Republicans: No honeymoon if Clinton wins

[agent00f]

Oblivious to what? That it's a good joke?

hahaha, wow, you mean your dumb machismo comment was not a rhetorical device? Or the very start about a big brain? Don't cry if you get repaid in kind, my dear.

Of course, I told you before that I am, but on the other side. Which is why I'm bothering with the likes of you.

Let's examine the situation surrounding your sort in more detail. Had they succeeded much academically, they wouldn't be attracted to the right wing agitprop that blames the education system for their failures. These are the same sources that tell them they're the smart ones despite all evidence to the contrary, so it's no mystery why simpletons who aren't exactly accused of intellect are drawn to these empty compliments in exchange for their loyalty. All the teachers in school evaluate them as dummies, but what do schools and teachers know.

As a result your type is basically stuck aggrandizing an ideology for backwards thinkers, given it's the only way they're ever to going to feel intellectually competent.

 

[Puffnstuff]

Most republicans I know are not capable of overcoming their own biases of many types that would allow them to see things more clearly. The ones who grew up going to church have also morphed into religitards ( a person who practices religion in lieu of Christianity) which further fuels their spurn of pretty much anything not spoken from a pulpit or republican spokesperson.. I get attacked by the religitards on a regular basis when I speak out against their positions on matters. Take Trump for instance, I pointed out how he's treated women, had multiple marriages and outsources his own jobs and its all okay in their eyes even though the bible they thump says otherwise. If it were a Democrat behaving that way they'd want blood from them (remember what they did to Bill). All of the rich and powerful practice a double standard life as they are exempt from the constraints that we mere mortals face on a daily basis.

 

[fskimospy]

Most republicans I know are not capable of overcoming their own biases of many types that would allow them to see things more clearly. The ones who grew up going to church have also morphed into religitards ( a person who practices religion in lieu of Christianity) which further fuels their spurn of pretty much anything not spoken from a pulpit or republican spokesperson.. I get attacked by the religitards on a regular basis when I speak out against their positions on matters. Take Trump for instance, I pointed out how he's treated women, had multiple marriages and outsources his own jobs and its all okay in their eyes even though the bible they thump says otherwise. If it were a Democrat behaving that way they'd want blood from them (remember what they did to Bill). All of the rich and powerful practice a double standard life as they are exempt from the constraints that we mere mortals face on a daily basis.

Republicans on this board and in general will immediately pretend Trump never existed when he loses. You are correct that partisanship is incredibly strong and makes people defend things they would be horrified by otherwise.

I mean just look at the 'values voters' supporting a philandering sex offender over a woman who by all available information has always kept her marital vows.

 

[Puffnstuff]

I mean just look at the 'values voters' supporting a philandering sex offender over a woman who by all available information has always kept her marital vows.

Exactly! A real Christian pastor would rail against such behavior (the behavior and not a personal attack on a person) and not support it. Politics have no place at the pulpit and when it happens do they not cross the line and become a PAC? I personally believe that churches who do this should be stripped of their tax free status and be classified as PAC's.

My parents are always talking about morality and wholesomeness yet turn a blind eye to Trump's exploits. They complain of outsourcing yet refuse to acknowledge Donald's hiring of foreign workers using H1B visa's. They complain about the steel industry losing jobs jet refuse to consider how Trump used Chinese steel to build all of his buildings to save money. Their confirmation bias is just so overwhelming that it troubles me every time I consider it.

I was a Republican for most of my adult life who had a revelation while studying employment and business law. Once I was able to wrap my head around the bigger picture by conducting a rhetorical analysis I discovered that I was a Democrat all along as I want worker and social protections to prevent another industrial revolution. When I see union workers rally behind him I have to shake my head in dismay. I've tried to get through to them but they refuse to listen. If it weren't for caring people like Sen. Robert Wagner they wouldn't have the right to organize right now. I try to get my parents to see that their Social Security fund was robbed by W to the tune of 10b each time they complain about not getting a COLA. I've tried to explain to them that SS came from a Democratic president who wanted what was best for the entire country to prevent American's of all walks of life from doing without ever again but it just flies over their heads.

The very same thing happens when a religious organization gets behind a candidate like Jerry Falwell did for Trump. His people will follow along blindly regardless of any evidence that will contradict his decision. This is why I believe that they should be forbidden from it and be reclassified as PAC's when they do it. Nowhere in the bible will you find Jesus or the apostles pushing anything but Christianity and the modern church can't even get that right.

 

[dank69]

All the "Christians" I know are voting for Trump because Hillary SCOTUS picks will be worse than a Groper-in-Chief.

 

[Jaskalas]

I mean just look at the 'values voters' supporting a philandering sex offender over a woman who by all available information has always kept her marital vows.

A philandering sex offender... Bill Clinton? Hillary stands by sex offenders.

 

[fskimospy]

A philandering sex offender... Bill Clinton? Hillary stands by sex offenders.

No, Donald Trump. Clinton stands by her husband, yes, but Trump himself is the offender, which is obviously way, way, way worse.

 

[Puffnstuff]

I'm just going to come right out and say it. What we see right now is what Jesus said would happen before the end. First there will a great falling away and that Christians would leave their first love. He also talks about the love of money is the root of all evil and how you cannot have two masters for you will end up loving one and hating the other. This is the conflict between prosperity preaching and the actual gospel which are not even remotely close to one another.

Religitards practice religion not Christianity. The real Christians I speak with are appalled by his behavior and cannot support it. People who claim to be Christian but are really church actors support him because they are not actually Christians. I've heard the religitards complain that there are people who claim that only a Christian believes that Jesus is God and in reality the bible says that this is the only way you can tell who is really a Christian and who is not. That minority why can are your actual Christians and don't forget it.

FWIW neither of my parents are saved, my mom used to teach Sunday school and has heard the gospel many times and my dad is a Mormon Melchizedek priest who believe that this books of Mormon supersede the bible. I've used 1 John 4:1-2 many times to prove who is who and they fail the test. When they both die they will go to eternal darkness with weeping and gnashing of teeth where the worm dies not.

 

[glenn1]

This election is turning out as perfect as could be given the terrible choices made by the two parties. Whoever wins will be tainted, have almost zero political capital, and will spend a good part of their term under the storm cloud of possible criminal investigation and or prosecution. Trump would take office nearly completely crippled and Clinton would be severely damaged even if probably not mortally wounded. That my friends is a win-win for the American people in 2016.

 

[Jhhnn]

This election is turning out as perfect as could be given the terrible choices made by the two parties. Whoever wins will be tainted, have almost zero political capital, and will spend a good part of their term under the storm cloud of possible criminal investigation and or prosecution. Trump would take office nearly completely crippled and Clinton would be severely damaged even if probably not mortally wounded. That my friends is a win-win for the American people in 2016.

As if deliberately hobbling the necessary functions of govt somehow benefits the people.

 

[shortylickens]

http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/27/politics/hillary-clinton-republicans-congress/index.html

Just what the country needs - 4 more years of politically motivated "investigations" instead of solving real problems.

Get ready for more Benghazi, emails, Clinton Foundation, Benghazi and Benghazi.

Also, this winning statement from Drumpf:

Trump: 'We should just cancel the election' and declare me the winner
http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/27/politics/donald-trump-cancel-election/index.html

Translation - "We are as desperate as a 19 year old virgin."

 

[glenn1]

As if deliberately hobbling the necessary functions of govt somehow benefits the people.

When the two people most likely to run it are completely unacceptable for the position and have historical levels of unfavorability, then hell yes that benefits the people.

 

[bshole]

As if deliberately hobbling the necessary functions of govt somehow benefits the people.

Bipartisanship makes me nervous. I prefer a split government.

 

[Jhhnn]

When the two people most likely to run it are completely unacceptable for the position and have historical levels of unfavorability, then hell yes that benefits the people.

Bullshit. Repubs have been playing that game since 2008 & before, taking the govt & the people it serves hostage to their radical agenda. One of the first rules of game theory is that hostage takers don't care about the hostage.

 

[bshole]

Bullshit. Repubs have been playing that game since 2008 & before, taking the govt & the people it serves hostage to their radical agenda. One of the first rules of game theory is that hostage takers don't care about the hostage.

What is "game theory"? Just curious.

 

[sdifox]

What is "game theory"? Just curious.

Math

 

[Jhhnn]

Bipartisanship makes me nervous. I prefer a split government.

Please. Some level of cooperation is necessary if we want the govt to work at all.

 

[Jaskalas]

This election is turning out as perfect as could be given the terrible choices made by the two parties. Whoever wins will be tainted, have almost zero political capital, and will spend a good part of their term under the storm cloud of possible criminal investigation and or prosecution. Trump would take office nearly completely crippled and Clinton would be severely damaged even if probably not mortally wounded. That my friends is a win-win for the American people in 2016.

The... rage.. that pushes Trump towards the Presidency will not be sated by more failed policies, nor a crippled and ineffective government. If you believe malaise is "win-win", then you must certainly be resigned to thinking we are a nation that has already fallen. Such a reality, if manifest, would be quite unfortunate for those of us living in it.

 

[bshole]

A philandering sex offender... Bill Clinton? Hillary stands by sex offenders.

Bill was a philanderer however, he was only accused of being a sex offender. The allegations were not overly credible IMHO. He should be presumed innocent on the sex offender charge.

 

[glenn1]

Please. Some level of cooperation is necessary if we want the govt to work at all.

And a non-zero amount of trustworthiness is necessary to allow cooperation. Neither Trump nor Clinton possess even that.

 

[Jaskalas]

Please. Some level of cooperation is necessary if we want the govt to work at all.

I think we can agree. I find there is no voice of the voter if, after winning an election, the will of the voter can simply be ignored by non functioning government. Not even hearing a SCOTUS appointee is quite shameful, and I've been saying for a few years now that our nation cannot be governed in its current state.

How can we be a Democracy if our elections give no voice to our voters?

 

[bshole]

The... rage.. that pushes Trump towards the Presidency will not be sated by more failed policies, nor a crippled and ineffective government. If you believe malaise is "win-win", then you must certainly be resigned to thinking we are a nation that has already fallen. Such a reality, if manifest, would be quite unfortunate for those of us living in it.

"Effective" governments make new laws at a breakneck pace. Many times the new laws are worse than nothing being done at all. Bush was not gridlocked and he tanked the economy. Obama has been gridlocked and the economy has done very well.... at least that is my perception.

 

[glenn1]

The... rage.. that pushes Trump towards the Presidency will not be sated by more failed policies, nor a crippled and ineffective government. If you believe malaise is "win-win", then you must certainly be resigned to thinking we are a nation that has already fallen. Such a reality, if manifest, would be quite unfortunate for those of us living in it.

I disagree. There are sometimes elections where the American people would be best served if both primary candidates lost, were replaced, or if nothing else were ineffective. The Edwin Edwards vs. David Duke election ("vote for the crook, it's important") is a good example. Another is the 1972 POTUS election and we were better off for George Wallace being knocked out via assassination attempt and then having Ford later assume the Presidency.

 

[bshole]

I disagree. There are sometimes elections where the American people would be best served if both primary candidates lost, were replaced, or if nothing else were ineffective. The Edwin Edwards vs. David Duke election ("vote for the crook, it's important") is a good example. Another is the 1972 POTUS election and we were better off for George Wallace being knocked out via assassination attempt and then having Ford later assume the Presidency.

In another words...... it is a damn shame that we don't have Bernie Sanders on the ballot. I concur.

 

[Jhhnn]

And a non-zero amount of trustworthiness is necessary to allow cooperation. Neither Trump nor Clinton possess even that.

More bullshit. It certainly doesn't explain Repub obstructionism of the last 8 years.