Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

For discussion of religion and politics

Moderators: LawBeefaroni, $iljanus

Post Reply
User avatar
Defiant
Posts: 21045
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:09 pm
Location: Tongue in cheek

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Defiant »

Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?
How about...
Republican Party
/rəˈpəbləkən ˈpärdē/
noun
1. A political party that is primarily associated with blind support for Donald Trump. See Trumpism

2. (archaic) of, relating to, or constituting the one of the two major political parties evolving in the U.S. in the mid-19th century that is usually primarily associated with business, financial, and some agricultural interests and is held to favor a restricted governmental role in economic life
User avatar
Smoove_B
Posts: 54567
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 am
Location: Kaer Morhen

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Smoove_B »

I don't even know where to post this stuff anymore. Please do enjoy, comments from recently re-elected Representative Steve King:
“White nationalist, white supremacist, Western civilization — how did that language become offensive?” Mr. King said. “Why did I sit in classes teaching me about the merits of our history and our civilization?”
Amazing.
Maybe next year, maybe no go
User avatar
Pyperkub
Posts: 23583
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 5:07 pm
Location: NC- that's Northern California

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Pyperkub »

Smoove_B wrote: Thu Jan 10, 2019 1:18 pm I don't even know where to post this stuff anymore. Please do enjoy, comments from recently re-elected Representative Steve King:
“White nationalist, white supremacist, Western civilization — how did that language become offensive?” Mr. King said. “Why did I sit in classes teaching me about the merits of our history and our civilization?”
Amazing.
sing-song "which one of these is not like the others?"

Dude's batting .333 - good in baseball, awful in History class.
Black Lives definitely Matter Lorini!

Also: There are three ways to not tell the truth: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
User avatar
Skinypupy
Posts: 20333
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 10:12 am
Location: Utah

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Skinypupy »

King has always been a racist douche, so these comments are surprising at all.

What is disheartening is the fact that not a single other member of the GOP will call him out on it. Whether that's because they agree or because he's on "their side" doesn't make any difference. It needs to be called out.
When darkness veils the world, four Warriors of Light shall come.
User avatar
YellowKing
Posts: 30126
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 2:02 pm

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by YellowKing »

It's why I don't understand how NeverTrumpers like Bill Kristol can keep hanging on. I know they're probably thinking, "I can't fix my party if I abandon it" but come on. Your party is dead. Your'e not getting it back. There is no redemption.
User avatar
Pyperkub
Posts: 23583
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 5:07 pm
Location: NC- that's Northern California

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Pyperkub »

Skinypupy wrote: Thu Jan 10, 2019 1:41 pm King has always been a racist douche, so these comments are surprising at all.

What is disheartening is the fact that not a single other member of the GOP will call him out on it. Whether that's because they agree or because he's on "their side" doesn't make any difference. It needs to be called out.
But somehow it's AOC who is a complete idiot. They don't even bother anymore. :grund:
Black Lives definitely Matter Lorini!

Also: There are three ways to not tell the truth: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 43688
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Kraken »

Republican Charlie Baker has come out with some bold (for a R) and forward-thinking policy proposals in the past few months, such as doubling the tax on new home sales to fund climate mitigation -- taxing real estate to protect real estate. Previously, he signed a payroll tax increase to pay for a generous new family leave benefit. This regular Globe columnist's essay made me think of this thread.
The most popular governor in America is essentially a man without a party to call home. He’s way too liberal for Republican primary voters, yet still much too conservative to get anywhere as a Democrat.
...
Baker’s no longer pretending this isn’t about revenue-raising. All it took was the confidence that comes with winning 1.7 million votes in last November’s gubernatorial election — and perhaps an acknowledgment that there’s absolutely no place for him anyway in today’s GOP. The party he signed up for is an ideologically rigid corpse, compliments of Trump and his crew of Republican enablers.
...
Still, when Trump’s GOP is finally dead and buried, someone will have to reinvent the party he destroyed. Why not someone like Baker? The country’s politics are already trending away from Trump’s base. According to a recent report by the Pew Research Center, young people, including Republicans, are shifting left on social issues and on what they believe government should deliver. That next generation of voters will redefine both parties, or maybe decide to create a new one.

In the meantime, Massachusetts is an excellent laboratory for political experimentation, with maximum national exposure. Baker has not ruled out a third term. As he starts his second, he seems focused on building a legacy by trying to do right by Massachusetts.

Too bad his party wants nothing to do with that.
IDK if the R Party can ever be rehabilitated, at least not until my generation dies off...but if it can, people like Baker will come to the forefront.
User avatar
pr0ner
Posts: 17424
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 3:00 pm
Location: Northern Virginia, VA
Contact:

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by pr0ner »

It continues to amuse me that some of the most popular governors are Republicans in historically Democratic states.

For those who live in Mass., is Baker popular enough that, if he were the Republican nominee for President, he could win the state in the Electoral College?
Hodor.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by malchior »

pr0ner wrote: Thu Jan 31, 2019 12:53 pm It continues to amuse me that some of the most popular governors are Republicans in historically Democratic states.
It often makes sense. It depends on whether they have national ambitions. If not, they can be very effective especially as centrists. If they get Presidential ambitions then the GOP centrist often turns into a ridiculous parody of themselves. See Chris Christie. He had the makings of a great governor until he got stars in his eyes.
User avatar
Enough
Posts: 14688
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:05 pm
Location: Serendipity
Contact:

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Enough »

Why We Are Quitting RedState
For more than a decade, RedState was a solid voice in the world of online conservative commentary. Unfortunately, the allure of Trumpism has left the once great site a shell of its former self.
Though we continued on in the hopes the atmosphere might change, that approach is now untenable.

A cursory glance at the front page of RedState reveals the transformation that Salem wanted is now complete. There is no local editorial control. Decisions are made behind the scenes at Townhall and subject to its review.
We are conservatives. We believe in limited government, the free market, the Constitution, and protecting the rights of the unborn. We have therefore supported the Republican Party and believed in the Republican Party for years. But a healthy Republican Party cannot exist without a healthy conservative media; likewise, a toxic, poisonous conservative media is like a parasite for the conservative movement— and, make no mistake, it will eventually kill it.

We publish this with the hope that it serves to push the Republican Party and conservative media back to the ones we respected, admired, and believed in.
My blog (mostly photos): Fort Ephemera - My Flickr Photostream

“You only get one sunrise and one sunset a day, and you only get so many days on the planet. A good photographer does the math and doesn’t waste either.” ―Galen Rowell
User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 43688
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Kraken »

pr0ner wrote: Thu Jan 31, 2019 12:53 pm It continues to amuse me that some of the most popular governors are Republicans in historically Democratic states.

For those who live in Mass., is Baker popular enough that, if he were the Republican nominee for President, he could win the state in the Electoral College?
That's a good question. It would depend on his opponent. But he would probably have a shot at it. Boston, Cambridge, and the Berkshires are all reliably deep blue. There's a lot of purple and red outside those enclaves. Bill Weld is still popular here. Romney was popular in his Romneycare days, before he changed his stripes and made us a punchline. Baker is popular in part because he doesn't have Potomac Fever, so it's hard to say how opinions would change if he went that way.

We like Republican executives as a fiscal check on our Democratic legislature. One-party rule inevitably leads to excesses.
User avatar
Holman
Posts: 28906
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 8:00 pm
Location: Between the Schuylkill and the Wissahickon

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Holman »

Kraken wrote: Thu Jan 31, 2019 6:00 pm
pr0ner wrote: Thu Jan 31, 2019 12:53 pm It continues to amuse me that some of the most popular governors are Republicans in historically Democratic states.

For those who live in Mass., is Baker popular enough that, if he were the Republican nominee for President, he could win the state in the Electoral College?
That's a good question. It would depend on his opponent. But he would probably have a shot at it. Boston, Cambridge, and the Berkshires are all reliably deep blue. There's a lot of purple and red outside those enclaves. Bill Weld is still popular here. Romney was popular in his Romneycare days, before he changed his stripes and made us a punchline. Baker is popular in part because he doesn't have Potomac Fever, so it's hard to say how opinions would change if he went that way.

We like Republican executives as a fiscal check on our Democratic legislature. One-party rule inevitably leads to excesses.
The question isn't whether a genuinely moderate/centrist Republican could win this or that state in the general but whether they could first win the national primary. It's hard to imagine that happening with today's GOP.

How could a Baker win the Southern and Western primaries?

An America in which Massachusetts gets to choose between Charlie Baker and (say) Kamala Harris is an America in which Trump's GOP has entirely ceased to exist.
Much prefer my Nazis Nuremberged.
User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 43688
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Kraken »

Holman wrote: Thu Jan 31, 2019 6:51 pm
Kraken wrote: Thu Jan 31, 2019 6:00 pm
pr0ner wrote: Thu Jan 31, 2019 12:53 pm It continues to amuse me that some of the most popular governors are Republicans in historically Democratic states.

For those who live in Mass., is Baker popular enough that, if he were the Republican nominee for President, he could win the state in the Electoral College?
That's a good question. It would depend on his opponent. But he would probably have a shot at it. Boston, Cambridge, and the Berkshires are all reliably deep blue. There's a lot of purple and red outside those enclaves. Bill Weld is still popular here. Romney was popular in his Romneycare days, before he changed his stripes and made us a punchline. Baker is popular in part because he doesn't have Potomac Fever, so it's hard to say how opinions would change if he went that way.

We like Republican executives as a fiscal check on our Democratic legislature. One-party rule inevitably leads to excesses.
The question isn't whether a genuinely moderate/centrist Republican could win this or that state in the general but whether they could first win the national primary. It's hard to imagine that happening with today's GOP.

How could a Baker win the Southern and Western primaries?

An America in which Massachusetts gets to choose between Charlie Baker and (say) Kamala Harris is an America in which Trump's GOP has entirely ceased to exist.
Well yeah, "when Trump’s GOP is finally dead and buried" was the premise.
User avatar
Holman
Posts: 28906
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 8:00 pm
Location: Between the Schuylkill and the Wissahickon

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Holman »

Kraken wrote: Thu Jan 31, 2019 7:33 pm Well yeah, "when Trump’s GOP is finally dead and buried" was the premise.
Not just Trump's GOP, but Limbaugh's and Hannity's and whichever fascist goon leads the alt-right.

The current crop of NeverTrumpers will literally be dead before the GOP retreats from fascism.
Much prefer my Nazis Nuremberged.
User avatar
Defiant
Posts: 21045
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:09 pm
Location: Tongue in cheek

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Defiant »


For those who live in Mass., is Baker popular enough that, if he were the Republican nominee for President, he could win the state in the Electoral College?
I know nothing about Baker, but IIRC, the average home state advantage for a Presidential candidate is like +5% (and tends to be more pronounced in smaller states). With Democrats typically winning MA in recent presidential elections by like 25%, I would be very skeptical unless he were winning in a landslide anyway.
User avatar
Pyperkub
Posts: 23583
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 5:07 pm
Location: NC- that's Northern California

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Pyperkub »

developments in the CA GOP
The California Republican Party elected Jessica Millan Patterson as its new chair Sunday, making her the first woman and first Latina to lead the 140-year-old organization.


Black Lives definitely Matter Lorini!

Also: There are three ways to not tell the truth: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 41246
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by El Guapo »

Baker as a Republican would stand a 0% chance of winning Massachusetts in 2020 (even in the fantasy world in which he could beat Trump in a GOP primary). He would do much better than most Republicans, and *might* have a shot if he's running against the reanimated corpse of Joseph Stalin, but otherwise presidential elections are too national / partisan these days, and Massachusetts is too blue.
Black Lives Matter.
User avatar
$iljanus
Forum Moderator
Posts: 13676
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 3:46 pm
Location: New England...or under your bed

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by $iljanus »

Baker is by no means anything close to Trump ideologically but the way the GOP in general has rolled over for this asshat in the presidency I think the GOP has a bit of work to do before I even remotely consider any GOP candidate for president.

Black lives matter!

Wise words of warning from Smoove B: Oh, how you all laughed when I warned you about the semen. Well, who's laughing now?
User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 43688
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Kraken »

Well, Baker restated his complete lack of national ambition in no uncertain terms again yesterday, so that point is moot. For the moment, Bill Weld is the Republicans' only hope.
Weld is not careful, and never has been — a function, perhaps, of being so patrician that he never seemed to need a job at all.

And Lord, do we need not-careful now.

His critics say Weld is too flighty to be credible here, and it is fair to say he hasn’t been relevant politically for 20 years. “Even Benedict Arnold switched allegiances less often!” Trumpkin Jim Lyons, the chairman of the Massachusetts GOP, told the Globe’s Michael Levenson.

Weld has flitted around: He endorsed Democrat Barack Obama for president in 2008, ran on the Libertarian ticket in 2016, spoke highly of Hillary Clinton near the end of that race, and is now back in the GOP. But ideologically — and on Trump — Weld has been consistent.

“As I said in 1992, I want the government out of your pocketbook and out of your bedroom,” Weld said. “It has an antiquated ring to it, but it shouldn’t.”

Does it ever. Many of the things Weld believes are tantamount to heresy in Trump’s GOP, which is not so much a big tent these days as a shred of tattered canvas: Weld supports abortion rights, sees climate change as the emergency it is, abhors nativism, and wants to make it easier for immigrants to work here. Voters turned off by those views will find many more where they came from.

But Weld seems to reckon he can get around the red hat brigade. He’s banking for support on independent voters, who can cast Republican primary ballots in 20 states. He might make inroads in New Hampshire. A recent UMass Amherst poll found that 40 percent of likely Republican voters there believe Trump should be challenged in the 2020 primary, with support for a contest higher among college-educated and younger voters, and women.

But Weld must convince them he’s for real here, and not just making a statement.

“There’s no reason to run except to win,” he said. “I hope it doesn’t sound vainglorious, but I could start on Monday in that job.”

The knock on Weld is that he is vainglorious, that ego is driving him here. Maybe. But the fact remains that, right now, there is only one person willing to take on Trump, and to stand up against the disaster today’s Republican Party has wrought.

Whether he has a real shot or not, this is Weld’s finest hour.
User avatar
Holman
Posts: 28906
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 8:00 pm
Location: Between the Schuylkill and the Wissahickon

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Holman »

Much prefer my Nazis Nuremberged.
User avatar
Holman
Posts: 28906
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 8:00 pm
Location: Between the Schuylkill and the Wissahickon

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Holman »

A propos...

Today I returned a major graded essay to my students. According to TurnItIn, I had one plagiarist, a kid who copied significant content from a website.

I planned to talk to him after class, but he didn't attend. Later I found his email apologizing for missing class: he was in D.C. with the rest of the College Republicans, attending CPAC.
Much prefer my Nazis Nuremberged.
User avatar
Zarathud
Posts: 16434
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:29 pm
Location: Chicago, Illinois

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Zarathud »

But he most assuredly did it all himself without any assistance (from society) and your calling him out will be liberal oppression and fake grades! Why should he take any personal responsibility?

Sigh. The worst thing about conservatism is its vocal supporters are so often hypocrites.
"If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts." - Albert Einstein
"I don't stand by anything." - Trump
“Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.” - John Stuart Mill, Inaugural Address Delivered to the University of St Andrews, 2/1/1867
“It is the impractical things in this tumultuous hell-scape of a world that matter most. A book, a name, chicken soup. They help us remember that, even in our darkest hour, life is still to be savored.” - Poe, Altered Carbon
User avatar
Unagi
Posts: 26376
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 5:14 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Unagi »

Holman wrote: Fri Mar 01, 2019 6:14 pm A propos...

Today I returned a major graded essay to my students. According to TurnItIn, I had one plagiarist, a kid who copied significant content from a website.

I planned to talk to him after class, but he didn't attend. Later I found his email apologizing for missing class: he was in D.C. with the rest of the College Republicans, attending CPAC.
Oh, it's hammer time.
Enlarge Image
User avatar
Holman
Posts: 28906
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 8:00 pm
Location: Between the Schuylkill and the Wissahickon

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Holman »

Getting sooooo close to the issue.

Much prefer my Nazis Nuremberged.
User avatar
Remus West
Posts: 33592
Joined: Mon May 09, 2005 5:39 pm
Location: Not in Westland

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Remus West »

Holman wrote: Fri Mar 01, 2019 6:14 pm A propos...

Today I returned a major graded essay to my students. According to TurnItIn, I had one plagiarist, a kid who copied significant content from a website.

I planned to talk to him after class, but he didn't attend. Later I found his email apologizing for missing class: he was in D.C. with the rest of the College Republicans, attending CPAC.
How did this turn out anyway?
“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
User avatar
Holman
Posts: 28906
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 8:00 pm
Location: Between the Schuylkill and the Wissahickon

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Holman »

Remus West wrote: Fri May 10, 2019 7:28 am
Holman wrote: Fri Mar 01, 2019 6:14 pm A propos...

Today I returned a major graded essay to my students. According to TurnItIn, I had one plagiarist, a kid who copied significant content from a website.

I planned to talk to him after class, but he didn't attend. Later I found his email apologizing for missing class: he was in D.C. with the rest of the College Republicans, attending CPAC.
How did this turn out anyway?
I called the student in, showed him what I'd discovered, and he broke down in tears. (They always do. They're just kids.)

My school has a policy that the first discovered plagiarism goes into a file and is never mentioned again unless there is a second instance later (in which case the academic honesty board holds a hearing).

As instructor, I have the choice of failing the assignment or giving the student an F for the whole course. I chose the former, and he walked away with a very low grade on the essay. He spent the rest of the semester trying hard to recover from that. Nice kid, actually.

I think he learned his lesson. And (although I hope this goes without saying) his politics didn't enter into my thinking or this interaction at all. It went exactly as most other cases of medium-level plagiarism do.
Much prefer my Nazis Nuremberged.
Jeff V
Posts: 36414
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: Nowhere you want to be.

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Jeff V »

Once I had a girlfriend who was accused of plagiarism for a paper on psychological child abuse. I was highly insulted and had half a mind to storm into teacher's office and declare "I did NOT plagiarize anyone in that paper!" My GF assured me that would likely not help the situation. :lol:
Black Lives Matter
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by malchior »

Holman wrote: Fri May 10, 2019 12:26 pmI think he learned his lesson. And (although I hope this goes without saying) his politics didn't enter into my thinking or this interaction at all. It went exactly as most other cases of medium-level plagiarism do.
I was involved in one that rankled me and that guy was a young Republican too for thread coherence. I was in an intro Comp Sci course at RIT at the time and one day the Prof pulls me into a room. He wanted to review my program for an assignment. Except oddly it had someone else's name at the top. A friend of mine. I end up muttering something along the lines of 'What a fucking idiot'.

The Professor said he knew it was mine instantly since I had a particular style, clearly understood it was stolen (based on my reaction), and gave me a 0 on it for not protecting it. That was the accepted practice at RIT at the time fwiw. If he had thought I intentionally helped that dope, then I would have received the same punishment which was an F for the course. That guy ended up flipping a shit on me and accused me of being a rat. He didn't get that 1) both of us going down with the ship still left him with an F and 2) HE STOLE THE FUCKING DISK TO GET THE PROGRAM BY PRETENDING TO HANG OUT TO HAVE A BEER. What an entitled asshole.
User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 43688
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Kraken »

Justin Amash, the Michigan Republican who called for Trump's impeachment, chose Independence Day to declare his independence from the R Party.
But we owe it to future generations to stand up for our constitutional republic so that Americans may continue to live free for centuries to come. Preserving liberty means telling the Republican Party and the Democratic Party that we’ll no longer let them play their partisan game at our expense.

Today, I am declaring my independence and leaving the Republican Party. No matter your circumstance, I’m asking you to join me in rejecting the partisan loyalties and rhetoric that divide and dehumanize us. I’m asking you to believe that we can do better than this two-party system — and to work toward it. If we continue to take America for granted, we will lose it.
Overlooking his bothsiderism, he's not wrong.
User avatar
Z-Corn
Posts: 4894
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 4:16 pm

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Z-Corn »

And it was announced yesterday that a Meijer family grandson is going to run against him.

Those are some deep pockets to go up against.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by malchior »

I saw his piece and I disagree with his premise: if this was a metaphor about driving a car, he was in the passenger seat, he went along with things when the carload decided to off-road near a cliff, he yelled drive faster, and then rolled out when it veered towards the cliffs edge. He then gets up and points at the car that went off the cliff and the people driving along back on the road and says you're both at fault? Come on.

Do the Dems play partisan games? Sure being that they are a 'political party' and by definition they will do that. That isn't the problem. The problem is one party has completely decided to go to war politically against the populace at large, and doing so warped the mechanisms of government, trashed norms, and is essentially in the midst of tearing down checks and balances. And at this point it doesn't look like anything can be done except slow it down. So when he dives out of the party far after it is too late to speak up...good for him I guess.
User avatar
Blackhawk
Posts: 43493
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:48 pm
Location: Southwest Indiana

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Blackhawk »

Given that the car is already in motion and you can't turn back time, what would you prefer that he do at this point?
(˙pǝsɹǝʌǝɹ uǝǝq sɐɥ ʎʇıʌɐɹƃ ʃɐuosɹǝd ʎW)
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by malchior »

Blackhawk wrote: Thu Jul 04, 2019 12:17 pm Given that the car is already in motion and you can't turn back time, what would you prefer that he do at this point?
I'm not saying he shouldn't have left the party but his letter was too little too late. I was further saying we shouldn't pay attention to his view on the causes or cures. He got it wrong before, he has it wrong now, and I'd bet he'll be wrong about it in the future.
User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 43688
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Kraken »

Z-Corn wrote: Thu Jul 04, 2019 11:42 am And it was announced yesterday that a Meijer family grandson is going to run against him.

Those are some deep pockets to go up against.
So he already knew he was getting primaried, and very likely going to lose. If he runs as an independent in the general, might he siphon off enough R votes to throw the district to the Ds? How tight is the R stranglehold?
User avatar
Z-Corn
Posts: 4894
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 4:16 pm

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Z-Corn »

Kraken wrote: Thu Jul 04, 2019 1:12 pm How tight is the R stranglehold?
I don't know, it will be interesting to see. He's very popular so we may see some people follow him away from "R" and vote for the man and not the party.

My Dad is a pretty socially liberal guy and he wishes he lived in the district so he could vote for Amash and not see any "D" he votes for get trounced by the "R" incumbent over and over.
User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 43688
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Kraken »

Well, kudos to Amash if he manages to deny that seat to the Meijer kid. I suppose we'll find out in 2020.
User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 43688
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Kraken »

This thread will do.

Even though it's really about how both parties are defining themselves (and being defined), America has two economies - and they're diverging fast has lots of neat graphs explaining why it seems like Republicans live in a different world.
Where Republican areas of the country rely on lower-skill, lower-productivity “traditional” industries like manufacturing and resource extraction, Democratic, mostly urban districts contain large concentrations of the nation’s higher-skill, higher-tech professional and digital services.

Yet now comes another wrinkle to the story. Not only are red and blue America experiencing two different economies, but those economies are diverging fast. In fact, radical change is transforming the two parties’ economies in real time.
Image
User avatar
Pyperkub
Posts: 23583
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 5:07 pm
Location: NC- that's Northern California

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Pyperkub »

Black Lives definitely Matter Lorini!

Also: There are three ways to not tell the truth: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
User avatar
Blackhawk
Posts: 43493
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:48 pm
Location: Southwest Indiana

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Blackhawk »

Anti-intellectualism has been a cornerstone of the social turmoil of the past few years.
(˙pǝsɹǝʌǝɹ uǝǝq sɐɥ ʎʇıʌɐɹƃ ʃɐuosɹǝd ʎW)
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82085
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

Post by Isgrimnur »

Wiki
Anti-intellectualism in American Life is a book by Richard Hofstadter published in 1963 that won the 1964 Pulitzer Prize for General Non-Fiction.
A Cult of Ignorance - Isaac Asimov (1980)
There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that “my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.”
It's almost as if people are the problem.
Post Reply