Boehner abandons GOP to extremists

[C_Clayton_Jones]

RAY FROM CLEVELAND SAID:

"The Republican constituents are showing they want major change instead of the business as usual way things are run now. That's why our top contenders are no-politicians."

This is naïve and ridiculous – the GOP frontrunners are indeed politicians, whether they've held elected office or not.

And what the extreme right considers to be 'major change' is actually fearful reactionaryism, the desire to return to an idealized American past that never actually exists to begin with; an American past in no way 'ideal' for African-Americans, gay Americans, and women.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

RAY FROM CLEVELAND SAID:

"The Republican constituents are showing they want major change instead of the business as usual way things are run now. That's why our top contenders are no-politicians."

This is naïve and ridiculous – the GOP frontrunners are indeed politicians, whether they've held elected office or not.

And what the extreme right considers to be 'major change' is actually fearful reactionaryism, the desire to return to an idealized American past that never actually exists to begin with; an American past in no way 'ideal' for African-Americans, gay Americans, and women.

No. What we are looking for are representatives that act like they have the power we gave them--not act like Democrat light.

The problem we have today is that when Democrats are in power, Democrats run things. When Republicans are in power, Democrats still run things because Republicans are fearful of the left-wing media or government shutdowns.

But that's the way things work in Washington: you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours. Then at the end of session, they all go to the same bar and laugh things off. Business as usual. We're about sick of it.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Good or bad for republicans?

Bad for republicans. The last time that the republicans let the fringe right head jobs set policy they got the 2013 shut down. It was a disaster for republicans, dropping their approval ratings to the lowest level of any congress. With the GOP receiving the lowest approval ratings of any party in gallup history.

I'd say with this raises the stakes of a debt default to say, 1 chance in 4. As the fringe right republicans want to destroy the US government's credit rating, defund the US government to the point where it can't function, and do as much damage to the US economy as possible before the end of Obama's term.

Alas, the public will not be kind to them for it.

They won the senate in what year ?

I actually think...as far as the federal government is concerned...it's a good thing.

Chaos means no productivity.

And no productivity from the federal government is great.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

RAY FROM CLEVELAND SAID:

"The Republican constituents are showing they want major change instead of the business as usual way things are run now. That's why our top contenders are no-politicians."

This is naïve and ridiculous – the GOP frontrunners are indeed politicians, whether they've held elected office or not.

And what the extreme right considers to be 'major change' is actually fearful reactionaryism, the desire to return to an idealized American past that never actually exists to begin with; an American past in no way 'ideal' for African-Americans, gay Americans, and women.

Do you have this tatooed on your ass ?

Blah blah blah blah blah blah...blah.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Extremist according to who? What makes an extremist depends greatly on ones point of view.

Extremists are those who hold the government hostage if they can't advance their errant, partisan agenda, resulting in sequesters, credit rating downgrades, and government shutdowns.

Extremists are those who seek to 'defund' Planned Parenthood absent justification, where the organization violated no laws.

Extremists are those who hold meaningless 'hearings' concerning 'Benghazi' and 'emails,' absent any evidence of 'wrongdoing,' where the extremists themselves concede there is no evidence of 'wrongdoing,' yet they continue to hold such 'hearings' for purely partisan reasons.

Extremists are those who want to cut spending to vital social programs, education and training programs, and necessary, proper regulatory policies.

Extremists are those who support county clerks who have nothing but contempt for the Constitution and the rule of law, who seek to vilify a teenager who built a clock simply because he's Muslim, who seek to deny American citizens their citizenship predicated solely on who their parents are, and seek to deny a woman her right to privacy by increasing the size and authority of government at the expense of individual liberty.

So no, what constitutes an extremist can be objectively defined and identified.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Extremist according to who? What makes an extremist depends greatly on ones point of view.

Extremists are those who hold the government hostage if they can't advance their errant, partisan agenda, resulting in sequesters, credit rating downgrades, and government shutdowns.

Extremists are those who seek to 'defund' Planned Parenthood absent justification, where the organization violated no laws.

Extremists are those who hold meaningless 'hearings' concerning 'Benghazi' and 'emails,' absent any evidence of 'wrongdoing,' where the extremists themselves concede there is no evidence of 'wrongdoing,' yet they continue to hold such 'hearings' for purely partisan reasons.

Extremists are those who want to cut spending to vital social programs, education and training programs, and necessary, proper regulatory policies.

Extremists are those who support county clerks who have nothing but contempt for the Constitution and the rule of law, who seek to vilify a teenager who built a clock simply because he's Muslim, who seek to deny American citizens their citizenship predicated solely on who their parents are, and seek to deny a woman her right to privacy by increasing the size and authority of government at the expense of individual liberty.

So no, what constitutes an extremist can be objectively defined and identified.

Yeah, if that kid was a white kid, they would have just ignored him? Do you ever read or watch the news?

I think extremism is forcing people to buy something they may not want, need or can afford using punitive measures. That's extremism.

 

[Disir]

Today on Politco was a letter written by a man by the name of Mike Needham. He's been pretty vocal over Boehner resigning.

Mike Needham is the CEO of Heritage Action and a former Heritage Foundation chief of staff. He's a real young cat that has lived a very privileged life. He is the son of George Needham.
Needham & Company - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Heritage Foundation's Michael Needham Tears Apart Right Wing | The New Republic
The Fall of the Heritage Foundation and the Death of Republican Ideas

Now you know the front man for the organization that owns the Freedom Caucus and Cruz.

We should examine the boards and that way we have a damn good picture of who runs the extremists and why.

 

[blackhawk]

Extremist according to who? What makes an extremist depends greatly on ones point of view.

Extremists are those who hold the government hostage if they can't advance their errant, partisan agenda, resulting in sequesters, credit rating downgrades, and government shutdowns.

Extremists are those who seek to 'defund' Planned Parenthood absent justification, where the organization violated no laws.

Extremists are those who hold meaningless 'hearings' concerning 'Benghazi' and 'emails,' absent any evidence of 'wrongdoing,' where the extremists themselves concede there is no evidence of 'wrongdoing,' yet they continue to hold such 'hearings' for purely partisan reasons.

Extremists are those who want to cut spending to vital social programs, education and training programs, and necessary, proper regulatory policies.

Extremists are those who support county clerks who have nothing but contempt for the Constitution and the rule of law, who seek to vilify a teenager who built a clock simply because he's Muslim, who seek to deny American citizens their citizenship predicated solely on who their parents are, and seek to deny a woman her right to privacy by increasing the size and authority of government at the expense of individual liberty.

So no, what constitutes an extremist can be objectively defined and identified.

You prove my point so well your idea of extremist is based soley on your own liberal viewpoint.

 

[Disir]

Here is more information on the House Freedom Caucus.
House Freedom Caucus Forms 'Fight Club' in House

minus Tom McClintock. He resigned last week.
House Republican quits Freedom Caucus

 

[Slyhunter]

When is the next debate?

 

[Grandma]

are you really that ignorant. gerrymandering of districts in our big cities has been done by democrats for generations. They are experts at it. Thats exactly why our democrat run big cities are all broke and full of crime and despair. Look at the leadership of Baltimore, Detroit, Cleveland, Cincinnatti, New York, LA. New Orleans--------------all dems and all f&^Ked up

Umm no.

Districts are redrawn every ten years, after the US Census is done. The party controlling the House draws the lines. Currently the representative districts are those drawn by republicans in 2010/2011.

 

[JimH52]

The only direction the GOP is taking at present is Down. They sit and whine and blame the establishment and the Dems. Then, when given the opportunity to do something, they walk away and cry about the black man in the White House. They are becoming a pathetic, whimpering, caucus of complainers. They have no answers...only complaints.

You're doing a pretty good of it yourself.

What about issues? Come up with any yet? How have the Republicans moved to the right?

Hasn't it become obvious that I don't care about your "so called" Republican issues. You have your right wing loons, who are drooling over the prospects of shutting down the Federal Government and calling it "conservative values." You just keep whining and complaining about the GOP not being conservative enough. It is charming....

So when you say Republicans are moving to the right, that isn't caring, so when I ask how, that isn't caring either.

You made the claim, you aren't man enough to back it up. You've made that clear for a while now.

Aren't you running late for a tupperware party?

I
Just keep whining about the GOP not being conservative enough. You are on the verge of losing both the WH and the Senate......all the while urging your party to move further to the right.

Not enough racist white males being born to allow the GOP to win nationally again. Now.....please whine some more.

Strawman, I didn't say any of that crap.

You said the Republican party was moving to the right. Post after post, you can't name any issue they are actually moving to the right on. So it turns out you pulled it out of your ass

No, the Democrats Have Not Moved Further Left Than Republicans Have Moved Right

The GOP plan to fix the party: Move further right

Now, go read and while you are at it....GET A LIFE!

 

[Slyhunter]

You're doing a pretty good of it yourself.

What about issues? Come up with any yet? How have the Republicans moved to the right?

Hasn't it become obvious that I don't care about your "so called" Republican issues. You have your right wing loons, who are drooling over the prospects of shutting down the Federal Government and calling it "conservative values." You just keep whining and complaining about the GOP not being conservative enough. It is charming....

So when you say Republicans are moving to the right, that isn't caring, so when I ask how, that isn't caring either.

You made the claim, you aren't man enough to back it up. You've made that clear for a while now.

Aren't you running late for a tupperware party?

I
Just keep whining about the GOP not being conservative enough. You are on the verge of losing both the WH and the Senate......all the while urging your party to move further to the right.

Not enough racist white males being born to allow the GOP to win nationally again. Now.....please whine some more.

Strawman, I didn't say any of that crap.

You said the Republican party was moving to the right. Post after post, you can't name any issue they are actually moving to the right on. So it turns out you pulled it out of your ass

No, the Democrats Have Not Moved Further Left Than Republicans Have Moved Right

The GOP plan to fix the party: Move further right

Now, go read and while you are at it....GET A LIFE!

It's report about how the Voters want the Republicans to change. What is wrong with the Republicans changing the way that their voters want them to? In some ways more conservative on certain issues, less on others.

You can't say they are too far right when they aren't right enough for us, the voters.

Now explain on which issue YOU think republicans are too far right on so you can be corrected in your assessment if correction is warranted.

 

[oreo]

Extremists are in the Democratic Party, so in a way, you're right. But his resignation is a good thing for Republicans AND the country overall. Hopefully someone with balls will replace him.

I want one of you to explain exactly what you mean by balls? If you''re talking about shutting down the government every single time you have to negotiate with Democrats--we will lose every single time. And we will lose elections because of it.

The right wing of the base (Tea Party politicians) are the minority in the Republican party--and if you swing it too far right, the majority will vote for Democrats along with Independents, Hispanics and Women. MEANING you won't win the White House.

And as we all know if a Republican is not sitting in the oval office, you're not going to do anything about border control, immigration, Planned Parenthood, deficits, spending, education or Obamacare. It's over because the Democrat winner, probably Hillary Clinton will have the Veto Pen--and we'll be back to another minimum 4 years of listening to this bull-shit.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Extremists are in the Democratic Party, so in a way, you're right. But his resignation is a good thing for Republicans AND the country overall. Hopefully someone with balls will replace him.

I want one of you to explain exactly what you mean by balls? If you''re talking about shutting down the government every single time you have to negotiate with Democrats--we will lose every single time. And we will lose elections because of it.

The right wing of the base (Tea Party politicians) are the minority in the Republican party--and if you swing it too far right, the majority will vote for Democrats along with Independents, Hispanics and Women. MEANING you won't win the White House.

And as we all know if a Republican is not sitting in the oval office, you're not going to do anything about border control, immigration, Planned Parenthood, deficits, spending, education or Obamacare. It's over because the Democrat winner, probably Hillary Clinton will have the Veto Pen--and we'll be back to another minimum 4 years of listening to this bull-shit.

So what that means is when Democrats get leadership, Democrats run the show. When Republicans get leadership, the Democrats still run the show.

Since that's the situation Republicans are in, who cares if we lose elections? The Democrats are going to call the shots no matter who is in charge.

 

[Slyhunter]

Extremists are in the Democratic Party, so in a way, you're right. But his resignation is a good thing for Republicans AND the country overall. Hopefully someone with balls will replace him.

I want one of you to explain exactly what you mean by balls? If you''re talking about shutting down the government every single time you have to negotiate with Democrats--we will lose every single time. And we will lose elections because of it.

By not making decisions based on whether or not Obama will use his veto. Pass the damn bill and let Obama veto it then it's Obama's fault the government shuts down not the Republicans.

Obama is running that place like he is king because the republicans are too chicken to challenge him.

 

[S.J.]

Extremists are in the Democratic Party, so in a way, you're right. But his resignation is a good thing for Republicans AND the country overall. Hopefully someone with balls will replace him.

I want one of you to explain exactly what you mean by balls? If you''re talking about shutting down the government every single time you have to negotiate with Democrats--we will lose every single time. And we will lose elections because of it.

The right wing of the base (Tea Party politicians) are the minority in the Republican party--and if you swing it too far right, the majority will vote for Democrats along with Independents, Hispanics and Women. MEANING you won't win the White House.

And as we all know if a Republican is not sitting in the oval office, you're not going to do anything about border control, immigration, Planned Parenthood, deficits, spending, education or Obamacare. It's over because the Democrat winner, probably Hillary Clinton will have the Veto Pen--and we'll be back to another minimum 4 years of listening to this bull-shit.

Yeah, whatever you say, JAKE. If the Tea Party is such a small minority in the Republican Party, why did Boehner resign? And don't say "WE", because you are not a Republican, poser.

 

[JoeB131]

No, I wouldn't' count on Bush winning anything. He may even drop out early if things go south enough.

The Republican constituents are showing they want major change instead of the business as usual way things are run now. That's why our top contenders are no-politicians.

What Republican voters are showing is that they are kind of stupid and taken in by flim-flam artists with no substance. Trump and Uncle Tom Carson are already fading, and Fiorina will soon enough.

Then pretty much, you guys are going to be stuck with Bush because he'll be the only guy with the money and establishment support to go the distance. The PRetenders have sucked all the air out of the room, I'm so sorry.

As for that "voter turnout" you libs love to use so much, it's time to put that to rest. It was only 3% higher than the lowest turnout last century (1942) and around 4% lower than last mid-term. Not really that big of a deal.

actually, it IS that big of a deal because it shows that midterms don't really reflect the mood of the country. It was a really, really low turnout. Really, only about 30 house seats and 6 senate seats were in play.

Now, I did this chart earlier, it shows exactly how many votes each winning Senate candidate got compared to what Romney had gotten in 2012. (Romney won all the states that flipped except IA and CO)

State Candiate Total 2012 Romney
NC Tillis 1,413,269 2,275,853
CO Garner 965,496 1,125,391
LA Cassidy 602,439 1,152,460
IA Ernst 586,921 727,928
AR Cotton 476,309 644,784
WV Capito 280,123 412,406
MT Daines 210,863 264,974
SD Rounds 140,721 210,541
AK Sulivan 110,203 136,848


See the problem here? You didn't win anyone over. You just got some of the same people to show up in places you mostly won the last time.

IN 2016, everyone votes. And if you don't win people over, you are going to get the same result. Sorry.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No, I wouldn't' count on Bush winning anything. He may even drop out early if things go south enough.

The Republican constituents are showing they want major change instead of the business as usual way things are run now. That's why our top contenders are no-politicians.

What Republican voters are showing is that they are kind of stupid and taken in by flim-flam artists with no substance. Trump and Uncle Tom Carson are already fading, and Fiorina will soon enough.

Then pretty much, you guys are going to be stuck with Bush because he'll be the only guy with the money and establishment support to go the distance. The PRetenders have sucked all the air out of the room, I'm so sorry.

As for that "voter turnout" you libs love to use so much, it's time to put that to rest. It was only 3% higher than the lowest turnout last century (1942) and around 4% lower than last mid-term. Not really that big of a deal.

actually, it IS that big of a deal because it shows that midterms don't really reflect the mood of the country. It was a really, really low turnout. Really, only about 30 house seats and 6 senate seats were in play.

Now, I did this chart earlier, it shows exactly how many votes each winning Senate candidate got compared to what Romney had gotten in 2012. (Romney won all the states that flipped except IA and CO)

State Candiate Total 2012 Romney
NC Tillis 1,413,269 2,275,853
CO Garner 965,496 1,125,391
LA Cassidy 602,439 1,152,460
IA Ernst 586,921 727,928
AR Cotton 476,309 644,784
WV Capito 280,123 412,406
MT Daines 210,863 264,974
SD Rounds 140,721 210,541
AK Sulivan 110,203 136,848


See the problem here? You didn't win anyone over. You just got some of the same people to show up in places you mostly won the last time.

IN 2016, everyone votes. And if you don't win people over, you are going to get the same result. Sorry.

No, I'm sorry, sorry you don't get the fact that the "first black President" hype is over. It's a thing of the past. Blacks and college kids are not going to be coming out in droves to vote for Hilarious or any Democrat like they did with Obama.

McCain stood no chance. Why? Because the nominee of a party with the sitting President has to ride on his coat tails. Our median family income is down since DumBama took office. He is an international nightmare. Iran has a set path to get nukes, Obama virtually handed over Iraq to ISIS, he gave away our top five terrorist prisoners for nothing. One out of every seven Americans being fed by the taxpayers. Approaching 19 trillion in debt. Over 93 million Americans of working age not working.

If you think Americans are going to be excited to continue that record, well good luck with that one. But something tells me on election night, you'll be sitting home watching your DVD of Obama winning his election in the good ole days.

 

[007]

Most often, an extremist is not defined by his positions on any given subject. He is defined by his ardent refusal to compromise, the lengths to which he will go to satisfy his unyielding ego, and his mentally obtuse all-or-nothing attitude.

Yup... that's OBAMA.