Post New

I mean REAL Republicans, not MAGA cultists.

Because we are now seeing more and more of the true conservatives coming out against Trump. Many who worked with Trump in his first administration know what a danger he is to our country and are speaking out against him.

But the partisans on the right who are on this board seem to support him no matter what.

Nope.

Ronald Reagan would be considered a "radical left lunatic," by todays MAGA sect.

Reagan signed a bill granting amnesty to nearly three million "pet eating" illegal immigrants, an action that would outrage todays MAGA sect.
"I believe in the idea of amnesty for those who have put down roots and lived here for some time and may have entered illegally." ~Reagan

As governor of California, Reagan signed a restrictive gun control law, an action that would outrage todays MAGA sect.

Before Roe v. Wade, Reagan signed a law expanding abortion access in California, an action that would outrage todays MAGA sect.

Reagan raised taxes. Signed the Tax Reform Act of 1986, which imposed the largest corporate tax increase in history at the time, an action that would outrage todays MAGA sect.

Reagan was known for his ability to work with political opponents and maintain civility in discourse, traits that are not allowed in todays "enemy within" "lock her up" MAGA sect.

Given his history of compromise and some of his more liberal positions, Reagan would be labeled a "RINO" and booted to the curb by todays MAGA sect.
(See Cheney. Romney, McCain, Christine Todd Whitman, Colin Powell, George Will, etc.)

It's a shame what the dong-obsessed fry chef has done to the GOP and America.

The same Liberals lecturing Republicans .....

Trashed Romney.

Trashed W Bush.

Trashed Cheney.

Trashed Reagan.

Trashed Nixon.

REAL REPJUBLICANS?

It's corporatist oil drilling anti immigrant Leftists now....

BTW- Bill Clinton, JFK...... hard time winning on the Left these days too :O
\
I love it - it means tribalism and violence is coming in a most structural and normalized way.

Patience is a virtue.

Reagan raised taxes. Signed the Tax Reform Act of 1986, which imposed the largest corporate tax increase in history at the time,

Let’s not whitewash this bill. It was a tax cut for the wealthy, not a tax increase. Yes, there were some tax increases, but those are far smaller than the cuts it contained.

—Peter

The left has always been one running logical fallacy. When you can't or won't articulate a position on anything and can't close the sale on convincing someone of something based on the merits of your arguments, you resort to

Dishonest premises
Flat out lying
Strawmen
Poisoning the Well
Ad Hominems

and now...Appeals to Authority.

In this case, the lib holds up some skunk Republican by the tail and says "See? This skunk is a Republican and it's voting for day drunk Kamala Harris! Don't you want to be a skunk, too? All real Republicans are skunks!"

They can have Liz Cheney, Adam Kinzinger, Bill Kristol, Jonah Goldberg, and whomever else they want. We'll take Tulsi Gabbard, Danica Patrick and RFK.

Great trade.

Reagan raised taxes. Signed the Tax Reform Act of 1986, which imposed the largest corporate tax increase in history at the time,

Let’s not whitewash this bill. It was a tax cut for the wealthy, not a tax increase. Yes, there were some tax increases, but those are far smaller than the cuts it contained.
**

LUCKILY America went Reagan.

While the Soviets went Liberal - with Gorbachev and communism.

The results to this day - good and bad - are apparent.

"Waaa Waaa I miss the old Republican Party but it's all fake. I still can't help but whine about Reagan Nixon bush Romney McCain. I only like them when they are polite in defeat"

Relax GOP'er. Kamala Harris is as Conservative as George W Bush - you're in good hands.

*giggle* so is Climate Change and national debt - with any luck one day at 200% GDP :)

Strawmen

No, in this area you are King, the Master. You do this every other post it seems. You'll declare what Libs believe and no "Lib" on the board personally knows anyone who believes that, including me. But you'll keep believing it and down the road you'll bring it up again.

MAGA and gop have no differentiation.
check the registered approval rate.

those hypocrites recently opposing trump set all the conditions for his emergence.
'give him a chance' they all said, wanting the win far above country.
even pathetic david brooks, the pbs 'moderate'.

This was an exercise on the "no true Scotsman" fallacy. The party has evolved, as parties tend to do. The question may have been better phrased as "any classic Republicans on this board". Those people have largely been pushed out over the past 10 years or so, as the Republican party has become a less business-centric party, and a more isolationist party**. MAGA is the Rep party now. They just kept the old name.




**Which sort of goes hand-in-hand. If you're pro-business, you're less tolerant of anything that gets in the way of that, including foreign activities that may impede business. De-emphasizing business seems to mean less interest in foreign matters.

Peter: "Let’s not whitewash this bill. It was a tax cut for the wealthy, not a tax increase."

Yes, this is true, certainly not trying to whitewash it.
The point I was trying to make was that Reagans Tax Reform Act of 1986 included many things that would make todays MAGA sect flip their hoods!

Examples:
The act mandated that capital gains be taxed at the same rate as ordinary income, raising the maximum tax rate on long-term capital gains to 28% from 20%.
It expanded the AMT, the least tax that an individual or corporation must pay after all eligible exclusions, credits, and deductions have been taken.
It eliminated the partial tax exclusion of dividends received by individuals.
It also reduced the allowances for certain business expenses, such as business meals, travel, and entertainment and restricted deductions for certain other expenses.
It Lengthened depreciation schedules for business assets. This slowed down the rate at which companies could deduct the cost of capital investments.
The act significantly expanded the Earned Income Tax Credit, which provides tax benefits to low-income working families:
The EITC became the largest cash transfer program for lower-income families at the federal level. Almost two-thirds of single low-income mothers faced no tax burden on their income from work after this expansion.

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/t/taxreformact1...

No, in this area you are King, the Master. You do this every other post it seems. You'll declare what Libs believe and no "Lib" on the board personally knows anyone who believes that, including me. But you'll keep believing it and down the road you'll bring it up again.

LOL. That's because I have a 20 year history with many of the people who post here.

I know who you people are. I know what you think and how you think it. Many of you are so ridiculously transparent you might as well be walking panes of glass.

Then I have who you support and what *those folks* do and say while in office. The policies they implement. The results that happen.

I witness all of it.

And then I come back here, and I point out the flaming bag of elephant sh1t that the stuff you people vote for produces...and rub your noses in it.

That's what sets you off.

**Which sort of goes hand-in-hand. If you're pro-business, you're less tolerant of anything that gets in the way of that, including foreign activities that may impede business. De-emphasizing business seems to mean less interest in foreign matters.

I will grant you this point, with some modifications.
The GOP has traditionally oscillated between having an interventionalist viewpoint to an isolationist one to an interventionalist one and now is going back towards isolationism.

Pre-World War I under William McKinley/Teddy Roosevelt/William Howard Taft: Build the Panama canal, sail the Great White Fleet around the world, expand American colonial influence by force, enforce the Monroe doctrine. (Interventionalist)

Post-World War I under Warren Harding/Calvin Coolidge/Herbert Hoover: More isolationist, let's not get involved in another European-origin world war; heed Washington's advice. Let the League of Nations die. (Isolationist)

Post-World War II under Eisenhower/Nixon/Ford/Reagan/Bush41: Maintain the balance of Superpowers. Check the Soviet Union and the Easter Bloc. Stop the spread of communism, by force if need be. (Interventionalist)

Post Cold War under Bush43: Intervene to stop the spread of global terrorism by terrorist proto-states. (Interventionalist)

Post Global War on Terror under Trump: No foreign wars. Re-examine trade relationships to repatriate America's manufacturing base. Pivot confrontational posture towards China. (Mix of both, with isolationist bent)

The GOP follows an historical pattern: Intervention until trauma happens, then retrenches in an isolationist direction.

You may disagree with the latter, but Trump clearly recognizes that China is America's #1 threat and has always said so.

This was an exercise on the "no true Scotsman" fallacy.

LOL Kinda...
Although, I think examining how far the GOP has moved to the right in the last 30 years is a useful and interesting exercise.
Any further and they'll be smack dab in small mustache territory!

Check it...

"You know, Hitler did some good things, too." ~Trump

Army Gen. Mark A. Milley, who served as Trump’s chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said that Trump was "fascist to the core" and "the most dangerous person to this country."

Retired Gen. Jim Mattis, who worked as U.S. secretary of defense under Trump, reportedly later said he agreed with Milley’s assessment.

"He certainly prefers the dictators approach to government." ~John Kelly, the retired Marine general who worked for Trump in the White House from 2017 to 2019

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/trump-said-h...

LOL. That's because I have a 20 year history with many of the people who post here.

I know who you people are. I know what you think and how you think it. Many of you are so ridiculously transparent you might as well be walking panes of glass.

And you still manufacture things no one supports and claim people here do. So I would say you have a 20 year history of doing this, because you think you know what everyone believes, or, more likely, that's a smokescreen for you to do and say whatever you want to say..

And you still manufacture things no one supports and claim people here do.

I don't manufacture anything.
What I find is that few liberals really and truly want to go on the record about what they really believe. They find it easier and safer to be ambiguous and pretend to never hold the extreme positions they agitate for.

That makes the inevitable flip-flopping and running away So. Much. Easier. Emphasis on "running away", because there's no measure of velocity to describe how quickly you people zoom in the other direction when you're proven wrong on something.

Take a look at your Presidential candidate as Exhibit A!

LOL @u.

That's because I have a 20 year history

There’s a big difference between 20 years of experience and one year of experience repeated 20 times.

—Peter

Hello Dope1.....

Kamala Harris goes to "world salad" when she doesn't want to answer questions.

Who said that?

Dope1 or David Axelrod:)

ah, by 'classic republicans' you mean those non-trumpers that abscond any responsibility for the current state of the GOP since the tea party appeared.

although i am not sure (i.e., skeptical) what types of groups opposing trump have any impact on the critical swing-state undecideds, i welcome any and all, regardless of past and present proclivities, compared to the threat of a trump win.

Dope1 or David Axelrod:)

Heh.
I do have to tip my cap to CharNPC and a couple of others here: they just insist on using their personal thimbles to try to bail water out of the USS Kamala Harris as it takes on more and more water. No matter how ridiculous they make themselves look, they keep at it. Bravo.

There are a dozen threads I could have started about Harris and the ludicrous campaign she’s running but I invoked my own personal mercy rule weeks ago, not unlike a high school football game that’s using a running clock.

Even if Harris manages to be dragged across the finish line by the local democrat machines she’ll have no mandate and no enthusiasm.

Even if Harris manages to be dragged across the finish line by the local democrat machines she’ll have no mandate and no enthusiasm.

Well, there’s your perception and there’s reality. Clearly, these are 2 different things.

Harris has raised over $1 billion so far.

Now, some details. Small donors accounted for 23% of the overall fundraising in the 2020 federal elections.

In July, we know that the Harris campaign reported 94% of the contributions were under $200 each, and two-thirds were from first-time donors.

In September, the Harris campaign raised $221.8 million, while the Trump campaign raised $62.7 million.

While Musk and other billionaires continue to bribe, er…… donate, to Trump representing a handful of voters.

Harris’ donations are mostly from small donors, representing millions of voters.

Harris doesn’t have to use illegal bribes to motivate her voters. They’re actually excited to vote for her.

Facts have a liberal bias.

Harris has raised over $1 billion so far.

So? Are you saying you're going to buy votes? Careful admitting that out in the open.

In July, we know that the Harris campaign reported 94% of the contributions were under $200 each, and two-thirds were from first-time donors.

So it's your contention that Harris is SO AMAZINGLY POPULAR that all this money is just POURING IN from little guys all over the place.

The sad thing is, you probably believe this; liberals lie to themselves before they go out and lie to everyone else.

They’re actually excited to vote for her.

I know! It really comes through in these town halls, doesn't it? You can feel the joy as she shouts FASCISTHITLERNAZIPUTINRUSSIARUSSIARUSSIA from the podium.

Facts have a liberal bias.

Facts don't, but delusion does.

Even if Harris manages to be dragged across the finish line by the local democrat machines she’ll have no mandate and no enthusiasm.


You live in an alternate reality. Sad.

If Trump wins the electoral college votes and loses the popular vote (again), he will claim a overwhelming victory and a mandate to turn the US into an authoritarian state.

So? Are you saying you're going to buy votes?

No, I never said or implied that. I assume you’re confusing me with Elon Musk who is actually (and illegally) buying votes for Trump.

So it's your contention that Harris is SO AMAZINGLY POPULAR that all this money is just POURING IN from little guys all over the place.

No, it’s not my contention. You need to improve your reading skills. This is being reported in sites such as Forbes and the Christian Science Monitor, hardly liberal news sources (and neither of them have had to pay over three quarters of a billion dollars for repeatedly telling outright lies).

It’s a free country (so far) so you can continue to report your feelings, but I prefer to report facts.


https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2024/10/...

https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2024/0913/c...

No, I never said or implied that

You're the one throwing the money number around in a Phairly Phallic way, not me. Is that how you're measuring stuff?

Weird.

No, it’s not my contention.

LOL. You're the one bragging about small donors and this amazingly huge money pile that The Little Guys And Gals Of America (allegedly) have given to Harris. What other conclusion would one draw?

I didn't challenge the number, so it's curious why you think defending the sourcing buys you anything. It doesn't.

Learn logic, then learn how to argue. You're deficient at both.

I prefer to report facts.

I see. So your posts are basically what you think are statements of "2+2=4! 2+2=4!" and don't actually contribute to any kind of conclusion-drawing or broader discussion. Hey, baby, whatever gets you out of bed in the morning.

I have to warn you, the market for Posting The Irrelevant Fact has already been cornered by ChatNPC, and he's got a near monopoly on it. I don't think that's a business model that posters with something real to say ought to jump in to.

ah, by 'classic republicans' you mean those non-trumpers that abscond any responsibility for the current state of the GOP since the tea party appeared.

Sort of. Many/most of them retired and/or died. How many Reps retired since 2016 due to populist MAGA bull-excrement? I never voted for him, but I know Jeff Flake quit because he didn't recognize or identify with the values of the MAGA party. McCain died. Cheney was tossed out.

There are very few classic Reps left in office. It's just MAGA now, rebranded as "Republican".

I was still a Republican when the TEA party thing happened. I thought they were misguided. Then McCain lost the primary in 2000...it wasn't long after that that I realized the Party had evolved in a direction that didn't align with me. Now they aren't even on the same planet as me.

Dope1,

The first part of your post accuses me of drawing a conclusion about facts and the second part of your post accuses me of never drawing a conclusion.

I wonder why no one takes you seriously.

The first part of your post accuses me of drawing a conclusion about facts and the second part of your post accuses me of never drawing a conclusion.

I asked you a question, which you decided to reply to with snark.

Since that's how you want to play the game, that's how the game shall be played.

Don't hate the player. Hate what you bring to the game.

I wonder why no one takes you seriously.

Oh, noes! Man, this just stings to read. You people know how much of my self-esteem I measure by the thoughtful things you lot post here.

"I was still a Republican when the TEA party thing happened. I thought they were misguided."


I have 1 enduring memory of the tea party. They held a local rally in my town, outside of the Post Office, and I walked down there. Many men who looked infirm, a few lugging oxygen tanks behind their wheelchair(s), and all of them old and most certainly on Medicare or Medicaid Disability. They held up signs stating: Keep the Government out of My Health Care. They were
most certainly on Government Health Care, but they wanted the Government to keep out of that Health Care,lol. I had zero respect for the tea party after that. Bunch of poor fools doing the bidding of the Koch brothers and other billionaires. Didn't think the GOP could do worse than that, but they proved me wrong with the current version, it's much worse.

Bunch of poor fools doing the bidding of the Koch brothers and other billionaires. Didn't think the GOP could do worse than that, but they proved me wrong with the current version, it's much worse.
****

Luckily Kamala Harris is doing nothing with or for billionaires.

Mind you she's with George W Bush on the stuff Big Corporations and Billionaires care about.

But that's ok. She's not Trump.

W wins.

Did you people ever think you'd be Bush and Wolfowitz and Cheney?

I remember a few things about the TEA party. One was what you described. I still remember the sign "keep the government out of my Medicare". That was hysterical, in a sardonic and sad way. They clearly were clueless, and would be an argument for having poll exams before you can vote (yeah, it's unconstitutional).

I also remember that some of the TEA party elected decided to live in the Capitol, as was originally intended. Congressional offices have small apartments attached to them for the officials to sleep. Most use them for storage, and buy opulent houses in nearby VA. Several TEA party folks cleaned out those rooms and moved in. What I really remember is other members of Congress objected to that, and tried to stop it. The reaction to the TEA party members was both funny and annoying, implying a level of entitlement among most congress-slime. I sometimes think that's the one thing the TEA party got right: require members to live in the building in the rooms provided for that purpose. (We could then cut their salaries, since at least once in the past I heard the argument that congresspeople needed more money because they had to maintain a second home in the DC area...which it turns out, they don't have to do that.)

Harris has raised over $1 billion so far.
***

And I'm sure it went to a good cause.

And I'm sure it went to a good cause.

That WAS impressive. Raised a billion dollars and spent ALL OF IT in merely 107 days. In fact, Harris’ campaign is somehow $20 million in the red.

Fiscal incompetence has a liberal bias.

In fact, Harris’ campaign is somehow $20 million in the red.

Fiscal incompetence has a liberal bias.

Harris should follow Trump's M.O. and just stiff whoever is owed.

Yes!

Kamala supporters are prolly republicans :)

They love wars, oil, fracking, corporations, Goldman Sachs, Wall Street, favored tax treatment for upper income white people.

Plenty of republicans here.

Harris should follow Trump's M.O. and just stiff whoever is owed. - sano

----------

Do not despair, Harris' campaign is busy raising donations that are being described as going into a recount fund. I wonder where that money goes if there are no recounts?

In fact, Harris’ campaign is somehow $20 million in the red. Fiscal incompetence has a liberal bias.

Can we rename this board? I was thinking, "Liberals Explain How The World Works To MAGAS" would be suitable...

Reality check...
Don't like massive debt and deficits? Don't vote for the GOP.

George Bush (41) took the deficit to -$300 billion per year.

Clinton got it to zero. During his presidency, Clinton managed to zero out the deficit and end his term with a +$128 billion per year surplus.

Lil' Bush (43) went from a surplus to -$1.4 trillion per year.

Obama halved it to -$600 billion per year.

Trump then ramped the deficit up to an unheard of $2 Trillion per year!
The national debt rose by $8 trillion during Trump’s time in office. That amounts to $23,500 in new federal debt for every person in the country. (Including Babies!)
He also lost lost millions of American jobs. He was THE WORST JOBS PRESIDENT IN MODERN HISTORY. Sad!

"The amount he's added to the national debt is indecent." ~Mike Pompeo (Life long Republican with an IQ over 80.)

Who in their right mind would want four more years of that?
Oh never mind...

Money goes to "Kamala's" hotel fund.

If one checks her out a bit - - she loves spending other people's money on that stuff.


Either way, Hillary Clinton NEVER will be President.

And Kamala Harris will never be saluted.

Politically at this point - I guess all I want is a Cherry Coke and I'm good.

Who in their right mind would want four more years of that?

But, but, but... my groceries and gas were cheaper under Trump, and he says he's going to bring that back! That's all I care about, and of course closing the "wide open border" that I've been told we have (but really don't). Many voting Americans are clearly idiots.

Trump then ramped the deficit up to an unheard of $2 Trillion per year!
The national debt rose by $8 trillion during Trump’s time in office. That amounts to $23,500 in new federal debt for every person in the country. (Including Babies!)
He also lost lost millions of American jobs. He was THE WORST JOBS PRESIDENT IN MODERN HISTORY. Sad!

"The amount he's added to the national debt is indecent." ~Mike Pompeo (Life long Republican with an IQ over 80.)

But, according to some, "he has a proven track record". [..."of success" was implied here] I took that quote from this very board. I didn't bother to reply because it was absurd on the face of it; like saying "the sky is green". The only "proven track record" was tax cuts for billionaires, heavier taxes on lower income classes, fiscal irresponsibility, alienating allies while encouraging enemies, reckless disregard for national security...the list is long, and none of it is positive. Even a broken clock is correct twice a day, but the convict couldn't even manage to equal a broken clock.

But, but, but... my groceries and gas were cheaper under Trump, and he says he's going to bring that back! That's all I care about, and of course closing the "wide open border" that I've been told we have (but really don't). Many voting Americans are clearly idiots.
***

Non Club 401K America, wants more affordable eats.

Non Club 401K America, wants less illegal immigrants.

And for that they are "clearly idiots"


Signed, the true Haters of Democracy - Liberals. We love Democracy almost as much as we love people of color, as they are referred to - by us.

But, according to some, "he has a proven track record".

He does, that quote was mine.
The country was in a FAR better place when he was running things.

Lots of work to do.

Fortunately, you'll benefit from it.

...to say nothing of the fiscal incompetence and business failures in his personal management of the Trump "empire".

fd

...to say nothing of the fiscal incompetence and business failures in his personal management of the Trump "empire".

fd

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

Better to be governed by career politicians who never had to operate a business, meet payroll, keep up with regulations, and produce a service or product that customers will choose to buy. All the time being vilified as greedy exploiters by liberal politicians.

"...to say nothing of the fiscal incompetence and business failures in his personal management of the Trump "empire"."

America has hitched it's wagon to a self-proclaimed "genius" who managed to bankrupt 3 casinos.
Such a "stellar" record of accomplishment. In 2019, a look back at Trump's IRS filings showed:

A quick google search: https://www.google.com/search?q=did+trump+have+lar...
"In 2019, The New York Times obtained partial information from transcripts of Trump's IRS Form 1040s (the main personal federal tax form) from 1985 to 1994, revealing that during that time Trump lost $1.17 billion—the most of almost any individual U.S. taxpayer"

Trump has been quoted as stating that he luvs debt, that nobody uses debt better than him.
His "magic move" in that regard, his nobody uses debt better move, is to declare BK, stiff
creditors, stiff contractors, stiff working class people, stiff........everybody."

Just my opinion, but America FA'd, and America is going to FO. Truly hope I'm wrong.
I despise Trump, but if any of his wild-azz plans end up actually helping the Country,
I'll give him credit for it. And will surely give him blame if those same plans hurt
the Country.

I voted for 3 Republicans last week, they were running locally. Researched all of the candidates
before voting via looking over the sample ballot that was available, anybody that expressed any MAGA tendencies were tossed with extreme prejudice.

The 3 GOP I voted for were the best candidates in those local races.

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

Better to be governed by career politicians who never had to operate a business,

I’m beginning to believe the truth of that statement.

The two enterprises demand different skill sets. It’s increasingly evident that Trump’s skill set does not include “governing”.

In any event, he failed as a businessman as well. Whatever successes he had stemmed from fraud, bankruptcy, stiffing contractors and the prolific use of lawyers and lawsuits. And of course- turd polishing

And that is exactly the skillset he employs in governing.

I’m beginning to believe the truth of that statement.

The two enterprises demand different skill sets. I

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
Funny, and scary - at the same time.

I’m beginning to believe the truth of that statement.

I absolutely believe the truth of that statement. Running a business and running a government are completely different. They have different objectives, and in a democracy, different organizational structures. A business is an authoritarian venture. Your boss tells you to do something, you do it or get fired. There is no voting, except maybe at the level of the board of directors (if there is one).

And, as you pointed out, the convict was a failure as a businessman, as well. He should have taken his inheritance, invested it in an index fund, and played golf all day. He'd have been better off financially, rather than pretending he knew anything about business (which he doesn't).

Frankly, lawyers are better at governing. They will tend to have a closer match to the skillsets required for good governance.

Better to be governed by career politicians who never had to operate a business, meet payroll, keep up with regulations, and produce a service or product that customers will choose to buy.

So many absurdities, softballs packed into one sentence.

I’m beginning to believe the truth of that statement.

It's absolutely correct. Which is not to say that any particular individual can't be good in both arenas. There is certainly some overlap in the leadership skills. But there are also significant differences.

Business leaders tend to come through marketing and sales, and likely have studied business in college.

Political leaders tend to come through law, and likely have studied public policy in college.

--Peter

Post New

US Policy FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.