnoid rabbit holes but never address the elephant in the room.

To clarify (again for the billionth time since I started posting on internet message boards): I am NOT and never have been a Republican. I have been a Democrat, that didn't even make it to the first time I voted for President. I have voted Republican because the Republican party more represents my beliefs than the Democrat party. As water has rolled under the bridge, that gap has done nothing but get wider as the Dems have steamrolled leftward.

The Republican party has followed the Dems in its never ending quest for that "moderate/independent" vote; but, shifted left all the same. That disorganized bunch of grabastic politicians currently labeled the Republican party represent the same thing to me they always have: less dangerous to our freedom and the Constitution than the Dems.

They have however reached a point where they represent little more than what the Dems do: We're not the other guy. When was the last time the Republicans, as a party or members of Congress, came out with a hard list of principles, goals? Something they actually stand for in a united manner that outlines stark differences between themselves and the Dems/conservatives-liberals? Attainable goals that can be delivered on?

First thing they did in 2016 with control of Congress and the Presidency was start fighting the President and each other because of the President. Individual, personal likes and dislikes took precedent over serving the United States and its people. To this day, the Republicans have a handful of Reps and Senators that place putting on a show of "bipartisanship" above policy and will backstab their own party in a second if they think they'll be noticed for "reaching across the aisle" when no one gives a F-.

What are they doing now? Fighting over a candidate who should recuse himself for what's best for the Country and the party but his ego won't allow it instead of just expelling his ass. Going hard after Joe Biden and doing the Dem's dirty work getting rid of him for the Dem's who will turn around and cry foul the second its done and their hands are washed of him.

So exactly what is it you are calling a political party that allegedly represents half the voters in this Nation? I've picked up a platoon of 80 recruits fresh off the bus at receiving barracks that were more organized than this bunch of nitwits. SO you tell me what there is to support?

I get your reasoning, Gunny, much more than any on the not so fringe right and left.

My ideals regarding what's best for country haven't changed much since 1980s or so. Before that I was figuring things out, as I think teens and very young adults should.

I believe, as do you in smallest, least intrusive government, at the most local level possible.

Thus things like social security, Medicare, OSHA, UN, etc are all wrongs imo. IRS is totally out of control.

In fact, if more folks were like myself, the politicians would be very concerned. Most aren't.

If people focused on limiting power, instead of trying to force others to expanding acceptance of their favorite projects, more limitations would happen, but never fear; there's always another shiny object or lovable/hateable candidate to argue about.

On the covid discussion that underlies much today, from the get go, I was and am against forced immunizations for anything; with caveat that public institutions-schools, government buildings, military have the right/duty to do their utmost to protect the greater good.

Now it looks like yhe government knowingly kept abusing a reasonable power long after knowing the threat was not mitigated by immunization-underming the respect/trust of the many. Mistakes should be forgiven; abuse of power requires both punishment and more restrictions on power.

[revelarts]

I get your reasoning, Gunny, much more than any on the not so fringe right and left.

My ideals regarding what's best for country haven't changed much since 1980s or so. Before that I was figuring things out, as I think teens and very young adults should.

I believe, as do you in smallest, least intrusive government, at the most local level possible.

Thus things like social security, Medicare, OSHA, UN, etc are all wrongs imo. IRS is totally out of control.

In fact, if more folks were like myself, the politicians would be very concerned. Most aren't.

If people focused on limiting power, instead of trying to force others to expanding acceptance of their favorite projects, more limitations would happen, but never fear; there's always another shiny object or lovable/hateable candidate to argue about.

On the covid discussion that underlies much today, from the get go, I was and am against forced immunizations for anything; with caveat that public institutions-schools, government buildings, military have the right/duty to do their utmost to protect the greater good.

Now it looks like yhe government knowingly kept abusing a reasonable power long after knowing the threat was not mitigated by immunization-underming the respect/trust of the many. Mistakes should be forgiven; abuse of power requires both punishment and more restrictions on power.
I agree!
Small fed Gov't
Less Intrusive (as in no spying on citizens, etc)

I seem to remember a guy who wanted all that too.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_oASugb448

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pi-GgJpfSmQ

Seems we missed that boat for some reason.
lots folks leaning conservative thought small gov't was to ,wacky and he might not go to war or expand the military = "isolationist?". (military=Big govt too right?)
Seem most Rs or R leaning Folks Thought McCain in 2008 & Romney in 2012 were a better choices than Paul... for "smaller" gov't?

Paul's "too racist" & "crazy" but Trump's "not racist" and "very sane" (& you can have beer with him) :rolleyes:

Sorry no i won't let that bone go.
sorry.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GcypAC2VHew

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idV12epKanY

[Gunny]

I agree!
Small fed Gov't
Less Intrusive (as in no spying on citizens, etc)

I seem to remember a guy who wanted all that too.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_oASugb448

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pi-GgJpfSmQ

Seems we missed that boat for some reason.
lots folks leaning conservative thought small gov't was to ,wacky and he might not go to war or expand the military = "isolationist?". (military=Big govt too right?)
Seem most Rs or R leaning Folks Thought McCain in 2008 & Romney in 2012 were a better choices than Paul... for "smaller" gov't?

Paul's "too racist" & "crazy" but Trump's "not racist" and "very sane" (& you can have beer with him) :rolleyes:

Sorry no i won't let that bone go.
sorry.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GcypAC2VHew

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idV12epKanYI gave Ron Paul a hard look back when. His unsustainable isolationist policy shot him down with me. Not that it was his only weird quirk, just the deal-breaker I remember.

Isolationism didn't work for the Republican't's/US 100 years ago in a much, much larger World.

Not to mention he violated Texas voting law by having Ron Paul stickers pasted on everything that didn't get out of the way and failed to remove them within 90 days after the election :)

[fj1200]

what exactly are the kind people and Policies that you want?


I seem to remember a guy who wanted all that too.

Honestly I'm not sure if you want an answer that doesn't end with "gee Rev, you're right, Ron Paul was THEE guy. Darnitall, woe is us." We can either be hardcore conservative and win elections in the mid 90s or we can be softcore and lose elections in the 00s which of course argues that the Republicans should be hardcore but at some point people get in the way. Once divided government was over and Republicans had full control then there was no check and they suffered at the polls. I no longer have faith that enough people (around 2015/16 or so) actually prefer a smaller government. Many of them will follow a guy that does not express conservative ideals to their own detriment. Many of us can give you an answer but it doesn't really mean anything when people are fickle and get in their own way.

[gabosaurus]

Thoughts about Trump? OK then. As Gunny said in another thread, the U.S. government is not going after anyone without putting together a very solid body of evidence. In Trump's case, indictments featuring 37 federal charges. Backed by two recordings where Trump acknowledges that he has knowingly withheld classified documents that are hidden on his estate, and that he has shown such documents to unauthorized guests without security clearances. Both recordings are fairly damning. --------------------> The fact that Obama may have documents, or Joe Biden might have documents, or Hillary Clinton might have destroyed her e-mail server, or Hunter Biden might have accepted untold bribes from Ukraine, or that the FBI might be blood thirsty aliens out to devour conservatives, DOES NOT change the fact that Donald Trump is the one on trial. -------------------------> The fact that most prominent Republicans in Congress refuse to see Trump for what he is proves how much hold Trump has over the party. And how much they fear the unhinged devotion of Trump's cult of personality. Though the GOP as a whole does not deserve to be represented by certified nut jobs like Kari Lake. -----------------------> Only Donald Trump is on trial. Every trial has an appointed judge. This does not make the judge in the case a Trump hater. Threats of violence by supporters or massive deflection by the right wing media do not do Trump's case any favors.