pr0ner wrote: ↑Mon Jul 20, 2020 9:02 am
Sometimes progressives want to eat their own. John Kasich has been invited to speak at the Democratic National Convention on Biden's behalf.
Is this really the progressives eating their own? The only moderate Republican they could find is Kasich? I have no problem with him personally but I'm also not female.
The progressives comment is directed to the negative response to the Kasich invite because how dare Biden invite someone who isn't 100% pro-choice to speak. I think it's brilliant that Biden wants Kasich to speak - this is the kind of thing that appeals to me as someone who voted for Kasich in the 2016 GOP primary.
I know. You seem to be totally missing the legitimate issue raised that some might have with the invite. It isn't brilliant at all. It is tone deaf.
I certainly get why some people would really dislike Kasich, and why it would get some people upset. But the outrage is somewhat contingent on the logic that inviting someone to speak means endorsing all of their views. Kasich would be there to speak to disaffected Republicans, particularly in the midwest (and especially Ohio). I'm sure that they would make sure that he's not going to make a pro-life pitch as part of his speech (and I doubt that he would do that anyway.
Anyway, if you follow the logic that inviting Kasich is a betrayal of the pro-choice view, then it would quickly become impossible to have a convention anyway, given the coalition nature of the Democratic Party. There are non-trivial numbers of pro-life Democrats, and there are going to be many many speakers with pro-choice views at the convention. Same with a lot of issues - to put together a national coalition, you need to include people who are going to strongly disagree on some issues but are willing to come together on others.
Jesus christ on a stick. I agree in general but Kasich *in particular* is not palatable to *many* probably *most Females* in the party and is also anti-LGBT to boot. This isn't a hard one. Seriously. This feels like a decision made without a single female voice in the room.
I'm glad that you are open to differing views.
Anyway, I am curious what the answer to my question about which moderate Republicans you think would be acceptable to speak at the convention.
pr0ner wrote: ↑Mon Jul 20, 2020 9:02 am
Sometimes progressives want to eat their own. John Kasich has been invited to speak at the Democratic National Convention on Biden's behalf.
Is this really the progressives eating their own? The only moderate Republican they could find is Kasich? I have no problem with him personally but I'm also not female.
The progressives comment is directed to the negative response to the Kasich invite because how dare Biden invite someone who isn't 100% pro-choice to speak. I think it's brilliant that Biden wants Kasich to speak - this is the kind of thing that appeals to me as someone who voted for Kasich in the 2016 GOP primary.
I know. You seem to be totally missing the legitimate issue raised that some might have with the invite. It isn't brilliant at all. It is tone deaf.
Scraper wrote: ↑Mon Jul 20, 2020 9:18 am
If Biden really wants to win this thing he needs to bring as many people under the tent as possible. The more moderate Republicans that he can bring in the better. And make no mistake about it, Kasich is a moderate Republican. One of his final acts as Governor was to Veto an Abortion Heartbeat bill because he thought it was overly restrictive and it would just cost the State litigation money as it would definitely be challenged all the way to the Supreme Court. His successor then signed it in as one of his first acts as Governor.
Edit: My bad. I guess I'm not seeing it strongly enough from the male perspective. Any moderate Republican even at the cost of one of the top female issues. Got it.
This is the type of thinking that has lead the Republican party down the Trump path that they are on. Anyone who disagrees with Trump is silenced, fired or ridiculed. Tow the party line or get out. My hope if that the Democrat party resists this type of group think and instead welcomes people who truly want to make a difference, even if it is just temporary. Or they can go the opposite way and just cancel everything that doesn't line up with them 100%.
I also find it really hard to believe that anyone with critical thinking skills could line up with either political party on all of their major issues. Abortion, guns, healthcare, budgets, taxes, social programs, etc.
pr0ner wrote: ↑Mon Jul 20, 2020 9:02 am
Sometimes progressives want to eat their own. John Kasich has been invited to speak at the Democratic National Convention on Biden's behalf.
Is this really the progressives eating their own? The only moderate Republican they could find is Kasich? I have no problem with him personally but I'm also not female.
The progressives comment is directed to the negative response to the Kasich invite because how dare Biden invite someone who isn't 100% pro-choice to speak. I think it's brilliant that Biden wants Kasich to speak - this is the kind of thing that appeals to me as someone who voted for Kasich in the 2016 GOP primary.
I know. You seem to be totally missing the legitimate issue raised that some might have with the invite. It isn't brilliant at all. It is tone deaf.
I certainly get why some people would really dislike Kasich, and why it would get some people upset. But the outrage is somewhat contingent on the logic that inviting someone to speak means endorsing all of their views. Kasich would be there to speak to disaffected Republicans, particularly in the midwest (and especially Ohio). I'm sure that they would make sure that he's not going to make a pro-life pitch as part of his speech (and I doubt that he would do that anyway.
Anyway, if you follow the logic that inviting Kasich is a betrayal of the pro-choice view, then it would quickly become impossible to have a convention anyway, given the coalition nature of the Democratic Party. There are non-trivial numbers of pro-life Democrats, and there are going to be many many speakers with pro-choice views at the convention. Same with a lot of issues - to put together a national coalition, you need to include people who are going to strongly disagree on some issues but are willing to come together on others.
Jesus christ on a stick. I agree in general but Kasich *in particular* is not palatable to *many* probably *most Females* in the party and is also anti-LGBT to boot. This isn't a hard one. Seriously. This feels like a decision made without a single female voice in the room.
I'm glad that you are open to differing views.
Anyway, I am curious what the answer to my question about which moderate Republicans you think would be acceptable to speak at the convention.
I don't know off the top of my head. All I'm saying is probably not a White Male who signed a 20-week abortion ban and anti-LGBT legislation in the last 4 years. I just mentioned it to my wife and she flat out said, "HELL NO...that's a really bad decision."
malchior wrote: ↑Mon Jul 20, 2020 10:03 amI don't know off the top of my head. All I'm saying is probably not a White Male who signed a 20-week abortion ban and anti-LGBT legislation in the last 4 years. I just mentioned it to my wife and she flat out said, "HELL NO...that's a really bad decision."
Take your time - no rush.
Anyway, my wife is fine with it, so we are at a female impasse.
Scraper wrote: ↑Mon Jul 20, 2020 9:59 am
This is the type of thinking that has lead the Republican party down the Trump path that they are on. Anyone who disagrees with Trump is silenced, fired or ridiculed. Tow the party line or get out. My hope if that the Democrat party resists this type of group think and instead welcomes people who truly want to make a difference, even if it is just temporary. Or they can go the opposite way and just cancel everything that doesn't line up with them 100%.
I also find it really hard to believe that anyone with critical thinking skills could line up with either political party on all of their major issues. Abortion, guns, healthcare, budgets, taxes, social programs, etc.
I respectfully disagree. This type of thinking is why Democrats run people like Hillary Clinton. I'm not saying that reaching out to moderates is a bad idea or that they have to support every issue. My comment is about JOHN KASICH. Period. If you don't get it, go talk to a female who knows what he has stood for. If they don't know him well, start out by explaining that he is a Moderate Republican but he signed a 20-week abortion ban and anti-LGBT legislation recently. Seriously. That's the problem in a nutshell. There has to be someone better out there.
Scraper wrote: ↑Mon Jul 20, 2020 9:59 am
This is the type of thinking that has lead the Republican party down the Trump path that they are on. Anyone who disagrees with Trump is silenced, fired or ridiculed. Tow the party line or get out. My hope if that the Democrat party resists this type of group think and instead welcomes people who truly want to make a difference, even if it is just temporary. Or they can go the opposite way and just cancel everything that doesn't line up with them 100%.
I also find it really hard to believe that anyone with critical thinking skills could line up with either political party on all of their major issues. Abortion, guns, healthcare, budgets, taxes, social programs, etc.
I respectfully disagree. This type of thinking is why Democrats run people like Hillary Clinton. I'm not saying that reaching out to moderates is a bad idea or that they have to support every issue. My comment is about JOHN KASICH. Period. If you don't get it, go talk to a female who knows what he has stood for. If they don't know him well, start out by explaining that he is a Moderate Republican but he signed a 20-week abortion ban and anti-LGBT legislation recently. Seriously. That's the problem in a nutshell. There has to be someone better out there.
You're right. That's the problem. If you don't agree 100% with the party line, you're not worthy of having a voice at all.
Black Lives Matter
"To wield Grond, the mighty hammer of the Federal Government, is to be intoxicated with power beyond what you and I can reckon (though I figure we can ball park it pretty good with computers and maths). Need to tunnel through a mountain? Grond. Kill a mighty ogre? Grond. Hangnail? Grond. Spider? Grond (actually, that's a legit use, moreso than the rest)." - Peacedog
malchior wrote: ↑Mon Jul 20, 2020 10:03 amI don't know off the top of my head. All I'm saying is probably not a White Male who signed a 20-week abortion ban and anti-LGBT legislation in the last 4 years. I just mentioned it to my wife and she flat out said, "HELL NO...that's a really bad decision."
Take your time - no rush.
Anyway, my wife is fine with it, so we are at a female impasse.
Fair enough. Obviously not a scientific poll.
It doesn't hurt to say this started as push back on how this is "progressives eating their own". I think we'll hear a decent amount of give and take on this one but a lot of people just trust the party. That's great but there are people outside the fold who'll be much more critical of things like this where the issue matters to them.
Last edited by malchior on Mon Jul 20, 2020 10:23 am, edited 1 time in total.
malchior wrote: ↑Mon Jul 20, 2020 10:12 am
There has to be someone better out there.
Have you met the Republican Party lately?
Part of why I'm asking about who else is because, while I understand your thinking and it makes some sense, I think the logical conclusion of it will result in inviting either: (1) no moderate Republican; or (2) some Republican who no actual Republicans alive have heard of. And I suspect it will limit outreach to moderate Republicans in general.
Scraper wrote: ↑Mon Jul 20, 2020 9:59 am
This is the type of thinking that has lead the Republican party down the Trump path that they are on. Anyone who disagrees with Trump is silenced, fired or ridiculed. Tow the party line or get out. My hope if that the Democrat party resists this type of group think and instead welcomes people who truly want to make a difference, even if it is just temporary. Or they can go the opposite way and just cancel everything that doesn't line up with them 100%.
I also find it really hard to believe that anyone with critical thinking skills could line up with either political party on all of their major issues. Abortion, guns, healthcare, budgets, taxes, social programs, etc.
I respectfully disagree. This type of thinking is why Democrats run people like Hillary Clinton. I'm not saying that reaching out to moderates is a bad idea or that they have to support every issue. My comment is about JOHN KASICH. Period. If you don't get it, go talk to a female who knows what he has stood for. If they don't know him well, start out by explaining that he is a Moderate Republican but he signed a 20-week abortion ban and anti-LGBT legislation recently. Seriously. That's the problem in a nutshell. There has to be someone better out there.
I understand why voters in the Democrat party wouldn't vote for Kasich. I just can't get on board with locking him out of speaking and not allowing him to hopefully bring moderate Republicans with him. Honestly, most conservatives that I know can't stand Kasich because they think he is a RINO. He isn't Trumpy enough for them. After all he did veto the heartbeat bill, he signed anti LGBTQ discrimination orders protecting state workers in November of 2018 and he was open to the idea of Gun reform. If he is not moderate enough for you then no previously elected Republican will be.
Scraper wrote: ↑Mon Jul 20, 2020 9:59 amThis is the type of thinking that has lead the Republican party down the Trump path that they are on. Anyone who disagrees with Trump is silenced, fired or ridiculed. Tow the party line or get out.
There's strength in a singular message when it comes to politics. Refusing to adjust course is also a good way to drive completely off a cliff.
Democrats suffer an opposite problem, constantly perceived as weak because they don't have any hard lines in the sand and all generally kind of mill in roughly the same direction - but they'd be able to avoid hitting a tree if you put it in the middle of the road.
The GOP seems to have lost that ability.
What would the US be like if we had federal Ranked Choice Voting along with a mandate for a three-party system? It seems clear that two is too polarizing and a lot of people want to be somewhere in the middle but can't be.
Last edited by Paingod on Mon Jul 20, 2020 10:25 am, edited 1 time in total.
Black Lives Matter
2021-01-20: The first good night's sleep I had in 4 years.
I agree with everything said about him but still think he is a good choice. He represents the other side of the aisle in a non-Trumpist fashion. I do not agree with a ton of what he believes in but I do think he is someone that could be a piece of a functioning government. We need to embrace more people and discuss things with them rather than simply write them off.
“As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.” - H.L. Mencken
Romney would be an interesting invite. As would Justin Amish. I do not like either of their politics but both have shown signs of integrity. Although Amish is no longer a Republican and not even running for reelection so he is probably not a very valuable speaker. Romney might bring Utah with him?
“As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.” - H.L. Mencken
Remus West wrote: ↑Mon Jul 20, 2020 10:24 am
Romney would be an interesting invite. As would Justin Amish. I do not like either of their politics but both have shown signs of integrity.
Romney would be far more likely/interesting way to cross the divide than Amash would be, I think.
Last edited by pr0ner on Mon Jul 20, 2020 10:27 am, edited 1 time in total.
Remus West wrote: ↑Mon Jul 20, 2020 10:24 am
Romney would be an interesting invite. As would Justin Amish. I do not like either of their politics but both have shown signs of integrity.
Those two, plus maybe Meghan McCain (I know she hasn't held public office, but she would be very well known with suburban house wives) were the only ones that came to mind for me. Perhaps one of the several Republican Congressman who didn't seek re-election after Trump, but they are largely unknown on the national scale.
Remus West wrote: ↑Mon Jul 20, 2020 10:24 am
Romney would be an interesting invite. As would Justin Amish. I do not like either of their politics but both have shown signs of integrity. Although Amish is no longer a Republican and not even running for reelection so he is probably not a very valuable speaker. Romney might bring Utah with him?
Kasich is way, way more likely to swing Ohio than Romney would be to swing Utah. It's hard to gauge how competitive Ohio will be this fall - it's been trending red over the past few years, but it did vote twice for Obama and there are polls showing Biden competitive there. So part of the logic for Kasich I think is that if he can sway even a smallish number of Ohio Republicans (even just a few thousand) that could wind up mattering.
But if Utah is competitive at all then the election is already over anyway.
Remus West wrote: ↑Mon Jul 20, 2020 10:24 am
Romney would be an interesting invite. As would Justin Amish. I do not like either of their politics but both have shown signs of integrity.
Romney would be far more likely/interesting way to cross the divide than Amash would be, I think.
Certainly a more powerful cross if they could convince him. McCain is an interesting option as well given her father's ties to the military.
“As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.” - H.L. Mencken
Remus West wrote: ↑Mon Jul 20, 2020 10:24 am
Romney would be an interesting invite. As would Justin Amish. I do not like either of their politics but both have shown signs of integrity. Although Amish is no longer a Republican and not even running for reelection so he is probably not a very valuable speaker. Romney might bring Utah with him?
Kasich is way, way more likely to swing Ohio than Romney would be to swing Utah. It's hard to gauge how competitive Ohio will be this fall - it's been trending red over the past few years, but it did vote twice for Obama and there are polls showing Biden competitive there. So part of the logic for Kasich I think is that if he can sway even a smallish number of Ohio Republicans (even just a few thousand) that could wind up mattering.
But if Utah is competitive at all then the election is already over anyway.
Ohio is a lot more electoral votes too.
“As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.” - H.L. Mencken
Meghan McCain is very inconsistent honestly on her views; she is a bit of a risky choice. Romney would be an excellent choice but don't think he'd do it. He is a former Republican nominee after all. It seems like too big a reach. Amash I think might do it actually because he is pretty much outside the party now. He has some of the same baggage as Kasich but it isn't as concrete as the Ohio stuff. His voting record is just reliably conservative. That's actually a strength instead of being the final arbiter and implementer of the policy (compared to say Kasich).
There are plenty of #NeverTrump people to choose from who don't have as much baggage. They probably shouldn't try fro any of the Project Lincoln people to give them the freedom to chop at Trump. I think Tom Nichols might be a good choice in the #NeverTrump camp. I don't think he is tried to Lincoln directly. Some people have talked about a woman from Ohio, Sarah Mosher but she isn't a big enough name IMO.
Honestly though they don't need Kasich and it hasn't been officially announced. They have such a big lead at the moment why take the chance on divisive choices in a key constituency? This goes back to a key weakness I see in the Democratic party. They take unnecessary political risks with not enough upside. The risk/reward aspect is way off. Were there really some large cadre of moderate male Conservatives waiting for Biden to be more moderate? Is Kasich truly going to swing Ohio? At the risk of losing some women? Aside from anecdotes I'd love to see data to support this because it CW-wise seems like a poor move.
Last edited by malchior on Mon Jul 20, 2020 10:43 am, edited 1 time in total.
I was never a fan of Kasich. I also think he was hardcore in moderate clothing. And yet he would come to the table. He would discuss. He would learn and adapt and be better than what he was before he sat down. But I also think the left are pushing what it means to be moderate further and further left... concurrent with the right abandoning the moderates. That would end up with a lot a lot disaffected voters people on the left don't want in a time the right rules from a minority in a way that keeps strengthening their grip.
Remus West wrote: ↑Mon Jul 20, 2020 10:24 am
Romney would be an interesting invite. As would Justin Amish. I do not like either of their politics but both have shown signs of integrity. Although Amish is no longer a Republican and not even running for reelection so he is probably not a very valuable speaker. Romney might bring Utah with him?
Kasich is way, way more likely to swing Ohio than Romney would be to swing Utah. It's hard to gauge how competitive Ohio will be this fall - it's been trending red over the past few years, but it did vote twice for Obama and there are polls showing Biden competitive there. So part of the logic for Kasich I think is that if he can sway even a smallish number of Ohio Republicans (even just a few thousand) that could wind up mattering.
But if Utah is competitive at all then the election is already over anyway.
I have high hopes for Ohio this year. In the 2018 election there were 2 Supreme Court seats up for statewide vote. In both of them the Democrat challengers beat the Republican incumbents. Granted DeWine beat the Democrat challenger for Governor that year, but he ran a much stronger campaign. Add in the fact that the Youngstown area is usually a Democrat strong hold that switched to Trump in 2016, but since has become disillusioned with him and it's not a stretch to say that Ohio is in play.
malchior wrote: ↑Mon Jul 20, 2020 10:42 am
Meghan McCain is very inconsistent honestly on her views; she is a bit of a risky choice. Romney would be an excellent choice but don't think he'd do it. He is a former Republican nominee after all. It seems like too big a reach. Amash I think might do it actually because he is pretty much outside the party now. He has some of the same baggage as Kasich but it isn't as concrete as the Ohio stuff. His voting record is just reliably conservative. That's actually a strength instead of being the final arbiter and implementer of the policy (compared to say Kasich).
There are plenty of #NeverTrump people to choose from who don't have as much baggage. They probably shouldn't try fro any of the Project Lincoln people to give them the freedom to chop at Trump. I think Tom Nichols might be a good choice in the #NeverTrump camp. I don't think he is tried to Lincoln directly. Some people have talked about a woman from Ohio, Sarah Mosher but she isn't a big enough name IMO.
Honestly though they don't need Kasich and it hasn't been officially announced. They have such a big lead at the moment why take the chance on divisive choices in a key constituency? This goes back to a key weakness I see in the Democratic party. They take unnecessary political risks with not enough upside. The risk/reward aspect is way off. Were there really some large cadre of moderate male Conservatives waiting for Biden to be more moderate? Is Kasich truly going to swing Ohio? At the risk of losing some women? Aside from anecdotes I'd love to see data to support this because it CW-wise seems like a poor move.
You are suggesting there are some Democrats who are going to see Kasich and decide to vote for Trump or not vote for Biden knowing Trump is the other side of the coin? If so, they deserve what they get.
malchior wrote: ↑Mon Jul 20, 2020 10:42 am
Meghan McCain is very inconsistent honestly on her views; she is a bit of a risky choice. Romney would be an excellent choice but don't think he'd do it. He is a former Republican nominee after all. It seems like too big a reach. Amash I think might do it actually because he is pretty much outside the party now. He has some of the same baggage as Kasich but it isn't as concrete as the Ohio stuff. His voting record is just reliably conservative. That's actually a strength instead of being the final arbiter and implementer of the policy (compared to say Kasich).
There are plenty of #NeverTrump people to choose from who don't have as much baggage. They probably shouldn't try fro any of the Project Lincoln people to give them the freedom to chop at Trump. I think Tom Nichols might be a good choice in the #NeverTrump camp. I don't think he is tried to Lincoln directly. Some people have talked about a woman from Ohio, Sarah Mosher but she isn't a big enough name IMO.
Honestly though they don't need Kasich and it hasn't been officially announced. They have such a big lead at the moment why take the chance on divisive choices in a key constituency? This goes back to a key weakness I see in the Democratic party. They take unnecessary political risks with not enough upside. The risk/reward aspect is way off. Were there really some large cadre of moderate male Conservatives waiting for Biden to be more moderate? Is Kasich truly going to swing Ohio? At the risk of losing some women? Aside from anecdotes I'd love to see data to support this because it CW-wise seems like a poor move.
You are suggesting there are some Democrats who are going to see Kasich and decide to vote for Trump or not vote for Biden knowing Trump is the other side of the coin? If so, they deserve what they get.
Kind of with stessier here. I actually have a much lower opinion of the 2016 Bernie supporters who chose to vote for tRump rather than Hillary compared to folks who just generally preferred tRump in 2016.
“As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.” - H.L. Mencken
Remus West wrote: ↑Mon Jul 20, 2020 10:50 am
Kind of with stessier here. I actually have a much lower opinion of the 2016 Bernie supporters who chose to vote for tRump rather than Hillary compared to folks who just generally preferred tRump in 2016.
Oof, yeah. Those folks grabbed the shotgun and swallowed the barrel to avoid having to sniff curdled milk.
Black Lives Matter
2021-01-20: The first good night's sleep I had in 4 years.
Remus West wrote: ↑Mon Jul 20, 2020 10:50 am
Kind of with stessier here. I actually have a much lower opinion of the 2016 Bernie supporters who chose to vote for tRump rather than Hillary compared to folks who just generally preferred tRump in 2016.
Oof, yeah. Those folks grabbed the shotgun and swallowed the barrel to avoid having to sniff curdled milk.
Yeah we can all rightfully castigate them but in the end those people still exist.
malchior wrote: ↑Mon Jul 20, 2020 10:49 am
Meghan McCain is very inconsistent honestly on her views; she is a bit of a risky choice. Romney would be an excellent choice but don't think he'd do it. He is a former Republican nominee after all. It seems like too big a reach. Amash I think might do it actually because he is pretty much outside the party now. He has some of the same baggage as Kasich but it isn't as concrete as the Ohio stuff. His voting record is just reliably conservative. That's actually a strength instead of being the final arbiter and implementer of the policy (compared to say Kasich).
I'm a little baffled that Kasich is radioactive but Romney and Amash are ok. Amash is just as pro-life as Kasich (including voting to ban federal funding for abortions after 20 weeks), but it's ok because he wasn't governor? Why wouldn't Amash be just as much of a slap in the face to the pro-choice wing of the party?
Also Kasich has the benefit of not being complicit in the Trump administration, whereas Romney and Amash are to at least some degree by virtue of being in Congress and caucusing with the GOP leadership. I'll give Romney and Amash credit for being the Republicans who will most publicly break with Trump at times, but Romney in particular has voted with Trump the vast majority of the time.
Last edited by El Guapo on Mon Jul 20, 2020 11:23 am, edited 1 time in total.
pr0ner wrote: ↑Mon Jul 20, 2020 9:02 am
Sometimes progressives want to eat their own. John Kasich has been invited to speak at the Democratic National Convention on Biden's behalf.
People have their own pet causes the they're willing to burn everything down for.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General "No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton MYT
I don't like Kasich for all the normal reasons, but I don't think it's a mistake to invite him. Surely he'll be saying, "We don't agree on everything, but we definitely agree on THIS."
Having him speak is not an endorsement of his record but outreach to those Republicans who might consider voting for Biden even just this once. It's a smart move.
malchior wrote: ↑Mon Jul 20, 2020 10:49 am
Meghan McCain is very inconsistent honestly on her views; she is a bit of a risky choice. Romney would be an excellent choice but don't think he'd do it. He is a former Republican nominee after all. It seems like too big a reach. Amash I think might do it actually because he is pretty much outside the party now. He has some of the same baggage as Kasich but it isn't as concrete as the Ohio stuff. His voting record is just reliably conservative. That's actually a strength instead of being the final arbiter and implementer of the policy (compared to say Kasich).
I'm a little baffled that Kasich is radioactive but Romney and Amash are ok. Amash is just as pro-life as Kasich (including voting to ban federal funding for abortions after 20 weeks), but it's ok because he wasn't governor? Why wouldn't Amash be just as much of a slap in the face to the pro-choice wing of the party? I think to some degree to are overestimating how radioactive Kasich is.
I don't think so. Someone could point out that Kasich was in a position to veto legislation but did not, instead he signed it, and then went onto build out the policy. He owns it in a much more tangible way. I agree on the face that there isn't a whole lot of difference but it is a matter of the exposure/framing.
Also Kasich has the benefit of not being complicit in the Trump administration, whereas Romney and Amash are to at least some degree by virtue of being in Congress and caucusing with the GOP leadership. I'll give Romney and Amash credit for being the Republicans who will most publicly break with Trump at times, but Romney in particular has voted with Trump the vast majority of the time.
Again this is where the spin is important. Amash quit and spoke out against Trump. Romney voted to remove Trump from office. Their voting records are solidly conservative but they aren't Trumpists. Would Kasich get that benefit of the doubt? That's the maybe to me. He spoke out but he has a lot of specific baggage to target.
Amash spoke out and then quit not the other way around. Subtle but important difference in my mind. He and Romney are people whose views I disagree with but who have shown the willingness to speak out against corruption in a way that no other national Republicans have to my knowledge. A few governors but no national level people that I can think of.
“As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.” - H.L. Mencken
malchior wrote: ↑Mon Jul 20, 2020 10:03 amI don't know off the top of my head. All I'm saying is probably not a White Male who signed a 20-week abortion ban and anti-LGBT legislation in the last 4 years. I just mentioned it to my wife and she flat out said, "HELL NO...that's a really bad decision."
Take your time - no rush.
Anyway, my wife is fine with it, so we are at a female impasse.
I'm gay and I'm fine with it.
I do assume that his speech is vetted beforehand, though, but I'm fine with it. These are not normal times. We need all good Americans on all sides to come together right now.
Last edited by Defiant on Mon Jul 20, 2020 1:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Remus West wrote: ↑Mon Jul 20, 2020 10:24 am
Romney might bring Utah with him?
Not a chance in hell.
Mormons by and large don't like Trump, but they'll still hold their nose and vote for him (or vote third party) before voting for a dirty, socialist Democrat.
When darkness veils the world, four Warriors of Light shall come.
Remus West wrote: ↑Mon Jul 20, 2020 10:24 am
Romney might bring Utah with him?
Not a chance in hell.
Mormons by and large don't like Trump, but they'll still hold their nose and vote for him (or vote third party) before voting for a dirty, socialist Democrat.
One of the multitude of things that confuse me in life is this stance by religious people. To me it seems as though Joe Biden, in spite of being for a large number of things they would not be, yet they stand by tRump while he openly practices nearly everything they profess to believe is wrong. I just do not get it at all.
“As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.” - H.L. Mencken
pr0ner wrote: ↑Mon Jul 20, 2020 9:02 amSometimes progressives want to eat their own.
Sometimes? That's the preferred Progressive pass-time. It's one of the reasons they remain so politically impotent - a progressive can only remain pure so long as they remain powerless.
As to inviting Kasich...this is politics. In politics, your friend today will not be your friend tomorrow. Just because you agree on one issue does not mean you agree on all issues. You understand this, he understands this. What matters is finding common ground today. If that common ground is limited to "Trump must go," well, that's enough for now.
/. "She climbed backwards out her
\/ window into Outside Over There."
Remus West wrote: ↑Mon Jul 20, 2020 10:24 am
Romney might bring Utah with him?
Not a chance in hell.
Mormons by and large don't like Trump, but they'll still hold their nose and vote for him (or vote third party) before voting for a dirty, socialist Democrat.
One of the multitude of things that confuse me in life is this stance by religious people. To me it seems as though Joe Biden, in spite of being for a large number of things they would not be, yet they stand by tRump while he openly practices nearly everything they profess to believe is wrong. I just do not get it at all.
Remus West wrote: ↑Mon Jul 20, 2020 1:47 pmTo me it seems as though Joe Biden, in spite of being for a large number of things they would not be, yet they stand by tRump while he openly practices nearly everything they profess to believe is wrong. I just do not get it at all.
My opinion may not be popular, but I believe most religions call for a certain amount of cognitive dissonance. Once you've established a clear willingness to overlook A to get B, it becomes increasingly easy to find your way from A to B on lots of topics.
As far as I can tell, the concepts of fighting gender/sexual/racial/reproductive equality simply outweighs the multitudes of sins the Otyugh in office brings to the table. In their minds, being able to tell other people what they can and can't do in order to satisfy their belief systems is just that important.
Black Lives Matter
2021-01-20: The first good night's sleep I had in 4 years.
I understand why voters in the Democrat party wouldn't vote for Kasich. I just can't get on board with locking him out of speaking and not allowing him to hopefully bring moderate Republicans with him. Honestly, most conservatives that I know can't stand Kasich because they think he is a RINO. He isn't Trumpy enough for them. After all he did veto the heartbeat bill, he signed anti LGBTQ discrimination orders protecting state workers in November of 2018 and he was open to the idea of Gun reform. If he is not moderate enough for you then no previously elected Republican will be.
He also supported the expansion of Medicare under the ACA in Ohio. Seriously, this is not about his policies, he's not being invited to join the Democratic Party, he's not being invited to speak because of his policies, they're not being considered for the Democratic platform, he's being invited because is a Republican who can't abide Trump, and can show that there is a bi-partisan opposition to him. If he can help peel off some votes in swing states, then I'm all for it.
Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions. – G.K. Chesterton
Remus West wrote: ↑Mon Jul 20, 2020 1:47 pmTo me it seems as though Joe Biden, in spite of being for a large number of things they would not be, yet they stand by tRump while he openly practices nearly everything they profess to believe is wrong. I just do not get it at all.
My opinion may not be popular, but I believe most religions call for a certain amount of cognitive dissonance. Once you've established a clear willingness to overlook A to get B, it becomes increasingly easy to find your way from A to B on lots of topics.
i would say that much of life involves cognitive dissonance. I haven't found atheists to be any more consistent in their beliefs than believers
Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions. – G.K. Chesterton
Remus West wrote: ↑Mon Jul 20, 2020 1:47 pmTo me it seems as though Joe Biden, in spite of being for a large number of things they would not be, yet they stand by tRump while he openly practices nearly everything they profess to believe is wrong. I just do not get it at all.
My opinion may not be popular, but I believe most religions call for a certain amount of cognitive dissonance. Once you've established a clear willingness to overlook A to get B, it becomes increasingly easy to find your way from A to B on lots of topics.
i would say that much of life involves cognitive dissonance. I haven't found atheists to be any more consistent in their beliefs than believers
How many are voting for Trump and overriding their own moral values to do it?
I'm honestly curious. *Edit: Ah. Almost none according to that study of 1500 folks.
I know life is full of contradictions and everyone manages them every day - I just don't see many atheists designing their entire lifestyles around them.
Last edited by Paingod on Mon Jul 20, 2020 2:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Black Lives Matter
2021-01-20: The first good night's sleep I had in 4 years.
Defiant wrote: ↑Mon Jul 20, 2020 1:12 pm
I'm gay and I'm fine with it.
I do assume that his speech is vetted beforehand, though, but I'm fine with it. These are not normal times. We need all good Americans on all sides to come together right now.
Seriously, this is "war". The US and Great Britain didn't kick the Soviets to the curb when it came to fighting Hitler because they were brutal communists.
Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions. – G.K. Chesterton
