Congratulations, Trumpsters

[bendog]

The libertarians finally found their messiah..

To be a libertarian it’s not really a one-size-fits-all from what I’ve been learning. There is as you know even a distinction between Libertarian and libertarian, right leaning versus left-leaning, anarchistic versus peaceful ...many others

I don't see how that works, to be honest. Imo most libertarians are only selective in what they don't want the govt to help/hinder. But I can't find moonglow's original post, so ..... have a nice day.

I’m still learning more about it myself but one way that’s a helpful tool is looking at the Nolan Chart; take the quiz see where you fall, your results might surprise you.

I’m for small government, peaceful means to ends, support some of the left’s social measures and fiscal responsibility that both major parties continue to kick the can down the road. My results placed me as a middle of the road libertarian non-authoritarian.

There are various dimensions which leads me to conclude that there are different types of libertarians ....pretty much like there are are different types of Democrats and different types of Republicans. They’re not all one in the same just due to sharing the label. This is the main reason I think that we have these false stringent divisions that so many support. We can have Joe Blow, who identifies as a Democrat and Floo Too who also says she’s a Democrat and they can support different agendas. Same with Libertarians unless you are referring to the Libertarian Party... more in alignment but still containing unique mindsets like most parties.

Political Quiz - where do you stand in the Nolan Chart?

polquiz.com

Interesting. I couldn't answer the drug questions because imo it verged into healthcare, so I quit. One can be liberal, conservative, moderate .... none of my biz. And I'm fine with all. My "problem" with libertarian is that for a libertarian to be consistent, he/she could not support taxing all without voluntary buy in to build .... say a road, harbor airport that would benefit the geographical group as a whole. I think even Jefferson and the Founders who insisted on the Bill of Rights accepted that limitation.

As for drugs, imo it should not be a crime for a person to take oxy (synthetic heroin) but it should be a crime to prescribe or make it available outside a very narrow rage of circumstances.

 

[Devils_Advocate]

I've never seen such a big transformation like this, and it's happening so quickly.

This was huge and fast.

It shows you how much pent-up rage and paranoia there was in the party, and how badly the party missed it. It snapped right to Trump the minute he showed up.

No one should have missed it seeing it has been noticeable since Bill Clinton days!

 

[Orangecat]

It's not my job to understand this,

No one would pay you for your poor comprehensive skills, so that's not a surprise.

 

[Mac1958]

It's not my job to understand this,

No one would pay you for your poor comprehensive skills, so that's not a surprise.

I've enjoyed watching you folks get defensive and pissy on this thread, for no good reason.

Of course, that's just the way you are.

 

[Orangecat]

I've enjoyed watching you folks get defensive and pissy on this thread, for no good reason.

Of course, that's just the way you are.

You're projecting again, kid.

 

[evenflow1969]

If anyone is the GOP nominee McConnell will vote for them even if its Putin himself.

McConnell would vote for the anti-Christ himself if it benefits him.

Who says he has not been?

 

[Moonglow]

It's not my job to understand this,

No one would pay you for your poor comprehensive skills, so that's not a surprise.

I've enjoyed watching you folks get defensive and pissy on this thread, for no good reason.

Of course, that's just the way you are.

But they lost the election, er sorry, they had the election stolen!(cry on que, now)

 

[lg325]

Here's more just came in to my inbox Judge Rules Arizona’s Maricopa County Must Turn Over 2.1 Million November Election Ballots to Senate (theepochtimes.com) looks like there looking in to the Nov. vote after all.

 

[Shelzin]

You do know that Hillary owns the political party in comparison... Right?

What?

Is that a serious post? Who told you that?

Is your post serious?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Here's more just came in to my inbox Judge Rules Arizona’s Maricopa County Must Turn Over 2.1 Million November Election Ballots to Senate (theepochtimes.com) looks like there looking in to the Nov. vote after all.

At which time they will find no massive fraud, but the Arizona and national GOP will have made several TV and radio appearances designed to give the false impression that a foregone conclusion of fraud is why the ballots are being turned over. They will use this ruse to help push through legislation designed to reduce voter turnout in Arizona, in hopes of suppressing the vote enough to win future elections. This is the actual goal of their efforts, here.

 

[bendog]

Here's more just came in to my inbox Judge Rules Arizona’s Maricopa County Must Turn Over 2.1 Million November Election Ballots to Senate (theepochtimes.com) looks like there looking in to the Nov. vote after all.

At which time they will find no massive fraud, but the Arizona and national GOP will have made several TV and radio appearances designed to give the false impression that a foregone conclusion of fraud is why the ballots are being turned over. They will use this ruse to help push through legislation designed to reduce voter turnout in Arizona, in hopes of suppressing the vote enough to win future elections. This is the actual goal of their efforts, here.

Yes, but it is legal to suppress votes. I sincerely hope media outlets are successfully sued for libel, but the gop cut it's own throat on it's "euphoria" of Trump being so popular with the masses. Bringing in ALL these new voters. He was probably going to win before covid, but not because people were fooled that he wasn't an asshole they wouldn't want to be around.

 

[ClaireH]

The libertarians finally found their messiah..

To be a libertarian it’s not really a one-size-fits-all from what I’ve been learning. There is as you know even a distinction between Libertarian and libertarian, right leaning versus left-leaning, anarchistic versus peaceful ...many others

I don't see how that works, to be honest. Imo most libertarians are only selective in what they don't want the govt to help/hinder. But I can't find moonglow's original post, so ..... have a nice day.

I’m still learning more about it myself but one way that’s a helpful tool is looking at the Nolan Chart; take the quiz see where you fall, your results might surprise you.

I’m for small government, peaceful means to ends, support some of the left’s social measures and fiscal responsibility that both major parties continue to kick the can down the road. My results placed me as a middle of the road libertarian non-authoritarian.

There are various dimensions which leads me to conclude that there are different types of libertarians ....pretty much like there are are different types of Democrats and different types of Republicans. They’re not all one in the same just due to sharing the label. This is the main reason I think that we have these false stringent divisions that so many support. We can have Joe Blow, who identifies as a Democrat and Floo Too who also says she’s a Democrat and they can support different agendas. Same with Libertarians unless you are referring to the Libertarian Party... more in alignment but still containing unique mindsets like most parties.

Political Quiz - where do you stand in the Nolan Chart?

polquiz.com

Interesting. I couldn't answer the drug questions because imo it verged into healthcare, so I quit. One can be liberal, conservative, moderate .... none of my biz. And I'm fine with all. My "problem" with libertarian is that for a libertarian to be consistent, he/she could not support taxing all without voluntary buy in to build .... say a road, harbor airport that would benefit the geographical group as a whole. I think even Jefferson and the Founders who insisted on the Bill of Rights accepted that limitation.

As for drugs, imo it should not be a crime for a person to take oxy (synthetic heroin) but it should be a crime to prescribe or make it available outside a very narrow rage of circumstances.

I agree with you about an addiction to illicit drugs is a drug habit problem to be treated not penalized as in the form of incarceration, and the doctors who overwrite addictive scripts are as guilty as the street dealers soliciting their drugs.
I am a big supporter of individual freedoms and certainly the Bill of Rights, first and foremost in most every case. I view that as a libertarian viewpoint, one who is for small government, emphasizes personal growth and responsibility according to ability, and taxing a fair percentage regardless of tax bracket. I will never understand the mindset that supports that the ultra-rich should be taxed at a higher percentage than the rest of us. I also have strong support for the average citizen to be allowed to run for President of the United States - meaning not just getting on the ballot but in actually winning. The powers that be have kept the requirements for campaign financing to be such,and with loopholes like Hillary used, ensuring that no average citizen can ever run. It’s most interesting as well that they haven’t instilled any type of testing requirements to show proof that they even should be running for president. What is required is bogus, to have access to hundreds of billions of dollars to run. No wealthy citizen should be penalized for being wealthy, however, requiring that a citizen be wealthy in order to run for president is definitely unfair. Our founding fathers had their own perceptional limitations and in no way could predict our current times. The creation of an Electoral College was in part to protect the government from the common man as far as quality. Indeed, It could still be argued that this is in part a motive to keep government heads restricted to people with access to billions to play the game, but we know that money doesn’t clear the table of corruption. This last Georgia senatorial runoff election wasting hundreds of billions funneled into the campaigns should have gone toward public good. All campaign funding should go to charity. Total lunacy and conducted for decades using an open-faced public maneuver. Future historians, who will know so much more than current political experts, will puzzle why our citizenship allowed for such an “elite status only tag” requirement for so long.

Sorry to be so long-winded I’m on my phone and I have a feeling I’ve really carried on here lol I’m afraid even to check but I count on you skimming the redundant remarks

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Yes, but it is legal to suppress votes.

Of course. And much more so now that the Voting Rights Act has been gutted. Our democracy continues to be under attack by the GOP, who apparently refuse to consider the idea of appealing to more voters in order to win elections. So they gerrymander and suppress the vote. It's not a secret. They have let the cat out of the bag on this many times.

 

[bendog]

Yes, but it is legal to suppress votes.

Of course. And much more so now that the Voting Rights Act has been gutted. Our democracy continues to be under attack by the GOP, who apparently refuse to consider the idea of appealing to more voters in order to win elections. So they gerrymander and suppress the vote. It's not a secret. They have let the cat out of the bag on this many times.

But gerrymandering is not new. What really concerns me is that the dems were totally shut out from flipping any states. I really couldn't care if the label is D or R, but obviously whatever issues the dems were selling, voters weren't buying. I'm not sure why.

 

[GMCGeneral]

Here's the problem with the brain dead Left. They think the" real" Republicans are the milquetoast RINOs like John McShitstain, the Bush Cabal, Mittens, etc. Basically, spineless wimps unwilling to slug it out and fight the enemy head on.Trump pissed off the establishment RINKs which ia why they worked in concert with the Left to try and umdermine him at every turn.

Your problem is that you don't see that the Republican Party needs what you call RINOs and spineless wimps to win an election.

If those RINOs and spineless wimps leave the Republican Party, the republican party won't win very many elections again.

So you people need to stop forcing out people who don't kiss trump's butt if you people want to win elections in the future.

Not any more. The RINOs have done nothing BUT undermine President Trump.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Yes, but it is legal to suppress votes.

Of course. And much more so now that the Voting Rights Act has been gutted. Our democracy continues to be under attack by the GOP, who apparently refuse to consider the idea of appealing to more voters in order to win elections. So they gerrymander and suppress the vote. It's not a secret. They have let the cat out of the bag on this many times.

But gerrymandering is not new. What really concerns me is that the dems were totally shut out from flipping any states. I really couldn't care if the label is D or R, but obviously whatever issues the dems were selling, voters weren't buying. I'm not sure why.

It is not new. That is correct. But the idea of one party needing to win by more than 10 points nationally in order to represent, for example, a House majority is certainly new and obviously violates the spirit of democracy.

In North Carolina in 2018, democrats won 50% of the house vote, and 23 percent of the seats.

 

[struth]

Yes, but it is legal to suppress votes.

Of course. And much more so now that the Voting Rights Act has been gutted. Our democracy continues to be under attack by the GOP, who apparently refuse to consider the idea of appealing to more voters in order to win elections. So they gerrymander and suppress the vote. It's not a secret. They have let the cat out of the bag on this many times.

But gerrymandering is not new. What really concerns me is that the dems were totally shut out from flipping any states. I really couldn't care if the label is D or R, but obviously whatever issues the dems were selling, voters weren't buying. I'm not sure why.

It is not new. That is correct. But the idea of one party needing to win by more than 10 points nationally in order to represent, for example, a House majority is certainly new and obviously violates the spirit of democracy.

In North Carolina in 2018, democrats won 50% of the house vote, and 23 percent of the seats.

um yeah what you are talking about is nothing new....who cares if they got 50 percent of all the House votes in a State for the House.....there are districts that make up the House, not a national or statewide vote. Did you not know this? It's in the Constitution....read it

 

[bripat9643]

In all seriousness, I have to hand it to you: You have completely kicked ass and taken over your party.

It's not my job to understand this, but I sure as hell can see the results. The GOP "civil war" is over, if it ever really existed to begin with.

The final straw for me came from Mitch McConnell -- who has been trying to straddle the fence and failing pretty badly -- yesterday. Just a couple of weeks after condemning Trump on the Senate floor for his responsibility in the Capitol terrorist attacks of January 6, Mitch has now completely capitulated and said he would "absolutely" back Trump in 2024.

One guy owns a political party now. Incredible. And congratulations, I guess.

McConnell says he would 'absolutely' support Trump as 2024 nominee

McConnell this month called Trump's role in the deadly Jan. 6 riot a "disgraceful dereliction of duty."

www.nbcnews.com

What have establishment RINOs ever achieved aside from selling out our country to the Democrats?

 

[d0gbreath]

I admire the trumpsters for their dedication: Live by DJT, die by DJT. It's all the same to me. I, like most people, enjoy winning.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Yes, but it is legal to suppress votes.

Of course. And much more so now that the Voting Rights Act has been gutted. Our democracy continues to be under attack by the GOP, who apparently refuse to consider the idea of appealing to more voters in order to win elections. So they gerrymander and suppress the vote. It's not a secret. They have let the cat out of the bag on this many times.

But gerrymandering is not new. What really concerns me is that the dems were totally shut out from flipping any states. I really couldn't care if the label is D or R, but obviously whatever issues the dems were selling, voters weren't buying. I'm not sure why.

It is not new. That is correct. But the idea of one party needing to win by more than 10 points nationally in order to represent, for example, a House majority is certainly new and obviously violates the spirit of democracy.

In North Carolina in 2018, democrats won 50% of the house vote, and 23 percent of the seats.

um yeah what you are talking about is nothing new....who cares if they got 50 percent of all the House votes in a State for the House.....there are districts that make up the House, not a national or statewide vote. Did you not know this? It's in the Constitution....read it

Yes i know this, considering i am the one who brought it up and said it is legal. If you are going to comment, please pay attention. Thanks.

"Nothing new"... Really? Getting half the percentage of seats as votes is nothing new? You sure you didn't just...make that up just now because it sounded good? Pretty sure you did.