Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
The Tragic Death of the Republican Party The Tragic Death of the Republican Party

06-22-2017 , 09:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trolly McTrollson
I never go in to POG; do all the posters there go on these day-long turbo-posting binges? Seems exhausting.
That's how you end up with 70k posts.
06-22-2017 , 09:51 PM
The most recent werewolf game had over 50 people. On the first day each person posted more than 100 times on average.

Sort by post count, become werewolf expert.
07-17-2017 , 09:11 PM
That Joe Scarborough letter in the Washington Post, after him being berated by trump on Twitter, and responding in lots of interviews, some with Mika present, was so damn crushung
07-18-2017 , 10:08 PM
Quote:
Republicans condemn all lower-income programs as welfare because they’re kind of welfare-dependent themselves. After the 1996 reform ended “welfare as we know it” by imposing time limits on cash assistance, Republicans lost a campaign theme they’d come to rely on. They were like a dog chasing a car that suddenly stopped. So they defined welfare down. They began by shifting their ire to food stamps; they experimented with redirecting it to unemployment benefits; and eventually they simply pathologized all means-tested benefits, even though most had never particularly troubled them before. The more Republicans can persuade Democrats to accept needed income-contingent reforms to Medicare and Social Security, the more they can build support to eliminate these “welfare” programs, too. I don’t know how conscious this bait-and-switch is, but does that even matter? The GOP is dominated by ideologues whose every reflex is to shrink government as much as possible.

Why can’t Republicans let go of the welfare issue? The answer, I’m afraid, isn’t nice. For nearly half a century, the party has derived at least some of its appeal by scapegoating the poor as dusky, lazy good-for-nothings undeserving of your tax dollars. Today’s Republicans continue that tradition by inviting whiter and more affluent Medicare and Social Security recipients to feel superior to the welfare hordes (even as they edge toward trimming their benefits). Even Ronald Reagan paid lip service to the “social safety net.” But in today’s GOP, the only reason to mention that net is to suggest we cut there first.
https://newrepublic.com/article/1127...welfare-queens
07-18-2017 , 10:24 PM
I don't think its fair to call Republicans ideologues anymore. They don't really believe in their own talking points on healthcare, they don't believe in Trump on immigration etc. Like right wing media, its better for them to be out of power and complain because dems can't magically fix everything.
07-19-2017 , 06:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecriture d'adulte
I don't think its fair to call Republicans ideologues anymore. They don't really believe in their own talking points on healthcare, they don't believe in Trump on immigration etc. Like right wing media, its better for them to be out of power and complain because dems can't magically fix everything.
They're absolutely ideologues. Even more so than the Democrats. What they want is for rent seeking to be the only viable means of increasing wealth. Nothing else matters.
07-19-2017 , 06:50 PM
in order to be an ideologue, you have to at least maintain some level of consistency and conviction to the ideals you allegedly hold
07-19-2017 , 09:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by +rep_lol
in order to be an ideologue, you have to at least maintain some level of consistency and conviction to the ideals you allegedly hold
Lying to get what you want doesn't mean you're not an idealogue
07-20-2017 , 09:59 AM
i mean it kinda does actually, if the things you're lying about are related to the supposed ideals that you hold
07-20-2017 , 08:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by vaya
They're absolutely ideologues. Even more so than the Democrats. What they want is for rent seeking to be the only viable means of increasing wealth. Nothing else matters.
They are partisans, not ideologues. The problem is that Trump isn't really an ideologue, and the longer he is in office the more the party will be identified with him.
07-25-2017 , 04:15 PM
Quote:
"Vote for the Id" would make a pretty solid tagline for Republican politics circa 2017. The policy conversations and conflicts and basic premises that once governed conservatism — or at least appeared to — have been largely replaced by a set of principles built on the rock-solid foundation of irritating liberals.

After winning a presidential election with a candidate who had no serious conservative bona fides, the Republican Party has come to an important conclusion: Conservatism doesn't sell all that well. Telling Americans in desperate need of affordable health care that free markets will somehow sort it out someday is not a popular policy prescription — and Republicans have essentially given up on trying to enact those changes in the first place, settling instead for gesturing dismissively in its general direction. It turns out that many people, including President Donald Trump, kind of like Big Government, especially when a six-figure hospital bill is staring them down.

So amid the quagmire of the Obamacare repeal effort, Republicans are learning once more that being opposed to something is far easier than building consensus in support of something else. And fortunately for their party, plenty of voters also seem to enjoy focusing their searing anger onto other people and relishing in their apparent suffering, conservative values be damned.
https://www.buzzfeed.com/janecoaston...Z3E#.jkr8Y0wXQ
07-25-2017 , 11:39 PM
Bannon is an ideologue. Miller too probably but i dont know as much about him. Republicans got a few around and and unfortunately they are whispering in trumps ear and writing his speeches.
07-26-2017 , 11:25 AM
Steve Bannon and Matt Groening look very similar.
10-09-2017 , 05:02 PM
Darrell Issa doing a town hall!

...by live telephone call!
10-09-2017 , 06:06 PM
So brave.
10-10-2017 , 02:35 AM
The GOP death scene is more epic than that of any thought-he-was-dead-but-he's-back-in-even-worse-form movie villain. It's like Monty Python's Black Knight. "You may have cut off my arms and legs, but I'll return as Donald Trump and bite you nads off!" "I will start fights with a 2 person majority GOP Senate and then have my chief political strategist primary all the sitting senators from my party." "How you like that? More like the Epic death of the GOP!"
12-18-2017 , 10:11 AM
Welp, losing AL senate race isn't death, but it's a lot more than a sprained ankle. A mild heart attack that can be fixed with a little surgical intervention? Of course, Trump is more akin to a few Big Macs a day than surgical intervention.

This kind of poll looks like a possible extinction level event, or at least an evolutionary bottleneck. I think this thread may have been started a little before its time. (It was started at the correct time, but events have had to continue to unfold to highlight its accuracy).

12-18-2017 , 12:57 PM
Those numbers will become closer once Moore is forgotten and another Muslim blows himself up.
12-18-2017 , 01:10 PM
I think centrists constantly assuming the population will turn right after a Muslim terrorist attack are either telling on themselves or badly misreading the populace.

Here is my proof. There were TWO terrorist attacks by Muslims in New York City within the last few months. Without looking it up:

1) How many people died

2) What month did each of them occur in
12-18-2017 , 01:16 PM
I would not classify myself as a centrist.

That said, it is true that I could be misreading people. I'm 3,000+ miles away and left the country before Trump was even inaugurated (I'll be returning for the first time since later this week). So my perspective on this could be very outdated.

We've had enough media exposure to terror attacks that we're desensitized to attacks that years ago would be front page news for days. I'm currently in London and if a terrorist slashed a few people with a knife here, I doubt it would bother most of the populace for any longer than a few hours.
12-18-2017 , 03:28 PM
Yeah we'd have to be talking a massive scale attack to really move the needle. And to be honest in that scenario, the neolibs would just embrace the reactive war monger they all have inside and there wouldn't be a massive right vs left difference to really turn the tide.
12-18-2017 , 06:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyWf
I think centrists constantly assuming the population will turn right after a Muslim terrorist attack are either telling on themselves or badly misreading the populace.

Here is my proof. There were TWO terrorist attacks by Muslims in New York City within the last few months. Without looking it up:

1) How many people died

2) What month did each of them occur in
One was earlier this month, in the subway, a suicide bomber that failed to even kill himself, so 0 deaths.

The other one was the rented box truck driving down the sidewalk, I think it was in October because I remember it being within a day on either side of Halloween or on Halloween. So I have a 67% chance going October. I don't think there were any deaths, but it's possible there were a few. I want to say like 10-12 injured.

Edited to add: Looked it up now, shocked how far off I was on one aspect of one of the attacks.
12-18-2017 , 06:56 PM
I seem to remember something about an orange dude shooting up people on 5th Ave. Seems like that was a while ago and I don't think anyone died, but idk.
12-19-2017 , 11:48 PM
Basically all the people who are susceptible to fearmongering about Muslims have been at Defcon 1 on that **** for like the last decade. The "but what if a Muslim does X?" **** isn't a hypothetical about the future and a rightward shift, Donald ****ing Trump is President. It already happened. It ain't getting worse.

      
m