From an actual independent (me)

[YoursTruly]

You are mistaken.

U.S. Senate: Senators

www.senate.gov

Political party	Independent[a] (1978–present) Democratic (2015–2016, 2019–2020)

Bernie Sanders signs DNC loyalty pledge: 'I am a member of the Democratic Party'​

 

[jc456]

Political party	Independent[a] (1978–present) Democratic (2015–2016, 2019–2020)

Bernie Sanders signs DNC loyalty pledge: 'I am a member of the Democratic Party'​

Bernie has never voted for a GOP bill. EVER

 

[progressive hunter]

I explained how you were wrong. The GOP isn't "conservative" any longer. They've outlawed conservatism when Ron Paul ran in 2012. The last true conservative we had in DC, was Justin Amash. He was ran out of DC by his own party. Kicked off the congressional budget committee for trying to balance the budget, by a republican chairman. (Boehner) Was criticized by his own party for exposing Paul Ryan, when Ryan wouldn't allow amendments to be introduced on the House floor. He opposed Pelosi, Ryan, McConnell and Trumps spending, and was bashed for by republicans.

How much more proof do you need? The right is just as authoritarian as the left. They just have different rhetoric for it.

you may want to reread my comment cause thats exactly what I said,,

 

[Rogue AI]

Political party	Independent[a] (1978–present) Democratic (2015–2016, 2019–2020)

Bernie Sanders signs DNC loyalty pledge: 'I am a member of the Democratic Party'​

So you think Wiki knows better than senate.gov? Wow.

 

[BackAgain]

I am not an independent. When I was first dipping my big toe into anything political, I registered as a Dem. I was young. I had been indoctrinated. I hadn’t learned yet to really question such things. I just bought into the silly assumption that “liberalism” equals fairness and Justice and open-mindedness.

After I eventually got a bit older and wiser, I challenged the assumptions. I grew wary of the baseless platitudes of modern American liberalism and grew (reluctantly) a bit more conservative. I was reluctant because the flip side of assuming that liberalism = fair, Just and open-minded is that conservatives must not be. After I while, I saw through that nonsensical propaganda.

I registered as a Republican. But quickly realized that the Party is just the Dem Party with less determination because they don’t fight to oppose the relentless Dim propaganda. So, I registered as a Conservative

The Conservative Party is basically worthless, however. Too few in numbers and no prospect for winning offices. (And you can’t even vote in primaries that matter.) So, I flipped back to being a Registered Republican.

Here is why it matters. I might have a chance to “move” the GOP to find their nadz. We need to get creative in actually fighting against the socialist and Marxist precepts of the Dims. They have the news and the entertainment media and the “educational” academies. They have experience also in engaging in propaganda. Just look at how so many liberals here at USMB argue. True believers who can’t defend their positions with facts and consistent logic.

I can’t fully disagree with the OP. But I have made a choice against the Party that is inflicting it’s insidious damage on America so relentlessly. The best way to fight the Democrap Party is to align with the GOP — AND to fight to make the GOP a more principled Party. Our Republic’s Founding Principles do matter, so the battle against the Democrap Party must be fought and it needs to be won.

 

[YoursTruly]

Trump was an independent. A point you miss. He was fighting both parties. Hence Rino language was established. See, I'll never understand what it is you actually want? You can't seem to explain it. you don't want this, you don't want that, when a guy comes around that embraces that exact philosophy, you put him down. simply amazing.

I admit, I'm not as articulate as I need to be. This is one of those things that you either "get it," or you don't. It's like a 10,000 piece puzzle of a blue sky.
The mind set of republican party loyalist are that their party is conservative. That they support smaller government, less regulations and spending less money.
The government has never shrunk during a GOP majority. And neither has the spending. They may cut a few regulations here and there. Maybe even a little tax reduction. But without spending cuts, tax reductions are useless.
IMO, after watching Trump closely for 4 years, his actions vs what he said, were usually opposite.
As in saying he's pro life, but still funding Planned Parenthood.

Here's a piece of the puzzle for you comment about him fighting both parties.
"Reince Priebus, the outgoing chairman of the Republican National Committee and Trump’s incoming chief of staff,"
Nominating the RNC's chairman to the "chief of staff" position isn't fighting with the party. Trumps strategy comes from his people digging through social media and political forums like this, to see what people are talking about. And then incorporate that into his speeches. It's what salesmen do.
In this day and age, everyone likes to insult others. So, Trump does it to. People like to come up with clever names to call people. Trump does it too. (Lying Ted, Crooked Hillary). Why? Because it's what people want to hear.
They wanted to hear "Build the wall." Trump said just that, and even threw in cherry with "Make Mexico pay for it." Republicans knew that was a lie, and they called him out on it. So what happens, Trump fires back and it makes him look like he's opposing people in his own party. It's genius. But the bottom line is, even Trump knew it was a lie. And the republicans played their part by opposing Trump. The end result, Trump looks independent because a LOT of people were not happy with the GOP even before Trump announced his candidacy.

Like I said, you either get it, or you don't. It's not black and white. It's not supposed to be. If it was, everyone could figure it out.

 

[YoursTruly]

So you think Wiki knows better than senate.gov? Wow.

I think you're not reading or understanding what I posted. Note the 2020. It's now 2022.
Bernie has always sided with the democratic party. With only minor differences now and then.

Calling Sanders independent is like calling Trump an independent.

 

[HenryBHough]

I maintain my "independent" voter registration. There were several times in my nearly 60 years of voting that I cast a ballot for a Democrat - once...maybe twice....for a libertarian. But that was long ago before there ceased to be a simple "Democratic" party and it morphed into The Democrat Socialist Party.

Feels like JFK - who was worth a vote back in the day - could not be a member of that new hate group. Far too much of a right-wing extremist for the likes of the cabal that foisted off a mind-numbed Alzheimer's victim and a political prostitute off on America as "leadership".

 

[BlackSand]

I stopped being a party loyalist like 10 years ago. I've been a die hard democrat, die hard republican and libertarian. I've spewed the talking points in political arguments for my party. I've dug and researched for hours to try and prove the other side wrong. And I've ignored the things that were wrong with my party and done my best to the change the subject, when challenged. When I was a party loyalist, the "whataboutism" spewed regularly. Why? Because regardless of what party I was loyal to, there was still things wrong with my party. Things that I "overlooked." I had to overlook them, because I was a party loyalist.
Now that I'm not one, I can call out the wrongs with any party or any politician. I've called out Trump on his many lies, Pelosi on her lies and corrupt way she runs the house. McConnell, Ryan, Schumer and the rest of them. All with a clear conscious.
I've also praised Trump when he or the others, when they did or said something that I agreed with.
As a true independent, and an actual conservative, I must say, I wished you party loyalist would just STFU. Y'all sound retarded. The left going on and on and on about Trump. And the right going on and on about the stolen election. Even if it was stolen, it's done. It's over with and nothing is going to change it now.
When both sides (voters.. You people) realize that the ONLY arguments that need to be taking place, are you against your own parties, or both, because they refuse to do what's right for the vast majority of "We the people." Things like Pelosi not allowing your congressman to introduce amendments on the house floor, without first going through committee. (Which is code for lobbyist approval). Also all the spending that goes on inside these bills that are never made public. We only get a glimpse at the BS spending, when a politician wants to make a point about the other party. Things like spending for "Gender studies in Pakistan." Huge funding to corporations or special interest in a Covid relief bill or stimulus package

And please, for the love of god, when a party member exposes something corrupt within their own party, don't rag on them for making the party look bad. Praise them for trying to make the party better. (IE Tulsi Gabbard, Ron Paul, Justin Amash, Dennis Kucinich). Those people, if they ran the party, would actually bring honesty and transparency to their parties. Which would give you people a lot less to argue and fight about.

The right and the left created this retarded system. It's by design to:
1. Keep the voters arguing amongst themselves
2. Stay in power.
3. Allow those with the money to dictate legislation. Legislation that the vast majority of "we the people" would object to. (IE bank bailouts, foreign interventions, spending, and just about everything else)

Party loyalty is something that we'd expect to go on in places like Russia. But it goes on right here. People choosing their party and their talking points over their family and friends. Fact: The R & D's want their voters fighting with each other because they know that if all got along, we'd go against them.

Taken from a song I like:

1. Train the people only to consume
2. Influence adults with the news
3. Indoctrinate the children through the schools and the music and the phones and apps that they use.
4. Separate the right from the left.
5. Separate the white from the black.
6. Separate the rich from the poor. Use religion and equality to separate them more.
7. Fabricate a problem made of lies.
8. Put it on the news every night.
9. When people start to fight and divide, take control. This is called "situational design."

.

It's really pretty easy ... Never attempt to use a Party or Politics in general as a substitute for your Principles ...


.​

 

[YoursTruly]

I am not an independent. When I was first dipping my big toe into anything political, I registered as a Dem. I was young. I had been indoctrinated. I hadn’t learned yet to really question such things. I just bought into the silly assumption that “liberalism” equals fairness and Justice and open-mindedness.

After I eventually got a bit older and wiser, I challenged the assumptions. I grew wary of the baseless platitudes of modern American liberalism and grew (reluctantly) a bit more conservative. I was reluctant because the flip side of assuming that liberalism = fair, Just and open-minded is that conservatives must not be. After I while, I saw through that nonsensical propaganda.

I registered as a Republican. But quickly realized that the Party is just the Dem Party with less determination because they don’t fight to oppose the relentless Dim propaganda. So, I registered as a Conservative

The Conservative Party is basically worthless, however. Too few in numbers and no prospect for winning offices. (And you can’t even vote in primaries that matter.) So, I flipped back to being a Registered Republican.

Here is why it matters. I might have a chance to “move” the GOP to find their nadz. We need to get creative in actually fighting against the socialist and Marxist precepts of the Dims. They have the news and the entertainment media and the “educational” academies. They have experience also in engaging in propaganda. Just look at how so many liberals here at USMB argue. True believers who can’t defend their positions with facts and consistent logic.

I can’t fully disagree with the OP. But I have made a choice against the Party that is inflicting it’s insidious damage on America so relentlessly. The best way to fight the Democrap Party is to align with the GOP — AND to fight to make the GOP a more principled Party. Our Republic’s Founding Principles do matter, so the battle against the Democrap Party must be fought and it needs to be won.

I used to think the same exact way. That the only way to change the RNC and make it better, is to fight from the inside out. This was something I learned from Ron Paul. It was his exact words. He's a true conservative, so I believed him.
But it dawns on me that Ron Paul had been in congress for over 20 years. And made no headway what so ever.
in 2012, during his run for office, he came up with a budget plan to cut $1 TRILLION of now (not later) spending. And didn't cut one dime of social security.
What did the republicans do? They bashed him for it.
When he offered his "Sanctity of life" bill, during a GOP majority (and a republican president) (5 times), it got stuck in committee every single time.

My point, fighting to make the party better isn't going to work, from the inside out or the outside in, until enough people finally say screw it.


"If voting worked, they wouldn't let us do it."

 

[Rogue AI]

I think you're not reading or understanding what I posted. Note the 2020. It's now 2022.
Bernie has always sided with the democratic party. With only minor differences now and then.

Calling Sanders independent is like calling Trump an independent.

He calls himself an independent, just like you. Should I mistrust what you say?

 

[BackAgain]

I used to think the same exact way. That the only way to change the RNC and make it better, is to fight from the inside out. This was something I learned from Ron Paul. It was his exact words. He's a true conservative, so I believed him.
But it dawns on me that Ron Paul had been in congress for over 20 years. And made no headway what so ever.
in 2012, during his run for office, he came up with a budget plan to cut $1 TRILLION of now (not later) spending. And didn't cut one dime of social security.
What did the republicans do? They bashed him for it.
When he offered his "Sanctity of life" bill, during a GOP majority (and a republican president) (5 times), it got stuck in committee every single time.

My point, fighting to make the party better isn't going to work, from the inside out or the outside in, until enough people finally say screw it.


"If voting worked, they wouldn't let us do it."

Although I don’t agree with you, I am a fan of how reasonable you are in addressing the topic. I’d say that merely noting that Ron (alone) wasn’t effective in repairing the GOP from the inside position he had doesn’t mean that my position is mistaken.

I’ll simply note, with one less Ron (or Rand) there is one less voice to even make the effort. But what if we can move the needle by getting a whole lot more of such folks into the GOP?

 

[jc456]

I admit, I'm not as articulate as I need to be. This is one of those things that you either "get it," or you don't. It's like a 10,000 piece puzzle of a blue sky.
The mind set of republican party loyalist are that their party is conservative. That they support smaller government, less regulations and spending less money.
The government has never shrunk during a GOP majority. And neither has the spending. They may cut a few regulations here and there. Maybe even a little tax reduction. But without spending cuts, tax reductions are useless.
IMO, after watching Trump closely for 4 years, his actions vs what he said, were usually opposite.
As in saying he's pro life, but still funding Planned Parenthood.

Here's a piece of the puzzle for you comment about him fighting both parties.
"Reince Priebus, the outgoing chairman of the Republican National Committee and Trump’s incoming chief of staff,"
Nominating the RNC's chairman to the "chief of staff" position isn't fighting with the party. Trumps strategy comes from his people digging through social media and political forums like this, to see what people are talking about. And then incorporate that into his speeches. It's what salesmen do.
In this day and age, everyone likes to insult others. So, Trump does it to. People like to come up with clever names to call people. Trump does it too. (Lying Ted, Crooked Hillary). Why? Because it's what people want to hear.
They wanted to hear "Build the wall." Trump said just that, and even threw in cherry with "Make Mexico pay for it." Republicans knew that was a lie, and they called him out on it. So what happens, Trump fires back and it makes him look like he's opposing people in his own party. It's genius. But the bottom line is, even Trump knew it was a lie. And the republicans played their part by opposing Trump. The end result, Trump looks independent because a LOT of people were not happy with the GOP even before Trump announced his candidacy.

Like I said, you either get it, or you don't. It's not black and white. It's not supposed to be. If it was, everyone could figure it out.

well you haven't explained what it is you want. Not even in that post. It seems you are more against trump who is not GOP then you are the GOP.

Where you are correct is that the GOP has increased the size of government, it's because they are scared of demofks. You will always have a GOP rep side with a demofk and never the other way. When a media demofk outs a GOP, they quickly shrink into a shell and abide by the tactic of pressure and threat. Trump as you should have noticed, didn't cower to the media threats, even impeachment threats. He was the real deal of what it is you wish in an independent. Again, that makes it strange your dislike of the man. He stood for independence. Took on the GOP in the senate, he played into the need for judges. Which is truly the problem with government. One has to play the game to get anything done. Shame.

 

[jc456]

I maintain my "independent" voter registration. There were several times in my nearly 60 years of voting that I cast a ballot for a Democrat - once...maybe twice....for a libertarian. But that was long ago before there ceased to be a simple "Democratic" party and it morphed into The Democrat Socialist Party.

Feels like JFK - who was worth a vote back in the day - could not be a member of that new hate group. Far too much of a right-wing extremist for the likes of the cabal that foisted off a mind-numbed Alzheimer's victim and a political prostitute off on America as "leadership".

YoursTruly , Why did you love this post? JFK was never an independent, he was conservative. Wanted conservative policies, even said "ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country". All demofks want today is what the country can do for them, 180 degrees off JFK. However, JFK was no independent. I'd vote for JFK in a second.

 

[sparky]

You sound confused

talk to partisans , you'll find them far more confused, if not perpetually abused

~S~

 

[kaz]

I stopped being a party loyalist like 10 years ago. I've been a die hard democrat, die hard republican and libertarian. I've spewed the talking points in political arguments for my party. I've dug and researched for hours to try and prove the other side wrong. And I've ignored the things that were wrong with my party and done my best to the change the subject, when challenged. When I was a party loyalist, the "whataboutism" spewed regularly. Why? Because regardless of what party I was loyal to, there was still things wrong with my party. Things that I "overlooked." I had to overlook them, because I was a party loyalist.
Now that I'm not one, I can call out the wrongs with any party or any politician. I've called out Trump on his many lies, Pelosi on her lies and corrupt way she runs the house. McConnell, Ryan, Schumer and the rest of them. All with a clear conscious.
I've also praised Trump when he or the others, when they did or said something that I agreed with.
As a true independent, and an actual conservative, I must say, I wished you party loyalist would just STFU. Y'all sound retarded. The left going on and on and on about Trump. And the right going on and on about the stolen election. Even if it was stolen, it's done. It's over with and nothing is going to change it now.
When both sides (voters.. You people) realize that the ONLY arguments that need to be taking place, are you against your own parties, or both, because they refuse to do what's right for the vast majority of "We the people." Things like Pelosi not allowing your congressman to introduce amendments on the house floor, without first going through committee. (Which is code for lobbyist approval). Also all the spending that goes on inside these bills that are never made public. We only get a glimpse at the BS spending, when a politician wants to make a point about the other party. Things like spending for "Gender studies in Pakistan." Huge funding to corporations or special interest in a Covid relief bill or stimulus package

And please, for the love of god, when a party member exposes something corrupt within their own party, don't rag on them for making the party look bad. Praise them for trying to make the party better. (IE Tulsi Gabbard, Ron Paul, Justin Amash, Dennis Kucinich). Those people, if they ran the party, would actually bring honesty and transparency to their parties. Which would give you people a lot less to argue and fight about.

The right and the left created this retarded system. It's by design to:
1. Keep the voters arguing amongst themselves
2. Stay in power.
3. Allow those with the money to dictate legislation. Legislation that the vast majority of "we the people" would object to. (IE bank bailouts, foreign interventions, spending, and just about everything else)

Party loyalty is something that we'd expect to go on in places like Russia. But it goes on right here. People choosing their party and their talking points over their family and friends. Fact: The R & D's want their voters fighting with each other because they know that if all got along, we'd go against them.

Taken from a song I like:

1. Train the people only to consume
2. Influence adults with the news
3. Indoctrinate the children through the schools and the music and the phones and apps that they use.
4. Separate the right from the left.
5. Separate the white from the black.
6. Separate the rich from the poor. Use religion and equality to separate them more.
7. Fabricate a problem made of lies.
8. Put it on the news every night.
9. When people start to fight and divide, take control. This is called "situational design."

So you left libertarian because you stopped believing our lives are our own and government should protect us not control us like the other parties do? Why did you do that?

 

[kaz]

Our political system is broken, because it's flawed to begin with. It incentivizes and rewards the cynical, dishonest, craven, tribal behavior that we're seeing get worse and worse.

Unless and until we change the system, we keep bending over for it. This is a self-inflicted wound.

#ForwardParty

It rewards the "cynical" like you who want other people's money and are afraid they won't give it to you without a gun in their face so you vote to have government provide the gun

 

[YoursTruly]

Although I don’t agree with you, I am a fan of how reasonable you are in addressing the topic. I’d say that merely noting that Ron (alone) wasn’t effective in repairing the GOP from the inside position he had doesn’t mean that my position is mistaken.

I’ll simply note, with one less Ron (or Rand) there is one less voice to even make the effort. But what if we can move the needle by getting a whole lot more of such folks into the GOP?

I see your point. But when the vast majority of republicans are party loyalist, the chances of making the necessary changes to the party from the inside out, are about the same as us voters changing it from the outside end.
Especially when you consider that the party will not back you with campaign money, if you're not a party loyalist. This is exactly what the RNC did to Justin Amash. It's what the DNC did to Tulsi Gabbard.
Ron got lucky. The people in his district learned the difference between being a republican and being a conservative. But one little district in all of the USA is a mole hill.
The Rand we have now, isn't the same as the one we had when he was first elected. He won't go against this party now. Especially if the GOP needs him to vote party lines. He'll do it. If they don't need his vote, then they won't force him to do it. That's part of the smoke & mirrors of the parties.

Ever notice that when one party needs the other party's vote on something, they'll get it from someone who's not up for re-election? (or someone who's solid in their district)... It's all just part of the charade.

 

[kaz]

I see your point. But when the vast majority of republicans are party loyalist, the chances of making the necessary changes to the party from the inside out, are about the same as us voters changing it from the outside end.
Especially when you consider that the party will not back you with campaign money, if you're not a party loyalist. This is exactly what the RNC did to Justin Amash. It's what the DNC did to Tulsi Gabbard.
Ron got lucky. The people in his district learned the difference between being a republican and being a conservative. But one little district in all of the USA is a mole hill.
The Rand we have now, isn't the same as the one we had when he was first elected. He won't go against this party now. Especially if the GOP needs him to vote party lines. He'll do it. If they don't need his vote, then they won't force him to do it. That's part of the smoke & mirrors of the parties.

Ever notice that when one party needs the other party's vote on something, they'll get it from someone who's not up for re-election? (or someone who's solid in their district)... It's all just part of the charade.

So much for that you're not a Democrat anymore. The party that agrees on every issue and does nothing but personal attacks to get it, the Democrat party, aren't "loyalists," the Republicans are ...

"But when the vast majority of republicans are party loyalist."

That's just stupid. If you had left of the "when the" implying the Democrats aren't, you lost it, girl ...

 

[YoursTruly]

well you haven't explained what it is you want. Not even in that post. It seems you are more against trump who is not GOP then you are the GOP.

I can explain something to 10 people, the same exact way, and only 5 may get what I'm saying. My problem is, I don't know how to explain it to you.

I'm against Trump because of what Trump did. Not what he says. I agree with most of what Trump says. But very little of what he did.
Banning bump stocks, funding planned parenthood, spending. Trump was too progressive for me. I'm against 99% of the things progressives do. So why wouldn't I be against Trump too?
Being a conservative, and supporting Trump, would make me a party loyalist.

Where you are correct is that the GOP has increased the size of government, it's because they are scared of demofks.

My concern isn't why they increased the size of government. It's the fact that they did it.

You will always have a GOP rep side with a demofk and never the other way. When a media demofk outs a GOP, they quickly shrink into a shell and abide by the tactic of pressure and threat. Trump as you should have noticed, didn't cower to the media threats, even impeachment threats. He was the real deal of what it is you wish in an independent. Again, that makes it strange your dislike of the man. He stood for independence. Took on the GOP in the senate, he played into the need for judges. Which is truly the problem with government. One has to play the game to get anything done. Shame.

If Trumps actions were the same as his words, I'd support him a lot more.
He promised to balance the budget in 4 years. If he tried and failed, that would be one thing. But he didn't even try.
And again, what ever reason the GOP has when they bow down to democrats, I could care less. It's the fact that they bowed down to them.

"What you do means a whole lot more than anything you've got to say."