All good. Not really trying to have the gay debate, it was more an example of conceptual differences.
If they were still good at fiscal issues I’d feel partisan for it. They used to be leagues ahead of Dems on fiscal issues, and leagues behind on social issues. This is what caused me to vote for a decent number of Republican congressmen and nearly all republicans at a local level (I don’t see many issues with my local level repubs being fiscally responsible, big shoutout to them).
Since national level repubs don’t seem to care about the budget anymore, they’re downgrading in my book.
Well good because I think that issue has been resolved.
Well it’s like I have been saying, I absolutely know the dems will let me down regarding spending. They’ve never seen a spending bill that they didn’t like. The republicans on the other hand usually let me down. But, sometimes I am impressed with them. And there are good fiscal republicans in the House and Senate. I can’t say that about the dems. Therefore, I still have hope.
You mentioned voting locally. And probably to your surprise I have voted for many democrats. At the local level I have not found a huge difference between the two parties. At least not in my area. Also, I grew up with many of the dems that I have voted for and know them to be good people.
Agreed. I know this out of the gate any time I vote dem.
Also agreed, but at the very least Republicans used to let me down a whole lot less. It’s becoming increasingly harder to find enough value in the GOP to ignore their social shortcomings when they keep shitting the bed fiscally.
I hope they don’t become the party of “don’t let em take our guns and lets keep out brown people.” If they lose being fiscally responsible much more, they’re going to drive out non mouth breathers in droves.
Wow…you know I have no idea why you would say “keep out brown people”? That was really harsh. Do you mean the party that enforces immigration laws? Now I would like being part of that party. But that brown people comment really has taken be aback.
Not referencing yourself, as I said “I hope they don’t become the party of.” I’m more worried that as the party gets less fiscally responsible it will devolve to a sea of people like Raj instead of people that want a smaller govt such as yourself
A salient point. The over arching effect of these nuanced laws is that one person has a higher overall tax rate than another. They pay a higher percentage of their total income.
Your argument doesn’t hold up if we apply it to other natural or civil rights. If the government decided to only allow freedom of assembly to people on Tuesdays at 3pm they could very well apply that law across the entire population, that doesn’t make it equal protection since some can’t assemble then. Just because a law applies to everyone doesn’t mean it affords equal protection.
Yes, I understood what you were saying. It’s just that I don’t ever see the republican party as becoming that. I don’t understand how it would get to that point.
As for lowlifes being in the republican party, sure they are there. But they are also in the democrat party. I don’t know this for a fact but I would bet that many in the Black Lives Matter movement…those wishing death to Police Officers voted democrat in the previous Presidential election. In fact, Hillary tried to make a play for those votes by bringing Michael Brown’s Mom on stage during the DNC. There were other parents of slain thugs also on that stage. What was that all about? It backfired in a big way as I knew it would. When middle America saw that I am sure that they were as surprised as I was. and it is not about racism, it’s about right and wrong.
Anyway, no one knows what the future will bring. As I have said I wish the democrat party would revert back to what it was 50 years ago then I would have had a choice when a Donald Trump gets the nomination. I could look to the other side and cast a vote for the democrat. But, as it stands now who will get the democrat nod in 2020? Elizabeth Warren? Bernie Sanders? My gosh they are so far left that I cannot take either seriously. And if Trump keeps even 60% of his promises and the economy continues to improve the democrats will be defeated with candidates like either of those two.
But the far left has hijacked the democrat party and we don’t know how far out of bounds they will take them. But rest assured if it continues they will not be winning a national election until they get their act together. You can see what has happened around the country. The republicans now control something like 34 Governorships. And the overwhelming majority of State Houses something like 68%. It is unprecedented.
I think this is a reaction to where Obama took the country. Yes, people liked Obama personally that’s why he won twice. But I don’t think they like his political philosophy and where he wanted to take the country. But as I have always said people vote with their emotions and Obama is an incredibly attractive candidate in so many ways. Very, very likeable. In fact, if they had an Obama clone, or someone with his charisma Trump would have gone to defeat. People vote for people they like or against people they don’t like in the case of the 2020 election.
Anyway, all the democrats have to do to be become a permanent minority party is to continue their trek leftward with no real message other than “we hate Trump”. The odds of them turning out another Barack Obama are quite slim. Just as the republicans are not able to turn out another Ronald Reagan. Politicians of this magnitude are rare.
I don’t understand how both parties have got to the point they’re at. At this point I’m hoping for the best and planning for the worst.
Agreed. I also hope the left doesn’t devolve into the extremist members of BLM.
I think the far left has hijacked the democratic party to a lesser extent than the far right. We saw them come out in huge numbers for Trump. Even the freedom caucus being able to hold Congress hostage because bills don’t cut enough shows it’s rippling hard through the GOP.
Which is why I was hoping the republicans would actually get things done. Having a majority in every place that it matters should be enough to start getting things accomplished.
I agree it is a natural reaction to the dems swinging so far left. And it’s harmful to the republicans. Politics is about give and take. That is if they want to get things done.
If you look at this realistically it still might happen. They have only been in office something like 5 months. We are all in a hurry to see improvement in various areas but things do take time. Ask yourself this, was the dialogue this harsh when Obama was sworn in? We know the press loved him that’s not what I am talking about. Were people saying, “nothing is getting done…we need more accomplished.” No, they were not saying that. And it wasn’t because Obama was getting so much accomplished. There is a prevalent narrative that Trump and by extension the republicans can’t get things done. They are ineffective. This might be the case. But, at this point it is far too early to tell. If we are sitting here 3 years from now with no change to O Care and no tax reduction bill then I will join that bandwagon.
Until that point I am willing to wait and see. Trump has slashed regulations on business, he’s appointed a conservative the SC, there have been 222,000 new jobs added to the economy last quarter, the stock market is soaring. And illegal border crossings are down something like 65%. So, for my money he is doing a good job. I am not talking about Trump the man…the tweeter the blowhard the guy we all love to dislike. I am talking about what he has done so far.
In my families neck of the woods, it was much harsher on a more constant basis. Hands down.
Edit: My family is not unique. In those areas they are a dime a dozen. People near large cities often underestimate how much hate rural Americans had for Obama.
This is most likely because Republicans have had control of Congress for ~7 years now, and have virtually nothing ready now that they have a POTUS they’ll work with. People keep asking what they were doing for 6 years while Obama was in office other than voting NO on everything the dems touched. It’s not an unreasonable question.
You keep trying to put distance between “Trump the tweeter” and “Trump the POTUS.” They’re the same guy. It’s an all or nothing thing when you have a guy in office. Things like giving classified intel to the Russians and having your son tweet an email that implicates him in Russian collusion don’t magically not happen because Mexicans aren’t flooding into the country.
Humorously enough, an excuse that I’ve seen some Republicans float for not having a healthcare bill ready is basically “We didn’t think Trump was actually going to win.”
Now they have their pants down. I get where zeb is coming from - Trump has only been in office for six months (that is one-eighth of a Presidency by now…I think we’re approaching “time to see some forward progress” territory) - but the Obamacare repeal was supposed to be a day-one, tip-top priority issue. An excuse of “Well, we didn’t realize we would actually have to go through with it” is a pretty lazy excuse for the single biggest party talking point of the last 7 years.
Very curious on what part of Trump sounds fiscally responsible to you. These were positions he took on the campaign trail.
Building a massive wall estimated anywhere from 20-65 billion but who knows.
Will not touch medicare and social security (which is over a 1/3 of the budget).
Wants to spend more on the military
Huge investment on infrastructure (he was a fan of the Obama stimulus plan)
Tax cut that was estimated to add 10 trillion to the debt
Without getting in to the details of whether or not any of these would be good or bad what part is fiscally conservative? It seems like the party of families and moral values Trump officially killed the idea that Republicans are fiscally conservative. He killed the idea that Republicans believe in free market principles (hard to be free market when you are pushing tariffs). This is the leader of the Republican party. I’m not interested in what Republicans may have used to pretend they stood for (though I would argue that GWB was light years away from a fiscal conservative), but where they are right now.
I don’t see how anyone could consider the current leader a fiscal conservative.
I am willing to accept this thought, because I do agree things take time. My concerns are more along the lines that I do not think they are PREPARING to govern. There is no preparation that’s evident, just a constant circus. I would also echo pfurys point that when you control Congressfor close to 2 terms and you constantly say “we can’t do anything because the president won’t let us, just wait til we get a new president”, then you are OBLIGATED to follow through and you have set the expectation that you have a plan already–ready to unveil at least, possibly ready to implement fully formed. If you then do not have ANYTHING resembling a fully formed and we’ll thought out plan, I think a large portion of the criticism is warranted.
I was not clear but I meant the media outlets. I am well aware of the rural folks hating Obama.
Two things: Firstly, I don’t think any of the republicans thought Trump was going to pull it off. Secondly, health care is a massive undertaking. It is 1/7th of the economy. And they want to make sure that the changes made are good ones. I also think that they had too many potential plans. Every other Congressman had a twist they wanted to see implemented. Now they have to decide which way to go and it isn’t easy. Finally, they are no doubt scared because they don’t want to be perceived as taking anything away that was already given. Once you hand a voter something for free there is usually hell to pay if you try to take it away. With all that said I am guessing that they will come to terms with an alternative plan…eventually.
What is your definition of Russian collusion? What I read was he was contacted by a Russian, not connected to the government, who said they had dirt on Hillary. Now every campaign that I have ever been associated with from Mayor to Governor wants dirt on their opponent that is part of politics. When he met with the Russian it turned out to be nothing more than the Russian appealing for help with an adopted children’s program. Don Jr. then pretty much ended it. If I am wrong please correct me. But, if I am correct there is nothing more to this story than the nonsense that the dems and the left wing media have been promoting for months. It could be we have to wait until Mueller ends his investigation to know exactly what has occurred. But, from every story that I have read and listened to I just don’t see any collusion. But, if I am wrong impeach him.
You said the Republicans are better than the dems on fiscal conservatism. I’ve always said they are better at giving it lip service but not really in practice.
Currently though you agree that Republicans couldn’t care less about it as evidenced by their current leader?
You really should actually read the emails (“this is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump.”).
[quote=“zeb1, post:2804, topic:229190”]
"…What I read was he was contacted by a Russian, not connected to the government, who said they had dirt on Hillary. Now every campaign that I have ever been associated with from Mayor to Governor wants dirt on their opponent that is part of politics…[/quote]
