Republican Debates

[PhuturePriest]

28 minutes ago, little2add said:

 Between the two I would go with trump.

Don't hate me

I don't hate you. It seems you follow a narrative which says we must always vote for one party, no matter how bad the candidate is, for the sake of keeping out the other party. I disagree with the narrative and think that idea is what causes us to have such poor quality in candidates, but I don't hate anyone or think badly of anyone who holds this. It's a very established narrative and is definitely the mainstream opinion on both sides of the aisle.

[little2add]

 Republicans and the Democrats are one in the same 

trump may be or may not be beholding the  puppet master  pulling the strings,   Hard to forsee the Darkside is.  

I have no faith in Clinton or Bush or Obama. Or the republicandemocrats party

Edited February 29, 2016 by little2add

[Peace]

I don't think Trump has the votes to compete against Hillary. From my take on it Trump's support appears to come from mostly from "poorly educated" (his words) white voters. There simply aren't enough of those people to beat Hillary if 60% of the GOP hate him with a passion and many of them stay home on election day in November. The bigots in the party also tend to flock to Trump (hence Trump's reluctance to reject the support of folks like David Duke), but there are not enough of these people either to defeat Hillary. His supporters are enough to win the nomination against a heavily fractured field - but if the race came down to Trump v. Rubio, Trump v. Cruz, or Trump v. Clinton, which it eventually will, he pretty much gets killed in all 3 races. That is just my humble opinion, of course.

I think the Trump situation somewhat exemplifies the problem that the GOP will have to deal with at some time or another. The party has to decide in which direction it will go. Let's keep it real - there is a not-insignificant minority of Republicans who are racist (not to say that the Dems don't have them as well). The problem is that the GOP can't win anything without the votes of these people. The party is kind of a hostage to the Southern Strategy. So the GOP kind of plays the same kind of dog-whistle politics that Trump plays. You suggest that Obama is a Muslim. You question whether he is a citizen. You talk about all Mexicans who come to the US being rapists and so forth. Although the GOP at large is not racist, they can't exactly come right out and reject the minority. They don't have the votes to win otherwise. But you also see a shift in the country's demographics, where you need to win a significant percentage of minority voters to remain viable. That will become more and more true as the country becomes more brown over the next few decades. So I think right now the GOP is kind of figuring out what direction it wants to go in. Does it want to try to go after more minority voters at the risk of losing the support of the more bigoted wing of the party in the short term? Does it want to try to implicitly court their votes, while getting killed come election time among all non-white ethnic groups and losing any future viability? Time will tell.

[little2add]

One of the candidate’s deceitfulness will catch up to them, eventually.  To the spoils goes the winner

Remember what Abraham Lincoln said: You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.

 

 

Edited February 29, 2016 by little2add

[Nihil Obstat]

[little2add]

One of the workers Disney laid off and forced to train his foreign replacement endorsed Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump Friday, and bashed his rival Republican Sen. Marco Rubio

Rubio enabled and supported, what Disney did. He stole jobs from his constituents, and handed them to foreign workers.   

 

 

[veritasluxmea]

It kind of looks like it will come down to Trump and Hilary. 

There is a traditional, conservative Catholic adult I know who made an interesting case on facebook. He argued in that event, it would be better to vote for Hilary. It was something like this- Trump is ruining the prolife and pro-liberty aspect of the GOP. Being led by this guy would be the end of the GOP party. It would turn them into, well, what Trump is, a racist liberal.  If Hilary wins, it wouldn't damage the GOP as much. There would be a chance of recovery and promoting the values of the party later on. It's a good point, and one that makes me seriously consider voting for her in that case. She and Trump are basically the same policy and value-wise. 

[Nihil Obstat]

13 minutes ago, veritasluxmea said:

It kind of looks like it will come down to Trump and Hilary. 

There is a traditional, conservative Catholic adult I know who made an interesting case on facebook. He argued in that event, it would be better to vote for Hilary. It was something like this- Trump is ruining the prolife and pro-liberty aspect of the GOP. Being led by this guy would be the end of the GOP party. It would turn them into, well, what Trump is, a racist liberal.  If Hilary wins, it wouldn't damage the GOP as much. There would be a chance of recovery and promoting the values of the party later on. It's a good point, and one that makes me seriously consider voting for her in that case. She and Trump are basically the same policy and value-wise. 

I do not think that justifies voting for Clinton, but certainly you can refrain from voting for Trump on such grounds.

[Peace]

1 hour ago, little2add said:

One of the workers Disney laid off and forced to train his foreign replacement endorsed Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump Friday, and bashed his rival Republican Sen. Marco Rubio

Rubio enabled and supported, what Disney did. He stole jobs from his constituents, and handed them to foreign workers.

Let's say you go to Macy's and see the same exact shirt. One shirt was made in China and the other made in the USA. The shirt made in the US sells for $50 and the shirt made in China sells for $25. Are you going to pay $25 extra for a shirt just because it was made in the USA or are you going to buy the cheaper shirt and use the money you saved to buy your kids some schoolbooks or dinner?

Almost all of us buy the cheaper shirt.

So why should someone pay person A $50 dollars an hour when person B is willing to do the same job for $25 dollars an hour?

If you force the employer to pay $50 dollars when someone else could do the Job for $25 you are taking away money from the employer. The employer now has less money to buy his children books and to put food on his children's table.

If the employer has to pay $50 because he cannot find a cheaper employee, doesn't  that mean that the employee is stealing money from his employer?

No, of course not. But neither does increasing competition steal jobs from one person and give it to another. He lost his job because his skill set did not justify the salary that he was making. And that is what happens in a free market economy.

It seems that the main problem that people have is that "we" are forced to compete fairly against "them", which is a bit ironic because a majority of "us" are descended directly from immigrant groups who came here a few generations ago and provided the same cheap labor that we now complain about when "they" try to come here and do exactly the sam thing. So why exactly was it OK for our ancestors to immigrate here and take on jobs for lower wages, but it is now not OK for other groups to come here and attempt to do the same? It seems like a very animal-farmish type of mentality to me.

[little2add]

The difference is today there are labor laws against things like sweatshops, child labor and environmental regulations that add a tremendous cost to production.   Then there is workers compensation, pensions, health insurance and heavy tax burden imposed upon stateside employers 

100 years ago this was not the case.  

 

Did you know that there was no income tax 100 years ago, that begai

That began in 1913

Edited March 1, 2016 by little2add

[4588686]

On ‎12‎/‎16‎/‎2015‎ ‎12‎:‎46‎:‎10‎, Ark said:

I think Trump has a very good chance of winning the nomination. Many experts predict he doesn't have long term sustainability as we draw nearer to the Republican primary but a "fading out" has been predicted for months and it hasn't happened. I think as we near the primary his support will only grow as he connects strongly with the base and many Americans where as the establishment is totally disconnected. #trump2016

Yeah. A lot of people like me thought he'd get crushed. I had way too much faith in the Republican Party.

[Anomaly]

2 hours ago, Hasan said:

Yeah. A lot of people like me thought he'd get crushed. I had way too much faith in the Republican Party.

I think the Republican Party is baffled an what to do about Trump as well.   His populist appeal has baffled the political machines so far (both Dems and Reps), because politicians operate outside of populist will.   The negativity of both created a disdain for politicians, except for "your" politician.   The discourse is rarely common sense, but a trade of hyperbole and emotional thinking.  Dems don't want to kill babies any more than Reps want to kill immigrants.   The constant extremism of each other's position precludes any reasonable compromise, such as a secure border WITH a wide gate.    You risk US jobs when you bash US companies.   Outsourcing jobs also help other nation's economies to employ their citizens there, and avoid them risking their lives hiding in a train car. 

 

[little2add]

trump's appeal may very well be his independence from the old-school republican party.  the die will be cast or the two idiots will be determined  for the final showdown,  after todays super tuesday votes are tallied

clinton is a shoe-in

Edited March 1, 2016 by little2add

[4588686]

57 minutes ago, Anomaly said:

I think the Republican Party is baffled an what to do about Trump as well.   His populist appeal has baffled the political machines so far (both Dems and Reps), because politicians operate outside of populist will.   The negativity of both created a disdain for politicians, except for "your" politician.   The discourse is rarely common sense, but a trade of hyperbole and emotional thinking.  Dems don't want to kill babies any more than Reps want to kill immigrants.   The constant extremism of each other's position precludes any reasonable compromise, such as a secure border WITH a wide gate.    You risk US jobs when you bash US companies.   Outsourcing jobs also help other nation's economies to employ their citizens there, and avoid them risking their lives hiding in a train car. 

 

The Democratic Party was able to bury Sanders though. It's weird because in a lot of ways I thought the Republican Party was approaching an apex of power. The control 35 states, both houses of congress, the USSC until recently. They have (or had) a decent shot of winning the Presidency. But it also seems like they're imploding on a national level.

 

I think a lot of it has to do with the way Rush Limbaugh and other elements of talk radio/fox have fostered total distrust of the Republican Party establishment. But idk. This isn't a good sign for the Republican Party. Trump should not be doing this well.

[Anomaly]

1 hour ago, Hasan said:

The Democratic Party was able to bury Sanders though. It's weird because in a lot of ways I thought the Republican Party was approaching an apex of power. The control 35 states, both houses of congress, the USSC until recently. They have (or had) a decent shot of winning the Presidency. But it also seems like they're imploding on a national level.

 

I think a lot of it has to do with the way Rush Limbaugh and other elements of talk radio/fox have fostered total distrust of the Republican Party establishment. But idk. This isn't a good sign for the Republican Party. Trump should not be doing this well.

  

I don't think the Rep have a grip on any semblance of broad populist power.   They're the most diversely fractured party.  They did nothing after the mid term sweep,  and simultaneously include a very established political machine and rabid anti government Tea Party'ers.   Trump is outside of being controlled by Rep Party    Trump is using them because he isn't beholden to their power at this point.   Ticking the R Party off too is part of his populist appeal at this point   

   I think both parties have managed to alienate themselves from the readable minded general population by constantly vilifying each other.  This campaign has devolved into out insulting each other.  Hillary, Donald, Bernie, Rubio, nor Ted are village idiots, evil personified, pathological liars, or anti-US Agents.   But they're the only ones willing to play the political game of superficially appealing to the whims of polarized voters who elect the leader of a huge economic, military, and cultural world power.  

I think the election will be Clinton vs Trump and the political establishment will support Clinton and the populist anti-gov will support Trump.    The winner will be who gets the most people riled or disgusted enough to vote "against" the other one. Non voters don't matter, as always. 

[little2add]

Sanders is a stooge, he was selected by the powers at be to make Clinton look centrist by comparison 

sanders was or is a serious contender.  

[PhuturePriest]

Aaaaaaannnnnd

the nation is doomed. 

[4588686]

On 2/29/2016, 11:35:49, veritasluxmea said:

It kind of looks like it will come down to Trump and Hilary. 

There is a traditional, conservative Catholic adult I know who made an interesting case on facebook. He argued in that event, it would be better to vote for Hilary. It was something like this- Trump is ruining the prolife and pro-liberty aspect of the GOP. Being led by this guy would be the end of the GOP party. It would turn them into, well, what Trump is, a racist liberal.  If Hilary wins, it wouldn't damage the GOP as much. There would be a chance of recovery and promoting the values of the party later on. It's a good point, and one that makes me seriously consider voting for her in that case. She and Trump are basically the same policy and value-wise. 

He's not a liberal. He's just a good old fashioned Republican Racist Nationalist. Just like Pat Buchanan. 

5 hours ago, little2add said:

Sanders is a stooge, he was selected by the powers at be to make Clinton look centrist by comparison 

sanders was or is a serious contender.  

That's obviously wrong. He's made Clinton tact to the left. The party would want her to be able to position herself as a moderate and remain there for the general.

[Basilisa Marie]

21 hours ago, little2add said:

Sanders is a stooge, he was selected by the powers at be to make Clinton look centrist by comparison 

sanders was or is a serious contender.  

The idea that Sanders is wanted or was selected by anyone high ranking in the democratic party is laughable. He's done a lot to ruin things for Hilary's all-but-assured coronation as Obama part III. She desperately wants to go down in history as the first female president, and Sanders has been surprising a lot of the establishment with his grassroots campaign. Sanders is the Independent from Vermont who has been spouting the same things for decades. Young adults adore him like they adored Obama, and people probably thought they'd all get on Hilary's bandwagon. 

It should be Cruz or Rubio for the nomination, but Trump is blowing everything up. He's appealing to the basest instincts of the lowest common denominator of the party, and the party's going to end up with Trump if they can't figure out which of the other options they want to unite behind. 

[veritasluxmea]

On 2/29/2016, 8:51:42, Nihil Obstat said:

I do not think that justifies voting for Clinton, but certainly you can refrain from voting for Trump on such grounds.

I think Trump is so bad it justifies voting for Hilary. Assuming he gets the GOP vote, I'm seriously considering voting for her this November. Voting third party or not voting is basically voting for him. Voting is picking the lesser of two evils, and I think she's the lesser of two evils here. She is in no way the moral option, though. 

Ben Carson is also dropping out but not really dropping out: 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ben-carson-to-tell-supporters-he-sees-no-path-forward-for-campaign/2016/03/02/d6bef352-d9b3-11e5-891a-4ed04f4213e8_story.html 

“I do not see a political path forward in light of last evening’s Super Tuesday primary results,” the Wednesday statement said. “However, this grassroots movement on behalf of ‘We the People’ will continue. Along with millions of patriots who have supported my campaign for President, I remain committed to Saving America for Future Generations.”