a new party

[TroglocratsRdumb]

democrats are moving too far left

republicans have gone too far right

i find myself appreciating rinos and dinos more these days

we need a third party for the majority of us who are moderates

conservatives are mainstream, the Dems are far left wing extremist who are attempting create a one Party banana republic

 

[SC Patriot]

democrats are moving too far left
republicans have gone too far right
i find myself appreciating rinos and dinos more these days
we need a third party for the majority of us who are moderates

I've largely given up on this idea, considering the stranglehold the two "major" parties have on our election system. Plus, if such a party can't appear NOW, as ridiculous and polarized as things are, one NEVER will.

What I'm hoping now is that one of the parties will wake up and realize that a majority of the country wants moderation and cooperation, and be the first to take advantage of that. The problem is that the wings have most of the energy, and therefore the influence.

I don't know what fixes this.

It is actually more simple than you realize.
The Constitution is not a living document. It is a guideline.
It has resulted in the development of a union
It has allowed the freeing of people in bondage
It has allowed for fair elections
It has allowed for a SCOTUS that makes monumental decisions
It has allowed for the right to vote for women
It has allowed for the right to vote for all Americans
It has allowed for equal rights for all Americans
It has allowed for 3 equal branches of government offering checks and balances.

Sure, we were imperfect as a country back in the 1700's....we were new, we had habits of our heritages.....but it is our constitution that FORCED us to right our wrongs.

So what fixes it? Let the constitution do its job.

It really isnt that difficult. Only to the politicians who are trying to get votes.

And THAT is the problem.

Let the Constitution do what? Mind explaining further?

Not to start an argument. What is considered moderate these days? Like for these topics:
abortion
healthcare
taxes
national defense
foreign policy at large
What is the moderate position on each?

Abortion is the closest to being a binary argument. The rest all exist along a continuum and are not binary.

And I think we've fallen into a trap, thinking that one side has to "win" on any given issue, and one side has to "lose".

How about both sides collaborating, innovating, and creating something NEW, like our Constitution? That way we all have skin in the game.

America used to be able to innovate, back when we were great.

I agree, progress is only made through compromise and collaboration. But, that's not really a stance it's just asking the current parties to talk to each other. I was more curious as to what are the political beliefs of a moderate. Usually when they are asked it's quite clear that they would more than fit into one party or the other.

I think there are a couple of characteristics, depending on the individual moderate. So:

• Some moderates have strong feelings on any given issue, but their opinions as a whole don't fit with one of the tribes. So, a moderate may be passionately pro choice and passionately pro lowering income taxes. Neither tribe, then, is a fit for them.
• Some moderates really do want to find some kind of middle ground on most issues. They believe that there are decent or fair arguments on both ends, and want to at least begin the conversation by finding shared views and going from there.
• Some moderates think that both tribes are narcissistic gasbags and would rather just approach each issue on its own merits, taking some ideas from column A, some from column B, and the rest from new ideas.

My two cents, anyway.

I don't think you have to be a 'moderate' to want to compromise. As a liberal, I'd rather get something rather than nothing.

But since this thread is about a moderate party, what is that exactly? How are a group of people who claim to be in the middle however their various opinions on a range of topics will individually slide from liberal to conservative leaning is supposed to make up a cohesive political party?

That I couldn't tell you, since we've never really had one. I think a glimpse of it came a few years ago when there was talk of a Kasich/Hickenlooper ticket.

But to your point, I think a party that was clearly committed to collaboration and new ideas would draw many people who didn't necessarily agree with its candidates on every issue. So the appeal would be more about general approach than specific positions.

Please do not build John Kasich into what he is not. He is far from moderate.

Lets see.
the constitution allowed for women to vote. It was only because of the constitution that were given the right to vote. I agree with the decision and I respect it.
The consitution allowed for the decision of Roe V Wade. I disagree with the decision, but I respect it.

You see, our constitution was written in a way where it allowed for debate and it allowed for majority decision and implementation of laws and rights.

Seems to be working well.

Albeit, there are those that say it is a living document and we must adjust to it.

To me? That is wrong. It is a document and we must apply it....not Obey it....that would be wrong....apply it. And that is what we do.

And it is working.

Good points but it only works when people stand up for rights. I think that is why many call it a living document.

We have three branches of government. 2 of them are elected and one is appointed by the executive branch...however...with the confirmation of the senate. Those elections are how people can stand up for their rights. But when people are voted in they still must adhere to the constitution as it is a guidance for legislative decisions made by those elected.
Sure, protests are good....and they allow the legislators to hesitate and reconsider....but it is the constitution that keeps them in check and not simply do what they want to do for votes, but instead so what the constitution has deemed best for the overall good.
I know...the left would love to toss the constitution. But without it? We would not have women voting, African Americans voting. abortion legalized. The ACLU pushing rights of Americans.
The constitution ensures we do the right thing and not do something that can be damaging.
A good example is the ACA. Justice Roberts was well aware that the constitution does not allow for forcing anyone to purchase something from the day they are born to the day they die. So he called it a tax.
For right or wrong and regardless of how you feel...it was the constitution that guided that decision. And without the creativity of Justice Roberts, the act was unconstitutional.

Just thin about this....what if a law was passed that said you MUST buy only American made cars....and you MUST buy it at no age older than 18? It is the constitution that prevents such ridiculous laws being imposed on the American People.

the left would love to toss the constitution?

not sure there is much evidence of that.

and who do you consider “left”?
dolly parton?

meanwhile there is tons of evidence that the RIGHT would rewrite the constitution, insist it is a christian document, and use it to create a theocracy that denies rights and protections to gays, atheists, nonchristian religions...

and the dominionists would BAN evolution.....by their own admission...

Wow. I thought I was debating someone open minded.
But once you went in the direction of Christian document I realized I was not.
Take care

 

[Billiejeens]

democrats are moving too far left
republicans have gone too far right
i find myself appreciating rinos and dinos more these days
we need a third party for the majority of us who are moderates

I've largely given up on this idea, considering the stranglehold the two "major" parties have on our election system. Plus, if such a party can't appear NOW, as ridiculous and polarized as things are, one NEVER will.

What I'm hoping now is that one of the parties will wake up and realize that a majority of the country wants moderation and cooperation, and be the first to take advantage of that. The problem is that the wings have most of the energy, and therefore the influence.

I don't know what fixes this.

It is actually more simple than you realize.
The Constitution is not a living document. It is a guideline.
It has resulted in the development of a union
It has allowed the freeing of people in bondage
It has allowed for fair elections
It has allowed for a SCOTUS that makes monumental decisions
It has allowed for the right to vote for women
It has allowed for the right to vote for all Americans
It has allowed for equal rights for all Americans
It has allowed for 3 equal branches of government offering checks and balances.

Sure, we were imperfect as a country back in the 1700's....we were new, we had habits of our heritages.....but it is our constitution that FORCED us to right our wrongs.

So what fixes it? Let the constitution do its job.

It really isnt that difficult. Only to the politicians who are trying to get votes.

And THAT is the problem.

Let the Constitution do what? Mind explaining further?

Not to start an argument. What is considered moderate these days? Like for these topics:
abortion
healthcare
taxes
national defense
foreign policy at large
What is the moderate position on each?

Abortion is the closest to being a binary argument. The rest all exist along a continuum and are not binary.

And I think we've fallen into a trap, thinking that one side has to "win" on any given issue, and one side has to "lose".

How about both sides collaborating, innovating, and creating something NEW, like our Constitution? That way we all have skin in the game.

America used to be able to innovate, back when we were great.

I agree, progress is only made through compromise and collaboration. But, that's not really a stance it's just asking the current parties to talk to each other. I was more curious as to what are the political beliefs of a moderate. Usually when they are asked it's quite clear that they would more than fit into one party or the other.

I think there are a couple of characteristics, depending on the individual moderate. So:

• Some moderates have strong feelings on any given issue, but their opinions as a whole don't fit with one of the tribes. So, a moderate may be passionately pro choice and passionately pro lowering income taxes. Neither tribe, then, is a fit for them.
• Some moderates really do want to find some kind of middle ground on most issues. They believe that there are decent or fair arguments on both ends, and want to at least begin the conversation by finding shared views and going from there.
• Some moderates think that both tribes are narcissistic gasbags and would rather just approach each issue on its own merits, taking some ideas from column A, some from column B, and the rest from new ideas.

My two cents, anyway.

I don't think you have to be a 'moderate' to want to compromise. As a liberal, I'd rather get something rather than nothing.

But since this thread is about a moderate party, what is that exactly? How are a group of people who claim to be in the middle however their various opinions on a range of topics will individually slide from liberal to conservative leaning is supposed to make up a cohesive political party?

That I couldn't tell you, since we've never really had one. I think a glimpse of it came a few years ago when there was talk of a Kasich/Hickenlooper ticket.

But to your point, I think a party that was clearly committed to collaboration and new ideas would draw many people who didn't necessarily agree with its candidates on every issue. So the appeal would be more about general approach than specific positions.

Please do not build John Kasich into what he is not. He is far from moderate.

Lets see.
the constitution allowed for women to vote. It was only because of the constitution that were given the right to vote. I agree with the decision and I respect it.
The consitution allowed for the decision of Roe V Wade. I disagree with the decision, but I respect it.

You see, our constitution was written in a way where it allowed for debate and it allowed for majority decision and implementation of laws and rights.

Seems to be working well.

Albeit, there are those that say it is a living document and we must adjust to it.

To me? That is wrong. It is a document and we must apply it....not Obey it....that would be wrong....apply it. And that is what we do.

And it is working.

Good points but it only works when people stand up for rights. I think that is why many call it a living document.

We have three branches of government. 2 of them are elected and one is appointed by the executive branch...however...with the confirmation of the senate. Those elections are how people can stand up for their rights. But when people are voted in they still must adhere to the constitution as it is a guidance for legislative decisions made by those elected.
Sure, protests are good....and they allow the legislators to hesitate and reconsider....but it is the constitution that keeps them in check and not simply do what they want to do for votes, but instead so what the constitution has deemed best for the overall good.
I know...the left would love to toss the constitution. But without it? We would not have women voting, African Americans voting. abortion legalized. The ACLU pushing rights of Americans.
The constitution ensures we do the right thing and not do something that can be damaging.
A good example is the ACA. Justice Roberts was well aware that the constitution does not allow for forcing anyone to purchase something from the day they are born to the day they die. So he called it a tax.
For right or wrong and regardless of how you feel...it was the constitution that guided that decision. And without the creativity of Justice Roberts, the act was unconstitutional.

Just thin about this....what if a law was passed that said you MUST buy only American made cars....and you MUST buy it at no age older than 18? It is the constitution that prevents such ridiculous laws being imposed on the American People.

the left would love to toss the constitution?

not sure there is much evidence of that.

and who do you consider “left”?
dolly parton?

meanwhile there is tons of evidence that the RIGHT would rewrite the constitution, insist it is a christian document, and use it to create a theocracy that denies rights and protections to gays, atheists, nonchristian religions...

and the dominionists would BAN evolution.....by their own admission...

That is simply incongruous with reality.

 

[Billiejeens]

democrats are moving too far left

republicans have gone too far right

i find myself appreciating rinos and dinos more these days

we need a third party for the majority of us who are moderates

conservatives are mainstream, the Dems are far left wing extremist who are attempting create a one Party banana republic

Even with the fraud, Biden only won 15% of the counties in the Country.
It's a regional party.

 

[Cecilie1200]

democrats are moving too far left

republicans have gone too far right

i find myself appreciating rinos and dinos more these days

we need a third party for the majority of us who are moderates

So start one. You certainly have a lazy leftist mindset, sitting around and bitching about how someone else needs to provide you with what you think you need.

 

[norwegen]

democrats are moving too far left

republicans have gone too far right

i find myself appreciating rinos and dinos more these days

we need a third party for the majority of us who are moderates

I propose a keg party.

 

[Cecilie1200]

republicans have gone too far right

How so? Which specific policies do you consider "too far right"?

All of them, since he's "moderate" the same way Hell is a sauna.

 

[anynameyouwish]

democrats are moving too far left

republicans have gone too far right

i find myself appreciating rinos and dinos more these days

we need a third party for the majority of us who are moderates

I propose a keg party.

now that would be a good start!

 

[norwegen]

democrats are moving too far left

republicans have gone too far right

i find myself appreciating rinos and dinos more these days

we need a third party for the majority of us who are moderates

conservatives are mainstream, the Dems are far left wing extremist who are attempting create a one Party banana republic

Conservatives were certainly the mainstream in colonial and founding-era America.

The malcontents on the left just get louder and bolder, and brainwash the youth and other feeble-minded people.

 

[Cecilie1200]

You're gong to have to define what it is to be moderate these days. Not that you can't, I just genuinely don't know what that means anymore.

moderate is supporting the constitution as written,,,

What you really mean is to interpret the Constitution as believed by conservatives. Doesn't sound moderate to me.

Only insofar as what conservatives believe is what's actually written. And how can you say it "doesn't sound moderate to you", when you just got done telling us you have no idea what moderate means? Do you even listen to yourself?

 

[Billiejeens]

democrats are moving too far left

republicans have gone too far right

i find myself appreciating rinos and dinos more these days

we need a third party for the majority of us who are moderates

conservatives are mainstream, the Dems are far left wing extremist who are attempting create a one Party banana republic

Conservatives were certainly the mainstream in colonial and founding-era America.

The malcontents on the left just get louder and bolder, and brainwash the youth and other feeble-minded people.

The Democrat Media amplifies their small numbers.

 

[anynameyouwish]

democrats are moving too far left

republicans have gone too far right

i find myself appreciating rinos and dinos more these days

we need a third party for the majority of us who are moderates

conservatives are mainstream, the Dems are far left wing extremist who are attempting create a one Party banana republic

right wingers are not mainstream

REAL conservatives might be but right wingers are not

 

[anynameyouwish]

democrats are moving too far left
republicans have gone too far right
i find myself appreciating rinos and dinos more these days
we need a third party for the majority of us who are moderates

I've largely given up on this idea, considering the stranglehold the two "major" parties have on our election system. Plus, if such a party can't appear NOW, as ridiculous and polarized as things are, one NEVER will.

What I'm hoping now is that one of the parties will wake up and realize that a majority of the country wants moderation and cooperation, and be the first to take advantage of that. The problem is that the wings have most of the energy, and therefore the influence.

I don't know what fixes this.

It is actually more simple than you realize.
The Constitution is not a living document. It is a guideline.
It has resulted in the development of a union
It has allowed the freeing of people in bondage
It has allowed for fair elections
It has allowed for a SCOTUS that makes monumental decisions
It has allowed for the right to vote for women
It has allowed for the right to vote for all Americans
It has allowed for equal rights for all Americans
It has allowed for 3 equal branches of government offering checks and balances.

Sure, we were imperfect as a country back in the 1700's....we were new, we had habits of our heritages.....but it is our constitution that FORCED us to right our wrongs.

So what fixes it? Let the constitution do its job.

It really isnt that difficult. Only to the politicians who are trying to get votes.

And THAT is the problem.

Let the Constitution do what? Mind explaining further?

Not to start an argument. What is considered moderate these days? Like for these topics:
abortion
healthcare
taxes
national defense
foreign policy at large
What is the moderate position on each?

Abortion is the closest to being a binary argument. The rest all exist along a continuum and are not binary.

And I think we've fallen into a trap, thinking that one side has to "win" on any given issue, and one side has to "lose".

How about both sides collaborating, innovating, and creating something NEW, like our Constitution? That way we all have skin in the game.

America used to be able to innovate, back when we were great.

I agree, progress is only made through compromise and collaboration. But, that's not really a stance it's just asking the current parties to talk to each other. I was more curious as to what are the political beliefs of a moderate. Usually when they are asked it's quite clear that they would more than fit into one party or the other.

I think there are a couple of characteristics, depending on the individual moderate. So:

• Some moderates have strong feelings on any given issue, but their opinions as a whole don't fit with one of the tribes. So, a moderate may be passionately pro choice and passionately pro lowering income taxes. Neither tribe, then, is a fit for them.
• Some moderates really do want to find some kind of middle ground on most issues. They believe that there are decent or fair arguments on both ends, and want to at least begin the conversation by finding shared views and going from there.
• Some moderates think that both tribes are narcissistic gasbags and would rather just approach each issue on its own merits, taking some ideas from column A, some from column B, and the rest from new ideas.

My two cents, anyway.

I don't think you have to be a 'moderate' to want to compromise. As a liberal, I'd rather get something rather than nothing.

But since this thread is about a moderate party, what is that exactly? How are a group of people who claim to be in the middle however their various opinions on a range of topics will individually slide from liberal to conservative leaning is supposed to make up a cohesive political party?

That I couldn't tell you, since we've never really had one. I think a glimpse of it came a few years ago when there was talk of a Kasich/Hickenlooper ticket.

But to your point, I think a party that was clearly committed to collaboration and new ideas would draw many people who didn't necessarily agree with its candidates on every issue. So the appeal would be more about general approach than specific positions.

Please do not build John Kasich into what he is not. He is far from moderate.

Lets see.
the constitution allowed for women to vote. It was only because of the constitution that were given the right to vote. I agree with the decision and I respect it.
The consitution allowed for the decision of Roe V Wade. I disagree with the decision, but I respect it.

You see, our constitution was written in a way where it allowed for debate and it allowed for majority decision and implementation of laws and rights.

Seems to be working well.

Albeit, there are those that say it is a living document and we must adjust to it.

To me? That is wrong. It is a document and we must apply it....not Obey it....that would be wrong....apply it. And that is what we do.

And it is working.

Good points but it only works when people stand up for rights. I think that is why many call it a living document.

We have three branches of government. 2 of them are elected and one is appointed by the executive branch...however...with the confirmation of the senate. Those elections are how people can stand up for their rights. But when people are voted in they still must adhere to the constitution as it is a guidance for legislative decisions made by those elected.
Sure, protests are good....and they allow the legislators to hesitate and reconsider....but it is the constitution that keeps them in check and not simply do what they want to do for votes, but instead so what the constitution has deemed best for the overall good.
I know...the left would love to toss the constitution. But without it? We would not have women voting, African Americans voting. abortion legalized. The ACLU pushing rights of Americans.
The constitution ensures we do the right thing and not do something that can be damaging.
A good example is the ACA. Justice Roberts was well aware that the constitution does not allow for forcing anyone to purchase something from the day they are born to the day they die. So he called it a tax.
For right or wrong and regardless of how you feel...it was the constitution that guided that decision. And without the creativity of Justice Roberts, the act was unconstitutional.

Just thin about this....what if a law was passed that said you MUST buy only American made cars....and you MUST buy it at no age older than 18? It is the constitution that prevents such ridiculous laws being imposed on the American People.

the left would love to toss the constitution?

not sure there is much evidence of that.

and who do you consider “left”?
dolly parton?

meanwhile there is tons of evidence that the RIGHT would rewrite the constitution, insist it is a christian document, and use it to create a theocracy that denies rights and protections to gays, atheists, nonchristian religions...

and the dominionists would BAN evolution.....by their own admission...

Wow. I thought I was debating someone open minded.
But once you went in the direction of Christian document I realized I was not.
Take care

i dont want christian sharia law

do you?

i want fair laws based on logic and reason, dont you?

i dont want american declared a christian nation

do you?

 

[anynameyouwish]

democrats are moving too far left

republicans have gone too far right

i find myself appreciating rinos and dinos more these days

we need a third party for the majority of us who are moderates

So start one. You certainly have a lazy leftist mindset, sitting around and bitching about how someone else needs to provide you with what you think you need.

you surely are a reprehensible piece of crap

its actually possible to have a conversation on a topic without insulting and attacking people

 

[SC Patriot]

democrats are moving too far left
republicans have gone too far right
i find myself appreciating rinos and dinos more these days
we need a third party for the majority of us who are moderates

I've largely given up on this idea, considering the stranglehold the two "major" parties have on our election system. Plus, if such a party can't appear NOW, as ridiculous and polarized as things are, one NEVER will.

What I'm hoping now is that one of the parties will wake up and realize that a majority of the country wants moderation and cooperation, and be the first to take advantage of that. The problem is that the wings have most of the energy, and therefore the influence.

I don't know what fixes this.

It is actually more simple than you realize.
The Constitution is not a living document. It is a guideline.
It has resulted in the development of a union
It has allowed the freeing of people in bondage
It has allowed for fair elections
It has allowed for a SCOTUS that makes monumental decisions
It has allowed for the right to vote for women
It has allowed for the right to vote for all Americans
It has allowed for equal rights for all Americans
It has allowed for 3 equal branches of government offering checks and balances.

Sure, we were imperfect as a country back in the 1700's....we were new, we had habits of our heritages.....but it is our constitution that FORCED us to right our wrongs.

So what fixes it? Let the constitution do its job.

It really isnt that difficult. Only to the politicians who are trying to get votes.

And THAT is the problem.

Let the Constitution do what? Mind explaining further?

Not to start an argument. What is considered moderate these days? Like for these topics:
abortion
healthcare
taxes
national defense
foreign policy at large
What is the moderate position on each?

Abortion is the closest to being a binary argument. The rest all exist along a continuum and are not binary.

And I think we've fallen into a trap, thinking that one side has to "win" on any given issue, and one side has to "lose".

How about both sides collaborating, innovating, and creating something NEW, like our Constitution? That way we all have skin in the game.

America used to be able to innovate, back when we were great.

I agree, progress is only made through compromise and collaboration. But, that's not really a stance it's just asking the current parties to talk to each other. I was more curious as to what are the political beliefs of a moderate. Usually when they are asked it's quite clear that they would more than fit into one party or the other.

I think there are a couple of characteristics, depending on the individual moderate. So:

• Some moderates have strong feelings on any given issue, but their opinions as a whole don't fit with one of the tribes. So, a moderate may be passionately pro choice and passionately pro lowering income taxes. Neither tribe, then, is a fit for them.
• Some moderates really do want to find some kind of middle ground on most issues. They believe that there are decent or fair arguments on both ends, and want to at least begin the conversation by finding shared views and going from there.
• Some moderates think that both tribes are narcissistic gasbags and would rather just approach each issue on its own merits, taking some ideas from column A, some from column B, and the rest from new ideas.

My two cents, anyway.

I don't think you have to be a 'moderate' to want to compromise. As a liberal, I'd rather get something rather than nothing.

But since this thread is about a moderate party, what is that exactly? How are a group of people who claim to be in the middle however their various opinions on a range of topics will individually slide from liberal to conservative leaning is supposed to make up a cohesive political party?

That I couldn't tell you, since we've never really had one. I think a glimpse of it came a few years ago when there was talk of a Kasich/Hickenlooper ticket.

But to your point, I think a party that was clearly committed to collaboration and new ideas would draw many people who didn't necessarily agree with its candidates on every issue. So the appeal would be more about general approach than specific positions.

Please do not build John Kasich into what he is not. He is far from moderate.

Lets see.
the constitution allowed for women to vote. It was only because of the constitution that were given the right to vote. I agree with the decision and I respect it.
The consitution allowed for the decision of Roe V Wade. I disagree with the decision, but I respect it.

You see, our constitution was written in a way where it allowed for debate and it allowed for majority decision and implementation of laws and rights.

Seems to be working well.

Albeit, there are those that say it is a living document and we must adjust to it.

To me? That is wrong. It is a document and we must apply it....not Obey it....that would be wrong....apply it. And that is what we do.

And it is working.

Good points but it only works when people stand up for rights. I think that is why many call it a living document.

We have three branches of government. 2 of them are elected and one is appointed by the executive branch...however...with the confirmation of the senate. Those elections are how people can stand up for their rights. But when people are voted in they still must adhere to the constitution as it is a guidance for legislative decisions made by those elected.
Sure, protests are good....and they allow the legislators to hesitate and reconsider....but it is the constitution that keeps them in check and not simply do what they want to do for votes, but instead so what the constitution has deemed best for the overall good.
I know...the left would love to toss the constitution. But without it? We would not have women voting, African Americans voting. abortion legalized. The ACLU pushing rights of Americans.
The constitution ensures we do the right thing and not do something that can be damaging.
A good example is the ACA. Justice Roberts was well aware that the constitution does not allow for forcing anyone to purchase something from the day they are born to the day they die. So he called it a tax.
For right or wrong and regardless of how you feel...it was the constitution that guided that decision. And without the creativity of Justice Roberts, the act was unconstitutional.

Just thin about this....what if a law was passed that said you MUST buy only American made cars....and you MUST buy it at no age older than 18? It is the constitution that prevents such ridiculous laws being imposed on the American People.

the left would love to toss the constitution?

not sure there is much evidence of that.

and who do you consider “left”?
dolly parton?

meanwhile there is tons of evidence that the RIGHT would rewrite the constitution, insist it is a christian document, and use it to create a theocracy that denies rights and protections to gays, atheists, nonchristian religions...

and the dominionists would BAN evolution.....by their own admission...

Wow. I thought I was debating someone open minded.
But once you went in the direction of Christian document I realized I was not.
Take care

i dont want christian sharia law

do you?

i want fair laws based on logic and reason, dont you?

i dont want american declared a christian nation

do you?

Nope. I am Jewish.
I dont see any type of majority pushing for that.

In the meantime, I dont know of any law that has been enacted embracing that.

You really need to get a grip on reality. Not what Rachel Maddow wants you to believe.

 

[SC Patriot]

democrats are moving too far left

republicans have gone too far right

i find myself appreciating rinos and dinos more these days

we need a third party for the majority of us who are moderates

So start one. You certainly have a lazy leftist mindset, sitting around and bitching about how someone else needs to provide you with what you think you need.

you surely are a reprehensible piece of crap

its actually possible to have a conversation on a topic without insulting and attacking people

wait...

Just so I can get this straight.

Calling Cecillie a reprehensible piece of crap is NOT an insult or attacking?

You sure of that?

 

[JWBooth]

democrats are moving too far left

republicans have gone too far right

i find myself appreciating rinos and dinos more these days

we need a third party for the majority of us who are moderates

 

[BrokeLoser]

Did you bitch when Obama put kids in cages? I bet not.
Paris Climate Agreement? You mean YOU are actually for the redistribution of America's wealth?

Obama didn't have a family separation policy as deterrent. You're thinking of Rump, Miller and Sessions.
It's been fact checked to death Meister.
He did build some of the cages as a temporary solution when there was evidence that the parent was a felon or a kid was in danger.

So your for the 'rent a child' program that was promoted from south of the border, huh?
The reason for the separation was there wasn't any proof of who's child was who's.
Sad about the corruption from Mexico where people were being schooled on how to
beat the system in the US.

Nonsense -"Zero Tolerance" meant ZERO tolerance. They literally ripped breast feeding babies from the teat of their mothers. They then tossed them in a cage with a space blanket and didn't keep track of either the mother or the toddler thus were unable to reconnect hundreds of babies and children. The practice was among the cruelest and most gruesome of this administration.

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/10/doj-draft-shows-grievous-details-of-migrant-child-separation.html

If true..that’s awesome, makes me respect Trump even more.
Why do you Lefties hate personal accountability so much? Why do you ignore the causation principle?

 

[anynameyouwish]

republicans have gone too far right

How so? Which specific policies do you consider "too far right"?

i didnt say “policies”

i said the party itself has moved too far right

anti gay rights

the war on pot

advocating violence against their enemies

indulging a dictatorial traitor

agreeing that the only good democrat is a dead one

 

[BrokeLoser]

republicans have gone too far right

How so? Which specific policies do you consider "too far right"?

Note how anynameyouwish Mac1958 HappyJoy ignore your simple question...why you ask?
Because they can’t give you an honest rational answer.
They hate that conservatives remain committed to preserving and protecting American history, traditions, values and laws.
What they really mean is;
“why do Conservatives resist and denounce our push to CHANGE America into the anything goes, no boundaries, commie-lite shithole we seek, why don’t they want all of America to become Mexifornia / Loon York?”