Copacetic About The Nation's Future?

[PoliticalChic]

The list you provide is actually a set of demands. Obviously they could not be offered any of those outright. Compromise would be a willingness to make some adjustments in those areas, in return for their acceptance of some adjustments we’d like to see made. The demands presented have zero chance of going anywhere, so they really aren’t a serious concern. But dwindling as they may be in number, there are some moderate democrats out there. They just don’t get the airtime the socialist extremists do. As far as the fad of promoting these extremists goes; it will pass. After the election results soundly reject their insanity, the Democrat party will be in search of legitimate leadership that actually has a chance of making things happen. The only way they be able to make anything happen will be through compromise.
Instead making a list of demands, both sides could benefit from stating what effect, or outcome they’d like to see. Then start discussing terms which bring both sides somewhat closer to the ends theyd like to achieve.

Since you've been given the opportunity twice,and could not provide a viable compromise in any of those areas, I'll assume your view is not amenable in reality.


Billy said the other side must be defeated.

I'm gonna go with that view.



Consider the possibility that you are incorrect.

Then go with that view. So... How exactly do you intend to “defeat” the other side?

At the ballot box, silly.

So you agree. Like I said; the demands you listed won’t be met. But then what? We still have an immigration problem. We still could benefit from reforming our criminal justice system. Merely winning tha election alone isn’t enough to achieve that. As long as gridlock persists very little changes. Which might have its benefits, but also has some very strong negatives. Not the least of which being the steady flow of invaders. They are still coming. And will continue to do so until both sides choose to agree on a solution that they’ll enforce.

In Mac's thread about compromise, it eventually got to the point where there are many things both sides can agree on, however those issues will never be worked on. The media driven, divisive issues will continue the gridlock, and common sense stuff will never be touched. The game for power will ensure that if a Republican has a chance for a common sense agreement, it will be coupled with a government power grab. They would have to agree to dangerous horseshit like eliminating Ice, eliminating the electoral college, or mega programs like medicare for all. It is best to continue the gridlock than enact those liberal demands.

Then, there's this:

"The common wisdom holds that 'both parties' have to appeal to the extremes during the primary and then move to the center for the general election. To the contrary, both parties run for office as conservatives. Once they have fooled the voters and are safely in office, Republicans sometimes double-cross the voters. Democrats always do."
Coulter

 

[PoliticalChic]

Don't be.

First, take a look at the dunce Queen's New York put in the Congress, and the limelight, OcasioWhatever.

Now, look at last night's fiasco, with the Democrat establishment candidate, Katz, losing to Caban....


Caban ran on legaliziing prostitution, claiming the votes of illegal aliens and felons who are out of prison, arresting ICE workers, declining to prosecute pimps,




"... including ending cash bail, not prosecuting subway turnstile jumping, prosecuting the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, closing Rikers Island and decriminalizing sex work marks a massive departure from the traditional tough-on-crime, prosecutorial approach of DAs around the country...
Cabán—who has talked about decriminalizing sex work and also talked about arresting ICE agents in courtrooms—envisions an office that will not evaluate performance based on convictions but rather reduced incarceration and recidivism and increased community engagement, and that will provide updated information about sentencing policies, arrest rates and charging decisions."
Tiffany Cabán Claims Shocking Queens District Attorney Primary Win



And guess what?
"The most significant endorsement, however, likely came from Bronx and Queens Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez."
Tiffany Cabán Stuns Queens Machine, Holds Solid Lead in Race for Queens District Attorney



She was endorsed by other communists, including Bernie....



Don't imagine that this sort of scum doesn't have a chance to take over the nation.

Which scares you more, that she will fail or that she will succeed?

I'm pro-America.


Figure it out.

 

[alang1216]

Which scares you more, that she will fail or that she will succeed?

I'm pro-America.

Figure it out.

A dodge. I'm pro-America. Ironic, each of us being pro-America but believing the other is not may be the only thing we agree upon.

 

[Vastator]

The list you provide is actually a set of demands. Obviously they could not be offered any of those outright. Compromise would be a willingness to make some adjustments in those areas, in return for their acceptance of some adjustments we’d like to see made. The demands presented have zero chance of going anywhere, so they really aren’t a serious concern. But dwindling as they may be in number, there are some moderate democrats out there. They just don’t get the airtime the socialist extremists do. As far as the fad of promoting these extremists goes; it will pass. After the election results soundly reject their insanity, the Democrat party will be in search of legitimate leadership that actually has a chance of making things happen. The only way they be able to make anything happen will be through compromise.
Instead making a list of demands, both sides could benefit from stating what effect, or outcome they’d like to see. Then start discussing terms which bring both sides somewhat closer to the ends theyd like to achieve.

Since you've been given the opportunity twice,and could not provide a viable compromise in any of those areas, I'll assume your view is not amenable in reality.


Billy said the other side must be defeated.

I'm gonna go with that view.



Consider the possibility that you are incorrect.

Then go with that view. So... How exactly do you intend to “defeat” the other side?

At the ballot box, silly.

So you agree. Like I said; the demands you listed won’t be met. But then what? We still have an immigration problem. We still could benefit from reforming our criminal justice system. Merely winning tha election alone isn’t enough to achieve that. As long as gridlock persists very little changes. Which might have its benefits, but also has some very strong negatives. Not the least of which being the steady flow of invaders. They are still coming. And will continue to do so until both sides choose to agree on a solution that they’ll enforce.

Now don't start sounding like a moron, or a liar.

I certainly don't 'agree.'

They, the Left, the Democrats, Liberals, Progressives, must be defeated, extirpated, ground to dust politically......as I forced you to admit.....there is no basis for compromise.


Trump is reshaping the judiciary....that's were we begin.

On the over arching issues there is always room for compromise. The left merely needs to come back with more “reasonable” suggestions. And once these demands fall flat, they will. Those who try to deal in absolutes, and “all, or nothing” expectations deliver nothing but conflict. Not solutions. And those cocky, self righteous types occupy both sides of the aisle.

 

[Vastator]

The list you provide is actually a set of demands. Obviously they could not be offered any of those outright. Compromise would be a willingness to make some adjustments in those areas, in return for their acceptance of some adjustments we’d like to see made. The demands presented have zero chance of going anywhere, so they really aren’t a serious concern. But dwindling as they may be in number, there are some moderate democrats out there. They just don’t get the airtime the socialist extremists do. As far as the fad of promoting these extremists goes; it will pass. After the election results soundly reject their insanity, the Democrat party will be in search of legitimate leadership that actually has a chance of making things happen. The only way they be able to make anything happen will be through compromise.
Instead making a list of demands, both sides could benefit from stating what effect, or outcome they’d like to see. Then start discussing terms which bring both sides somewhat closer to the ends theyd like to achieve.

Since you've been given the opportunity twice,and could not provide a viable compromise in any of those areas, I'll assume your view is not amenable in reality.


Billy said the other side must be defeated.

I'm gonna go with that view.



Consider the possibility that you are incorrect.

Then go with that view. So... How exactly do you intend to “defeat” the other side?

At the ballot box, silly.

So you agree. Like I said; the demands you listed won’t be met. But then what? We still have an immigration problem. We still could benefit from reforming our criminal justice system. Merely winning tha election alone isn’t enough to achieve that. As long as gridlock persists very little changes. Which might have its benefits, but also has some very strong negatives. Not the least of which being the steady flow of invaders. They are still coming. And will continue to do so until both sides choose to agree on a solution that they’ll enforce.

In Mac's thread about compromise, it eventually got to the point where there are many things both sides can agree on, however those issues will never be worked on. The media driven, divisive issues will continue the gridlock, and common sense stuff will never be touched. The game for power will ensure that if a Republican has a chance for a common sense agreement, it will be coupled with a government power grab. They would have to agree to dangerous horseshit like eliminating Ice, eliminating the electoral college, or mega programs like medicare for all. It is best to continue the gridlock than enact those liberal demands.

The problem with letting the gridlock continue is that the invaders keep coming. That only benefits the left. And left unabated, it will give them the upper hand. It’s just a matter of time.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Which scares you more, that she will fail or that she will succeed?

I'm pro-America.

Figure it out.

A dodge. I'm pro-America. Ironic, each of us being pro-America but believing the other is not may be the only thing we agree upon.

Oh....so sorry.

Seems I made the mistake of assuming you had a cerebrum.

Thanks for the correction.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Since you've been given the opportunity twice,and could not provide a viable compromise in any of those areas, I'll assume your view is not amenable in reality.


Billy said the other side must be defeated.

I'm gonna go with that view.



Consider the possibility that you are incorrect.

Then go with that view. So... How exactly do you intend to “defeat” the other side?

At the ballot box, silly.

So you agree. Like I said; the demands you listed won’t be met. But then what? We still have an immigration problem. We still could benefit from reforming our criminal justice system. Merely winning tha election alone isn’t enough to achieve that. As long as gridlock persists very little changes. Which might have its benefits, but also has some very strong negatives. Not the least of which being the steady flow of invaders. They are still coming. And will continue to do so until both sides choose to agree on a solution that they’ll enforce.

Now don't start sounding like a moron, or a liar.

I certainly don't 'agree.'

They, the Left, the Democrats, Liberals, Progressives, must be defeated, extirpated, ground to dust politically......as I forced you to admit.....there is no basis for compromise.


Trump is reshaping the judiciary....that's were we begin.

On the over arching issues there is always room for compromise. The left merely needs to come back with more “reasonable” suggestions. And once these demands fall flat, they will. Those who try to deal in absolutes, and “all, or nothing” expectations deliver nothing but conflict. Not solutions. And those cocky, self righteous types occupy both sides of the aisle.

Is it possible you don't recognize that you just said compromise...but there is no possible compromise with the Left????


Why do you yearn for an equivalency that doesn't exist?

 

[alang1216]

Which scares you more, that she will fail or that she will succeed?

I'm pro-America.

Figure it out.

A dodge. I'm pro-America. Ironic, each of us being pro-America but believing the other is not may be the only thing we agree upon.

Oh....so sorry.

Seems I made the mistake of assuming you had a cerebrum.

Thanks for the correction.

Another dodge AND an insult. You're in fine form today.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Which scares you more, that she will fail or that she will succeed?

I'm pro-America.

Figure it out.

A dodge. I'm pro-America. Ironic, each of us being pro-America but believing the other is not may be the only thing we agree upon.

Oh....so sorry.

Seems I made the mistake of assuming you had a cerebrum.

Thanks for the correction.

Another dodge AND an insult. You're in fine form today.

Dodge???

Why would I? I'm fearless.

But I do provide what you deserve.




This is what Americans support.

Individualism
Free markets
Limited constitutional government.

And you?

 

[alang1216]

This is what Americans support.

Individualism
Free markets
Limited constitutional government.

And you?

No problem with those here.

of course Americans also support:

• socialism & communism
• environmental protection & developing natural resources
• Dems & GOP
• evolution & creationism/ID
• charity & justice
• etc.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

This is what Americans support.

Individualism
Free markets
Limited constitutional government.

And you?

No problem with those here.

of course Americans also support:

• socialism & communism

Non sequitur.

 

[alang1216]

This is what Americans support.

Individualism
Free markets
Limited constitutional government.

And you?

No problem with those here.

of course Americans also support:

• socialism & communism

Non sequitur.

No it was sequitur. I felt her list was incomplete since she doesn't speak for all Americans.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

This is what Americans support.

Individualism
Free markets
Limited constitutional government.

And you?

No problem with those here.

of course Americans also support:

• socialism & communism

Non sequitur.

No it was sequitur. I felt her list was incomplete since she doesn't speak for all Americans.

Marxist theory is not compatible with American foundational thought nor the precepts of the Constitution.

 

[alang1216]

This is what Americans support.

Individualism
Free markets
Limited constitutional government.

And you?

No problem with those here.

of course Americans also support:

• socialism & communism

Non sequitur.

No it was sequitur. I felt her list was incomplete since she doesn't speak for all Americans.

Marxist theory is not compatible with American foundational thought nor the precepts of the Constitution.

The founding fathers certainly leaned toward capitalism but I don't know anything in Marxism that violates the Constitution.

I'm not a Marxist but there are certainly Americans that do support him.

 

[PoliticalChic]

This is what Americans support.

Individualism
Free markets
Limited constitutional government.

And you?

No problem with those here.

of course Americans also support:

• socialism & communism
• environmental protection & developing natural resources
• Dems & GOP
• evolution & creationism/ID
• charity & justice
• etc.

"No problem with those here."


Then you voted for Trump over Hillary?

Or are you lying?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

This is what Americans support.

Individualism
Free markets
Limited constitutional government.

And you?

No problem with those here.

of course Americans also support:

• socialism & communism

Non sequitur.

No it was sequitur. I felt her list was incomplete since she doesn't speak for all Americans.

Marxist theory is not compatible with American foundational thought nor the precepts of the Constitution.

The founding fathers certainly leaned toward capitalism but I don't know anything in Marxism that violates the Constitution.

I'm not a Marxist but there are certainly Americans that do support him.

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" is diametrically opposed to the Constitution.

"American" is more an idea than a birthplace.

 

[PoliticalChic]

This is what Americans support.

Individualism
Free markets
Limited constitutional government.

And you?

No problem with those here.

of course Americans also support:

• socialism & communism

Non sequitur.

No it was sequitur. I felt her list was incomplete since she doesn't speak for all Americans.

Here's the choice.


a. individualism, free markets, and limited constitutional government.


or


b. the collective, command and control regulation of private industry, and overarching government that can order every aspect of the private citizen's life....right down to control of his thoughts and speech.




Who'd you vote for?

 

[PoliticalChic]

This is what Americans support.

Individualism
Free markets
Limited constitutional government.

And you?

No problem with those here.

of course Americans also support:

• socialism & communism

Non sequitur.

No it was sequitur. I felt her list was incomplete since she doesn't speak for all Americans.

Marxist theory is not compatible with American foundational thought nor the precepts of the Constitution.

The founding fathers certainly leaned toward capitalism but I don't know anything in Marxism that violates the Constitution.

I'm not a Marxist but there are certainly Americans that do support him.

Clearly you wasted precious bytes by not stopping at "but I don't know anything."

 

[otto105]

This Bolshevik pro-criminal was even too radical for the Democrat Party......Governor Cuomo endorsed her opponent....


'Shocking Blow to the Queens Democratic Machine' as Progressive Tiffany Cabán Declares Victory in District Attorney Race
"A victory for working people everywhere who are fighting for real political change and demanding we end cash bail, mass incarceration, and the failed war on drugs."
'Shocking Blow to the Queens Democratic Machine' as Progressive Tiffany Cabán Declares Victory in District Attorney Race


....but she is just fine for Bernie and OcasioDunce......



Can you imagine, this is too insane for the party that stands for this:


The Democrat Party is now running on full-blown anti-white racism, socialism, infanticide, opposition to free speech, substituting illegal alien voters for the American citizenry, and anti-Semitism…


....and this.....


Not just refusing to finance a wall on the southern border….but tearing down existing barriers

Abolishing ICE

Scrapping the electoral college

Eliminating all private health insurance

Packing the Supreme Court

Lowering the voting age to sixteen

Banning cars and airplanes

Financial security for those who ‘don’t care to work’

Reparations for slavery

Reparations for drug dealers

Giving murders and rapists the vote

Reparations for gays

Bah ha ha ha ha


Didn’t Alabama give visitation rights to rapists?

 

[otto105]

This is what Americans support.

Individualism
Free markets
Limited constitutional government.

And you?

No problem with those here.

of course Americans also support:

• socialism & communism

Non sequitur.

No it was sequitur. I felt her list was incomplete since she doesn't speak for all Americans.

Here's the choice.


a. individualism, free markets, and limited constitutional government.


or


b. the collective, command and control regulation of private industry, and overarching government that can order every aspect of the private citizen's life....right down to control of his thoughts and speech.




Who'd you vote for?

Dumb.


Your republic party mangles all those items that you listed.