Mid-term election Predictions


Carborendum
 Share

Recommended Posts

On 4/29/2022 at 1:46 PM, mirkwood said:

I have no idea what you are trying to get across to me.

If I can attempt to speak for Traveler...

I believe he is saying that the liberal culture has so engrained the minds and hearts of the average liberal, that even moderate liberals would rather accept the woke mob and the extremists in their own party than to elect even the most moderate republican.

So many Democrats completely disagree with the extremists in their own party.  But they hate the Republicans so much that they won't even listen to what the GOP candidate says or stands for anymore.  They just see the "R" and go running as fast as they can to ANYthing without an "R" -- even if they know for certain that the "D" will be terribly horribly rotten no good for America.

Edited by Carborendum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Carborendum said:

That's entirely possible.  And it would certainly explain an awful lot.

On this, it would seem that we agree.  Not only do I personally find that such is possible - I believe it to be most probable of any other consideration I have encountered.  I do not know if anyone else is following our exchange but I would be most interested in any other explanations that would make sense and clear up why someone sworn to uphold the law is deliberately ignoring the laws of immigration.   It is said that our immigration system is broken - the only thing I see broken is our immigration laws.  But I am puzzled that those that suggest our immigration system is broken are not making it clear what it is that needs to be fixed?  Because what needs to be fixed is not openly stated or presented as a change in the law - I believe that there is another objective being sought that is intended to remain hidden and obscure. 

 

The Traveler

Edited by Traveler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Traveler said:

On this, it would seem that we agree.  Not only do I personally find that such is possible - I believe it to be most probable of any other consideration I have encountered.  I do not know if anyone else is following our exchange but I would be most interested in any other explanations that would make sense and clear up why someone sworn to uphold the law is deliberately ignoring the laws of immigration.   It is said that our immigration system is broken - the only thing I see broken is our immigration laws.  But I am puzzled that those that suggest our immigration system is broken are not making it clear what it is that needs to be fixed?  Because what needs to be fixed is not openly stated or presented as a change in the law - I believe that there is another objective being sought that is intended to remain hidden and obscure. 

The Traveler

One other explanation is that they hope to enlist a whole bunch more Democrat voters to keep their party in power.

That would also explain why virtually all public education leans FAR left.  It is to raise a new generation of liberal voters.

This is exactly what happened with FDR and the New Deal.  You want the next several generations voting for the Democrats?  Give them money from the government coffers.  It becomes a self perpetuating system.  Chldren raised in such a condition come to believe everyone lives like that.

We invite people from poor nations to come here and get on the dole, guess whom they will vote for?

That said, I personally believe that the cartels do have a hand in the activity that is encouraged by Democrat politicians.  I just disagree as to the level at which it happens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Carborendum said:

.....

That said, I personally believe that the cartels do have a hand in the activity that is encouraged by Democrat politicians.  I just disagree as to the level at which it happens.

Thank you for your input.   I am curious about this particular conclusion.  Since I am not a member of a drug cartel (secret combination) I will admit that I rely on a great deal of speculation that includes what history has revealed along with warnings (particularly intended for our day through revelations that include the Book of Mormon 'and other modern scripture' and the official utterances of prophets) of the means or level that organized crime intends to influence political candidates and government workers and bureaucrats.   According to my understanding there are only two levels of activity that such organizations exert their influences.  There may be a possible third but I see the third level as being a subset of level two:

First I will call level one.  This level is the influence that is provided by individuals that are covenant members of the organization.  They are sworn to uphold the internal laws and covenants of the organization upon penalty of death.  These individuals are all in, concerning the organization.   An individual may compromise the organization but such a compromise puts themselves, their family (including extended family) and their friends all at risk - not just for all of their possessions but their very lives as well.

Next I will call level two.  This level is the influence that is provided by individuals that are not part of the organization but are used by the organization.  There are two ways that the organization utilizes such individuals that I believe can be summarized with two terms - bribes and threats.  

 

I would now present my understanding of what such organizations do as they obtain various levels of influence or control upon a government.  As I understand such organizations are interested in two aspects of government - control of resources (including money) and secondly; power.  When I say power - this is power to protect themselves and punish those that oppose them.  This power is exercised through the creation of a two tear legal system within the government.  What this does is allow them to break the laws and not be punished and the second is to allow them to punish their opposition even when their opposition have not broken any laws.  As to control of resources - this is done through ownership of resources (banks, companies and natural resources) and the ruin of resources (banks, companies and natural resources) that they do not own or control.

So how do I determine the influence of drug cartels.  I am aware that the drug cartels in Mexico for some time are trying to take control of the petroleum industry through control of pipelines and trucking.  The petroleum is in essence stolen from the Mexican government and sold on the world black market.  The single most recipient of Mexico black market petroleum is the US government - this is according to sources I have in Mexico that I acquired during my consulting when I was working.  In addition I look for laws and executive orders being passed and given that benefit the drug cartels - ether directly in allowing them to control resources or creating two tears of how the courts handle prosecutions that either insure certain individuals are not prosecuted while other are harassed or prosecuted for opposition.  There may be another possibility dealing with the media industry - both entertainment and the distribution of information (news). 

I believe that elected officials in both political parties are aligning themselves with the goals of the drug cartels but (and this should be obvious) the Democratic party is under greater influence.  We can talk more details if either you or @Vort (or anyone else reading this thread and post) are willing to engage and offer more details yourselves.

 

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Traveler said:

I will add another prediction - the projected "Red" wave will not be near as big and powerful as predicted by Republicans and conservative pundits. 

 

The Traveler

That's exactly what I've been saying all along.

Polls show tremendous dissatisfaction with the Democrats.  But to believe that will translate toa commensurate level of votes turned is pretty naive, in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/27/2022 at 10:53 AM, NeuroTypical said:

Maybe you folks can help me understand something.  In many accusations of voter fraud, I hear the term "ballot harvesting".   What is it, and why is it fraudulent?

If it's just things like visiting people's houses with ballots, or offering rides, even offering food or incentives to vote - I wouldn't consider any of those things fraudulent.  It would appear dems rock at it and republicans suck at it, which would explain why I only hear the right complaining about it.   I don't care if someone sets up shop in a nursing home to help people get their vote in for Biden.  If the right is too stupid to do similar things, then too bad for the right.  

Well, here's a horror story from Georgia.

After the election, they didn't have a full count because some of the Ballots were filled incorrectly.  There were those that decided to help get those ballots filled out correctly.  One of these individuals shared their story over NPR.  They got a bunch of ballots and went out, but if they saw the house had a pro-republican sticker or indication on it, or saw that the ballot was for a republican vote, they SKIPPED the house.  They ONLY went to houses that they felt voted for democrats.

I couldn't believe they even let that person tell their story on the radio.  That was blatantly twisting the mail in ballots!

Similar things can happen.  When someone goes to help an elderly or someone who has trouble, to fill out their ballot it sounds like they are being helpful.  IN truth, if they lean one way or the other, they can HIGHLY influence who and what that person is voting for.

I don't think the election was stolen.  I think quite the opposite and I am very tired of hearing some people go on and on about it. 

The items above are ways that the votes got twisted in Georgia though, which in theory could call into question how above board the election actually was.  I feel Biden won the election fair and square, but I think there are people on both sides that were attempting to twist the system to their advantage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/30/2022 at 7:08 PM, Carborendum said:

If I can attempt to speak for Traveler...

I believe he is saying that the liberal culture has so engrained the minds and hearts of the average liberal, that even moderate liberals would rather accept the woke mob and the extremists in their own party than to elect even the most moderate republican.

So many Democrats completely disagree with the extremists in their own party.  But they hate the Republicans so much that they won't even listen to what the GOP candidate says or stands for anymore.  They just see the "R" and go running as fast as they can to ANYthing without an "R" -- even if they know for certain that the "D" will be terribly horribly rotten no good for America.

I'd say the exact opposite.

Many on the right have gone OFF the ladder.  I am an independent.  I am an independent that leans HEAVILY conservative.  If these boards are any indication of how the Republican party is today (and this board seems to lean very Republican and at times inflate Republican ideals as religion) than anyone that is like me...is considered a Radical far left liberal. 

That's INSANE. 

Biden is actually almost dead center.  He's not really Left at all.  There are a TON of very conservative ideas that he introduced to congress which drive the left crazy to this day.  He is about as moderate as you can get as a democrat or republican. 

That there are Republicans that can't see this and accuse him of being far left shows just how EXTREME they have drifted. 

If the Republicans field guys that love the military (unlike Trump), the wounded veterans and disabled veterans (unlike Trump), respect Gold Star Families (unlike Trump), actually WANT to balance the budget (unlike Trump), reduce the Federal deficit (unlike Trump), promote morality (unlike Trump), and promote traditional conservative values (unlike Trump), they'd probably be more likely to get my support.  (in Trump's support though, the one thing HE DID DO was put conservative justices on the Supreme Court).

The reason many (including the middle like me, and as I said, even there I actually am conservative comparatively, just not the far right conservatives, and not a Republican) are not voting for Republicans is that they've skewed so far right we can't even see the horizon in many areas, and the areas which they SHOULD support conservative points, they've gone far left instead (such as the budget). 

That doesn't mean everyone is accepting the Far Left either.  There's just less of them overall from my perspective.  There are many things I don't support from the Left either, even things that aren't on the Far Left.  There are things they've passed I am very strongly against (I dislike the ACA for example, and think it is an abomination.  It has not done anything to curb health insurance and actually, made MY coverage a LOT worse). 

The problem I see with the current flock of many Republicans is that they view anyone who is not on the Far Right as a liberal, even their own Republicans and independents who may lean to the right.  (It's a problem the Far Left suffered from for decades, at least since the 60s...it's relatively new for the Republicans though).  It's ironic how many Republicans view Romney as a Democrat, even though his voting record overall shows something starkly different. 

Edit:  On the otherhand, the democrats are going to struggle these midterms.  Inflation is affecting their base heavily.  If they don't get it under control (and that window has passed, I think, unless they take drastic measures which will affect their base just as much) I think they are going to lose a LOT of votes.  They should not have lowered them so much during the pandemic years, and perhaps should have even raised them during that time period.  It would have hurt during that time, but I think it is going to hurt a lot more now. 

This could lead to them losing seats.  They need to get the economy under control quickly, I think the longer they take, the more votes they are going to lose.  Instead of the entire trillion dollar deal they were trying to pass with infrastructure (which no one really cared about to begin with, overall) they should have focused more on what actually was happening with the economy and worked to nip it in the bud before it went spiraling as it appears to be doing now.

Edited by JohnsonJones
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, LDSGator said:

This could be a problem for the republicans in November, just like how the gay marriage ruling in Massachusetts helped push W Bush to the win in 04. 

You know what?

It would be the end of a federal government mandating a nationwide Molochian holocaust.  (Yes, some big states will still permit abortion-on-demand; but a lot of states won’t).  The Republican Party’s ballot-box woes pale by comparison.

The fact that winning WW2 made FDR and Truman look good, doesn’t mean we [Republicans] shouldn’t have done our part to make it happen. :) 

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

You know what?

It would be the end of a federal government mandating a nationwide Molochian holocaust.  (Yes, some big states will still permit abortion-on-demand; but a lot of states won’t).  The Republican Party’s ballot-box woes pale by comparison.

The fact that winning WW2 made FDR and Truman look good, doesn’t mean we shouldn’t have done our part to make it happen. :) 

That’s fine @Just_A_Guy. Let’s remember that at this time, nothing is certain about the opinion. So while the left is screaming in agony (and it’s fun to see) and the right is lighting up victory cigars, this libertarian is telling both sides that it’s best to chill until further notice. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

Many on the right have gone OFF the ladder. 

Biden is actually almost dead center.  He's not really Left at all.  There are a TON of very conservative ideas that he introduced to congress which drive the left crazy to this day.  He is about as moderate as you can get as a democrat or republican. 

Ok, let's explore that.  I've heard self-professed liberals say that.  I've heard many moderates "claim" that.  But I never heard any details.  I'll present the things I see that the Democrats have changed over the years.  You tell me what Republicans have changed over the years and let's see which evince a greater change.  Deal?

  •  LGBTQ...:
    • OLD Liberal: 
      • Obama refused to acknowledge that transgenders should be allowed to use the bathroom of choice.   
      • Both Obama and Hillary were against gay marriage when they ran for President.
      • Many in Hollywood mocked the idea of a cross-dresser or transgendered individual.  They even mocked homosexuals until around the mid 90s.  Then they only subtly included them in films.
      • Legal teams promoting "tolerance said it was ludicrous to believe that a pre-operative transgendered individual would EVER use a bathroom for the opposite sex.
      • Marriage is a religious institution.  It is not for a government to mandate same-sex marriage.
      • Keep transgendered men out of women's sports.
    • New liberal:
      • Legalize homosexual marriages.
      • Tolerance is no longer enough.  You have to CELEBRATE homosexuality or you're a homophobe.
      • Biden promotes trasngenders going into opposite sex bathrooms.
      • Schools push it on our children without parental consent. 
      • They even give our children hormones/medication without parental consent.
      • Drag queen story hour is in our kindergarten classes.
      • Biological males are in our women's locker rooms and bathrooms.
      • Biological males in women's sports.
      • Musk (a moderate liberal) even offered up that he has nothing against transgenders, but he found it exhausting to try to keep track of such a plethora of pronouns.
        • He was labeled a homophobe and transphobe by the left for that one statement. And now he is hated for it.
      • Promote placing thy rainbow flag on government buildings.  But forbid a nativity scene at a public park for Christmas.

Also note that Trump was the first President to be for  gay marriage during a campaign.

  •  Abortion
    • Old liberal:
      • Three exceptions (rape, incest, or life/health of the mother) were the common liberal talking points before R v. W. 
      • Always hailed as "an extremely heart-wrenching and emotional" decision for any woman to make. 
      • Doctor's have the right to conscience regarding abortion.
    • New liberal:
      • Women CELEBRATE their abortions in public and crowds cheer them on.
      • Women all over don't want to have babies -- "unnatural affection".
      • Women who can't afford abortions have the baby and throw them in a dumpster.(*)
      • Doctors (OB-gyn) are pretty much legally obligated to offer abortions any time a woman is pregnant.  And they can be sued if the child has any defects after birth -- simply because they didn't FORCE the abortion on the mother.  This happened to a doctor in my ward.  The ironic thing is that it happened when she was working from home during her own pregnancy.  She got sued for not aborting a baby for a defect.
      • If a doctor simply offers a referral for an abortion instead of doing it himself, he can be sued for malpractice.
  • Racism
    • Old liberal: Martin Luther King, Jr.
      • Content of character, not the color of the skin.
      • Just get along.
      • Let their merits get them ahead regardless of race.
      • Obama has his "beer summit" to smooth over a clear misunderstanding.
      • Morgan Freeman said to get rid of racism:  Stop talking about it.  Stop caring about it.  Stop thinking about me as black.  I stop thinking of you as white.  And we just know each other by our names and our character as we get to know one another.
    • New liberal:
      • There is no misunderstanding, if you're white, you're automatically a racist.
      • Critical Race Theory.
      • Affirmative action (which had been shot down in courts for decades).  Now is being accepted as law.
      • We need to help out black people because they are automatically disadvantaged no matter how much money or power they have.
      • If a black man is killed by a cop, the cop is automatically guilty of racism.  A white man gets shot by a cop, it doesn't even make the news.
      • BLM riots not stopped by police.  Elected officials specifically tell the police to NOT arrest anyone "peacefully protesting" by beating people and setting both private and public property on fire.
      • A black man MUST be released regardless of the crime.
      • White people getting attacked completely randomly by blacks, and police are not allowed to do anything except call an ambulance.
      • White people are hiring "special black counselors" $50,000 to come to their house and explain why they are so privileged and what they need to do for penance to "beat the racism out of their white skin."
  • Financial woes:
    • Old liberal:
      • We need to be more caring about those less fortunate than us.
      • We need to give a hand-up, not a hand-out.
    • New liberal:
      • If you're a minority, you can't get ahead on your own.  You need help (a patron -- the classical definition).
      • If you're a minority, you are automatically poor even if you make $100,000 per speech about racism that lasts 30 minutes.
      • If there's any social program, it needs to prioritize minorities before white people (who are just as poor) are taken care of.
  • Immigration:
    • Old liberal:
      • We need to be nicer to people who immigrate.
      • Immigration is what has built this country.
      • We are a melting pot.
    • New liberal:
      • We should have more illegal immigrants come in than both the legal immigrants and natural born citizens combined.
      • OPEN BORDERS!!!

Over 80% of these items have been enforced by the force of law (or equivalent).

Of so many of these, I've seen that conservatives have come to adopt the old liberal values and positions.  But people still claim that it is the conservatives that have gone off the rocker?

Please talk about the tremendous changes that conservatives have undergone to go further right in the last two decades.  And what legal measures have we taken to enforce any of these changes onto society.  What's that percentage?

(*) the dumpster baby phenomenon is a very long discussion.  We can take that on a tangent if you want.  But it would probably be good for another thread.

Edited by Carborendum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

Many on the right have gone OFF the ladder.  I am an independent.  I am an independent that leans HEAVILY conservative.  If these boards are any indication of how the Republican party is today (and this board seems to lean very Republican and at times inflate Republican ideals as religion) than anyone that is like me...is considered a Radical far left liberal. 

 

You are correct, the GOP has gone off the ladder as well. Though it’s hard to tell. 
 

30 years ago moderates like Chafee, Jeffords, Olympia Snow were tolerated and nominated by their party. Now, no moderate would even try. They’d get crushed in the primary. Also, while there has always been liberal litmus tests (try being a pro life liberal) republicans want to want play that game too. Try being a conservative and wearing Nike shoes or going to an NFL game. 
 

Essentially, republicans have turned into liberals without changing their politics. I expect liberals to be thin skinned, not tolerate dissent and have no clue what the word “irony” means. I never expected it from republicans. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Carborendum said:

Ok, let's explore that.  I've heard self-professed liberals say that.  I've heard many moderates "claim" that.  But I never heard any details.  I'll present the things I see that the Democrats have changed over the years.  You tell me what Republicans have changed over the years and let's see which evince a greater change.  Deal?

Great post, but don't hold your breath waiting for an answer. There is never an answer. As everybody knows, abortion is a "sacred right". (I think they misspelled "rite".)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Vort said:

Great post, but don't hold your breath waiting for an answer. There is never an answer. As everybody knows, abortion is a "sacred right". (I think they misspelled "rite".)

 

It has become an unholy sacrament to some people on the left.  Abortions for any reason are to be celebrated.  People glorying in these extremely shameful activities.  It is a culture of death that I hope most Americans reject.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Still_Small_Voice said:

 

It has become an unholy sacrament to some people on the left.  Abortions for any reason are to be celebrated.  People glorying in these extremely shameful activities.  It is a culture of death that I hope most Americans reject.

Abortion is modern baal worship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/3/2022 at 5:40 PM, LDSGator said:

You are correct, the GOP has gone off the ladder as well. Though it’s hard to tell. 
 

30 years ago moderates like Chafee, Jeffords, Olympia Snow were tolerated and nominated by their party. Now, no moderate would even try. They’d get crushed in the primary. Also, while there has always been liberal litmus tests (try being a pro life liberal) republicans want to want play that game too. Try being a conservative and wearing Nike shoes or going to an NFL game. 
 

Essentially, republicans have turned into liberals without changing their politics. I expect liberals to be thin skinned, not tolerate dissent and have no clue what the word “irony” means. I never expected it from republicans. 

This may be a distinction without a difference, but . . .

It seems to me that the left’s shibboleths are primarily ideological, whereas the right’s are based around cults of common heroes (or villains).  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

This may be a distinction without a difference, but . . .

It seems to me that the left’s shibboleths are primarily ideological, whereas the right’s are based around cults of common heroes (or villains).  

Hey, fair point.
 

Regardless though, the hard right has still gone nuts. When pro life, pro gun, anti tax people are kicked out because they don’t bow to supreme commander Trump :: cough cough :: Liz Cheney there’s an issue.  
 

Ironically I still vote mostly republican because they are, amazingly, the lesser evil. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/3/2022 at 5:24 PM, Carborendum said:

Ok, let's explore that.  I've heard self-professed liberals say that.  I've heard many moderates "claim" that.  But I never heard any details.  I'll present the things I see that the Democrats have changed over the years.  You tell me what Republicans have changed over the years and let's see which evince a greater change.  Deal?

  •  LGBTQ...:
    • OLD Liberal: 
    • New liberal:

You have some very bizarre ideas. 

You lump ALL liberals into two groups...Old and New...with the indication that ALL Liberals fall into the New group. 

Your statements aren't even accurate.  Where do you get this stuff...Tucker Carlson!??? (Who, Fox news itself argued was an untrustworthy source no one in their right mind would believe, if rumor is correct).

Maybe you should find out what the Liberals actually believe these days and the many different types of them that there are.

If you are this incorrect about Liberals, I imagine you have no idea what us independents think or believe (which, backs up the idea that many here feel someone like me is a flaming liberal on the far left...incorrectly...but that's what I think some feel).

Quote

Please talk about the tremendous changes that conservatives have undergone to go further right in the last two decades.  And what legal measures have we taken to enforce any of these changes onto society.  What's that percentage?

 

Conservatives are a very vast and different crowd as well.  Right now, I see a sort of rift occurring between various groups of Republicans (who are a very different group than Libertarians, and both are very different than other conservative but smaller parties and groups). 

Lumping them together like you lumped liberals is probably going to be just as inaccurate...BUT...I can tell you why I don't support the Republican party, and how they have changed in my perception.

1.  Balanced Budget - this was a BIG push in the 90s.  This is the BIG ITEM for me.  I believe we should not only have a balanced budget, but we should also get rid of as much debt as possible.  This was a BIG talking point by Conservatives several decades ago.  It was actually a point (to a lesser degree) even when I was young...though not to the degree it got built up during the 90s all the way up until around 2014. 

They've all but abandoned this philosophy.  There is no attempt to rectify it.  Trump's "Tax Cuts" had no basis in reality for decreasing the deficit or even balancing the budget.  Under Trump our deficit grew to 27 TRILLION dollars.  His "tax cuts" did not work.  Indications that they were not working were seen even before the end of his presidency.  This was all about cutting taxes for him and his buddies and those like him rather than actually doing anything about "Balancing" the budget or cutting down the deficit. 

I was one who was an early Tea Party member (Before the movement was hijacked by other interests) and I will tell you, this one item is perhaps one of the most disgusting items that I've seen Republicans change on.

They ONLY talk about Balanced Budgets these days when it fits their political message, but their ACTIONS show they have no interest in this anymore.  In fact, it's hard to find any political party in the US that is actually interested in this anymore.

Those Congressmen that are, don't want to actually discuss balancing the budget when budget talks are on the table, but only when it comes time to ensure paying the debt they already approved. 

I long for the days when we actually wanted to pay down our debt and not have such a deficit.

2.  Republicans were NOT friends with Communists.  Republicans were NOT friends with Dictators - Why do I see some Republicans today taking the Side of Russia and Putin?  This is horrendous!  I think the likes of Ezra Taft Benson would be turning in his grave (if we believed in such things...more likely he's trying to guide us from heaven these days more than anything else and help us survive in this world).

3.  Republicans stood for Moral Leaders and Morality - One area Conservatives could put forward over some of the Liberals were that the leaders themselves at least acted moral.  The biggest scandal was Ronald Reagan, and that wasn't that much of a scandal.  He was a divorced man, but he HAD been married for many decades at that point to the same woman.  We didn't have the likes of those such as John F. Kennedy who at times, people would question what he did behind the bedroom doors.  Even Richard Nixon, who did some terrible things, didn't go off and have affairs or go off with strange woman (at least publicly that we know of).  The Democrats and Carter as a moral man.  The Republicans had everyone from Eisenhower to George Bush Jr. who were faithful to their marriages. 

Trump would never have gotten into office with the Conservatives of old.  He doesn't have the morality to do so. 

That Republicans support such an individual these days, or find such things acceptable is mind boggling. 

In addition, his disparaging of War Heroes for many of us (John McCain for example) and veterans who were disabled (again, John McCain) from their service to our nation was something I could not believe many Republicans would allow!

This is probably the NUMBER 1 reason I could not vote for Trump the first time around.  Call me an old time conservative, but those types of actions are not representative of who I would vote for. 

This is also something that I see is causing a rift among the Republican party with those who are actually more traditional in their views of Republican ideals vs. this new breed which doesn't so much care about morality of example and lifestyle, as much as it is morality of convenience. 

I don't like Romney, but I think Romney is more of a traditional Republican in regards to his views on Trump than many of the "New" Republicans I see around today.

4.  Republicans were for smaller government and freedom - This actually dates back some time.  The Patriot act was one thing that I did not think should have ever been approved.  We all got caught up in the fervor of the time after the attacks on the Twin Towers which led to this, but enough time has passed I would have thought the Conservatives would have gone back to their old ways.  There is no way Republicans of the 60s and 70s would have ever approved of letting the government have a program that can spy on fellow Americans the way the Patriot Act allows it to.  When we had the power to do away with it, we should have.

This also leads to the ACA.  The Republicans only used this for political points.  They HAD the power to actually do away with it had they retained the will to do so.  They voted hundreds of times to do away with it when they knew they didn't have the votes to do away with it.  When the finally HAD those numbers if they wanted it...They kept it.

--------------------------------------------------------

NOW obviously, the list above is not applicable to all conservatives.  These are merely the things I'VE seen that Republicans in their support of and their political actions have changed upon (sometimes, a complete 180 degrees even).  They also encapsulate some reasons why I don't support Republicans these days myself (of course, I don't support any party specifically, let the best candidate win). 

Edited by JohnsonJones
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

You have some very bizarre ideas. 

Hate to say it, but there *are* a growing number of self-described "progressive" and "woke" types who do, in fact, hold the beliefs that Carb has outlined. 

These people tend to be hotheads, people with sheltered existences who have never truly known hardship and so don't have a benchmark, and/or people who are so caught up in their personal drama and ideals that they no longer have full touch with reality. 

As a result, they very often wind up offending and patronizing the very people they mean to support, promote, and "protect". 

For example, comic book industry veteran Christopher Priest - who is himself black - has claimed that some editors are so obsessed with their female, LGBT, and racial minority characters having "authentic" voices that they'll only assign projects to people who are "just like" their characters. In Priest's case, many editors were only calling him to write black characters despite his vast portfolio and fan support. Thus, he ends up as head writer on "Vampirella", as Dynamite was the biggest company willing to assign him a job based on his resume instead of his skin color. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JJ,

I'll concede that we've given up on balancing the budget. 

  • This is a sign we've gone further left.  It is a Democrat party hallmark. Why are you using this as an example of us going further right?
  • I see it as simply giving up because even though we believe in it, we know it will never happen.  The national debt has ballooned up so high that we simply cannot pay it off.  We're running on fumes.  And there is nothing we can do about it.

I had thought your comment was saying that Republicans have gone further right.  But virtually everything you posted (whether true or not) was a sign we'd moved left.  I wonder if you are using the same definitions we are using.

The VAST majority of what you posted has to do with Trump, the man, not the President. I get the impression that you're biggest gripe is only about TRUMP, the man, not his policies, laws, regulations, etc.  Just HIM.

  • The party has not become Trump, the man
  • The party had found that they find common ground on policies.
  • I am able to separate a person from the policies he put into place.

You complained about Republicans not getting rid of the ACA because there was a provision in the original law that prevented the Republican controlled Senate from doing so (if you're interested, I can go into it). 

But he did pass The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act which did away with the individual mandate starting in 2019.  And that was the biggest complaint from conservatives.  After that, it was just another handout program like Medicaid.  At that point, what was the difference?  And TRUMP was the one that pushed that through.

I certainly hope you don't believe most Conservatives are like TRUMP, himself.  If you don't like Trump, I agree.  In fact most conservatives agree.  Most people who voted for Trump agree that he's not someone you want to be invited for Thanksgiving dinner.  I didn't vote for Trump the first time SPECIFICALLY because I didn't like the guy.  I didn't like what he stood for.  I thought he was just putting on a face to get elected.

The second time, I voted for him because I could hold my nose enough about the man, and hope he got some of the POLICIES through. 

Quote

Eliminated the individual mandate from the ACA.
Took America out of the Paris Climate Accord and Iran's Nuclear Deal.
Gave America's offical recognition that Jerusalem is the Capital of Israel (Even Reagan didn't do that).
Brokered peace deals in the Middle East that have endured so far.
Replaced NAFTA with USMCA
Revised immigration policy that drastically reduced illegal crossings.

If you look again at my previous post, I'm not looking at individuals.  I'm looking at the policies, laws, regulations, judicial decisions, etc.  The things that FORCE us to do ABC or FORBID us from doing XYZ.

I have many Democrat friends who state that they're not happy with MANY of the policies I just railed against before.  But they voted for the candidates who made these things into law.  They voted for executives and legislators who nominated and confirmed judges who would shape this nation into accepting all those policies.

On 5/6/2022 at 4:44 AM, JohnsonJones said:

You have some very bizarre ideas. 

Ad hominem attack.  Great way to start off a response.

On 5/6/2022 at 4:44 AM, JohnsonJones said:

You lump ALL liberals into two groups...Old and New...with the indication that ALL Liberals fall into the New group. 

You criticize me for simply using a convention by which to analyze the topic, then you do exactly the same thing.  Great.  You really believe that I consider a party consisting of half of America to be completely monolithic?  I'm glad you think so highly of me.

So, here:  Everything I said about the two types of liberals was an exercise to properly discuss issues that have affected our political environment today with a perspective on historical standards.  Doing so requires that we define groups of policies.  And this does not necessarily mean that any group (especially a very populous group) can by any means be considered monolithic.  

No that that is out of the way...

On 5/6/2022 at 4:44 AM, JohnsonJones said:

Your statements aren't even accurate.  Where do you get this stuff...Tucker Carlson!??? (Who, Fox news itself argued was an untrustworthy source no one in their right mind would believe, if rumor is correct).

I only visit Fox and MSNBC about once every month or so.

I actually visit CNN on a daily basis.  I also look at independent news sources and foreign news sources daily.  How about you?

On 5/6/2022 at 4:44 AM, JohnsonJones said:

Maybe you should find out what the Liberals actually believe these days and the many different types of them that there are.

I'm looking at what laws, regulations, policies, etc. are in place which either permit or require people to do A, B, or C.  Not individual people.

Whatever individual people believe is meaningless in a nation as large as ours.  And, frankly, what an individual believes is none of my concern.  What we can look at is that which has the force of law behind it.  And by that yardstick, everything I said was FACT.  Prove me wrong.

All the complaints you made didn't.

On 5/6/2022 at 4:44 AM, JohnsonJones said:

If you are this incorrect about Liberals, I imagine you have no idea what us independents think or believe (which, backs up the idea that many here feel someone like me is a flaming liberal on the far left...incorrectly...but that's what I think some feel).

You initiated this tangent by comparing Republicans and Democrats, not independents.  I neither said nor implied anything about independents.  The fact you're taking it personally indicates that you're reading a lot into my words that I neither said nor implied.

 

On 5/6/2022 at 4:44 AM, JohnsonJones said:

3.  Republicans stood for Moral Leaders and Morality

That boat sailed with Clinton.  After that, no one cared.  So, we stopped caring about our politicians jumping into bed as often as Hollywood.  Another sign we've actually gone further LEFT.

On 5/6/2022 at 4:44 AM, JohnsonJones said:

In addition, his disparaging of War Heroes

Again, a personal thing with Trump, not policies.  Again a leftist position. It always has been.  What did people think about the Vietnam war?  Were those on the right or the left?

On 5/6/2022 at 4:44 AM, JohnsonJones said:

4.  Republicans were for smaller government and freedom ...  The Patriot act 

I absolutely agree.  When it passed, I was stunned.  When Bush revealed the DHS, I said "this is the end of liberty".  I've often mused whether they thought long and hard about a more Orwellian name... until the Disinformation Governance Board was created.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share