GOP Cuckservatives Demand a Third Party Run if Trump Wins GOP Nomination

[Stephanie]

We are finally getting to see who the traitors are in the Republican party that is SELLING out their constituents. they and the Democrat traitors are now running as ONE. people need to wake up to this. don't donate to either party. give only to the person you are supporting. and change your political affiliation to: Independent. screw them all

 

[the_human_being]

MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!

Are any of those kids from the same mother?

Look how WHITE they are.

How does that answer the question? Were any of Trump's kids' mothers not white?

No, none were non-white. His kids are from two marriages..

All total -- 5 kids from 3 wives. You know, the party which champions family values.

At least they were married. You're likely a guy who supports gay marriage, living together out of wedlock, abortion, and all the other Liberal tripe.

When you get down to where the rubber meets the road, the Clinton daughter may have had married parents but it mattered little to Bill did it?

 

[LuckyDuck01!]

Trump is a entertainment buffoon. That said, he touches on important issues.
1. Porous borders which allow individuals in which are not properly vetted.
2. An immigration/so-called refugee policy which allows dangerous individuals to enter our country, especially those whose religious book and teachers, believe that one has to convert, subjugate, or kill all who do not hold the same religion, or obey its tenets.
3. International business policies which benefit other nations while leaving our nation more of a consumer country rather than a producing nation.
Trump, as any other legitimate candidate should have the same opportunity to win as the other candidates.

 

[Toro]

Trump is a populist demagogue, first and foremost.

It's a trend sweeping the developed world.

 

[Faun]

Are any of those kids from the same mother?

Look how WHITE they are.

How does that answer the question? Were any of Trump's kids' mothers not white?

No, none were non-white. His kids are from two marriages..

All total -- 5 kids from 3 wives. You know, the party which champions family values.

At least they were married. You're likely a guy who supports gay marriage, living together out of wedlock, abortion, and all the other Liberal tripe.

When you get down to where the rubber meets the road, the Clinton daughter may have had married parents but it mattered little to Bill did it?

Why wouldn't a Liberal support those things? We believe in personal liberties. If two women want to marry each other, why should I care? It's their business, not mine. If a couple want to live together without being married, why should I care? It's their business, not mine. If a woman wants to get an abortion, why should I care? It's their business, not mine.

On the flip side, generally speaking, conservatives think it is their business and position themselves as the champions of family values. ...... then you have to deal with folks Trump with multiple kids from multiple wives and folks like the Palins' having kids without getting married.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Trump is one of the least conservative of all the Republican candidates.

Can you define your meaning to the word 'conservative'?

To me there seem to be several definitions that people use;
1. a reactionary meaning. To dislike i-phones would be conservative.
2. an older set of values not generally subscribed to by the establishment today. A 1968 liberal would be a conservative today.
3. A defender and lover of Western civilization and one who longs to preserve it and make it flourish again some day.
4. a person who would like to restore the American government to something similar to what it was in 1800 (minus slavery) as best can be accomodated with todays requirements for the government still being met.
5. Libertarianism combined with a minarchist approach to government.

I personally subscribe to the first three categories.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Trump is a populist demagogue, first and foremost.

It's a trend sweeping the developed world.

Then it's the developed worlds fault?

I find Trump to be a breath of fresh air; all the PC nonsense blown out and the man has a genuinely free mind and says what he thinks.

 

[JimBowie1958]

You stupid ****, the mainstream GOP are not conservatives at all. Thread fail.

Bullshit. The public breaks down (self identified) into about 20% liberal, 35% moderate and 45% conservative.

If the GOP has the right side of the spectrum, then 95% of the GOP is conservative and led by a 5% elitist gaggle of pricks, aka GOP elite.

Numbers are hard for you, aren't they?

lol, you are right. If the GOP has the corner on the conservative 50% of the spectrum, then that gives them about 45% conservative and 5% moderate, with a percentage of 90% being conservative and 10% being moderate elite.

The point however still stands, despite my math error. Thank you for helping me keep my shit straight.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Trump is a entertainment buffoon.

Trump has been a wildly successful 'entertainment buffoon'.

I wouldnt mind making his money in just one year; not bad for a buffoon, wouldnt you say?

 

[PredFan]

You stupid ****, the mainstream GOP are not conservatives at all. Thread fail.

Bullshit. The public breaks down (self identified) into about 20% liberal, 35% moderate and 45% conservative.

If the GOP has the right side of the spectrum, then 95% of the GOP is conservative and led by a 5% elitist gaggle of pricks, aka GOP elite.

Numbers are hard for you, aren't they?

lol, you are right. If the GOP has the corner on the conservative 50% of the spectrum, then that gives them about 45% conservative and 5% moderate, with a percentage of 90% being conservative and 10% being moderate elite.

The point however still stands, despite my math error. Thank you for helping me keep my shit straight.

 

[EverCurious]

Trump is one of the least conservative of all the Republican candidates.

Can you define your meaning to the word 'conservative'?

To me there seem to be several definitions that people use;
1. a reactionary meaning. To dislike i-phones would be conservative.
2. an older set of values not generally subscribed to by the establishment today. A 1968 liberal would be a conservative today.
3. A defender and lover of Western civilization and one who longs to preserve it and make it flourish again some day.
4. a person who would like to restore the American government to something similar to what it was in 1800 (minus slavery) as best can be accomodated with todays requirements for the government still being met.
5. Libertarianism combined with a minarchist approach to government.

I personally subscribe to the first three categories.

I think this is the first time I've seen an attempt to "define" the term, thanks for that. Personally, I have a lot of difficulty both defining and fitting myself in to categories. Best I can usually come up with is actually from that linky in my sig; mostly Libertarian, fiscally Republican, and a bit Democrat/Liberal on the more "moral" social issues side of thing. I need a party who is mostly Republican without all the religious riders :/

We are all so varied and unique in our perspectives that I am surprised how many can so easily define their belief's within a single party. I've never been able to and this often makes me envious of how easy it is for others to vote heh

 

[JimBowie1958]

You stupid ****, the mainstream GOP are not conservatives at all. Thread fail.

Bullshit. The public breaks down (self identified) into about 20% liberal, 35% moderate and 45% conservative.

If the GOP has the right side of the spectrum, then 95% of the GOP is conservative and led by a 5% elitist gaggle of pricks, aka GOP elite.

Numbers are hard for you, aren't they?

lol, you are right. If the GOP has the corner on the conservative 50% of the spectrum, then that gives them about 45% conservative and 5% moderate, with a percentage of 90% being conservative and 10% being moderate elite.

The point however still stands, despite my math error. Thank you for helping me keep my shit straight.

You know they have an image icon in the tool bar that makes the image actually show up without the frame, right?

 

[JimBowie1958]

I think this is the first time I've seen an attempt to "define" the term, thanks for that. Personally, I have a lot of difficulty both defining and fitting myself in to categories. Best I can usually come up with is actually from that linky in my sig; mostly Libertarian, fiscally Republican, and a bit Democrat/Liberal on the more "moral" social issues side of thing. I need a party who is mostly Republican without all the religious riders :/

We are all so varied and unique in our perspectives that I am surprised how many can so easily define their belief's within a single party. I've never been able to and this often makes me envious of how easy it is for others to vote heh

I dont think of myself as conservative, though all m y friends and family tell me that I am.

I dont care for ideology dictating to me what I can or should believe is true. IMO, only the church can do that, and they are ******* up roundly.

What I do think I am is a 'Truth Seeker'. I want to know what I have in error, or is fallacious, and what is correct and what is True. IF I think I am wrong then I will not advocate or promote that item, and if I find something that seems more truthful I adopt it.

The pursuit of ideological versions of Truth is a recursive feed back loop that consumes itself. We need all points of view to keep the ship of America on course, and to insist that only one ideology holds that truth is a sign of either intellectual laziness, ideological dishonesty or idiocy.

 

[PredFan]

You stupid ****, the mainstream GOP are not conservatives at all. Thread fail.

Bullshit. The public breaks down (self identified) into about 20% liberal, 35% moderate and 45% conservative.

If the GOP has the right side of the spectrum, then 95% of the GOP is conservative and led by a 5% elitist gaggle of pricks, aka GOP elite.

Numbers are hard for you, aren't they?

lol, you are right. If the GOP has the corner on the conservative 50% of the spectrum, then that gives them about 45% conservative and 5% moderate, with a percentage of 90% being conservative and 10% being moderate elite.

The point however still stands, despite my math error. Thank you for helping me keep my shit straight.

You know they have an image icon in the tool bar that makes the image actually show up without the frame, right?

No. I did no know that. I wondered how others were doing it. I'll try it out.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Bullshit. The public breaks down (self identified) into about 20% liberal, 35% moderate and 45% conservative.

If the GOP has the right side of the spectrum, then 95% of the GOP is conservative and led by a 5% elitist gaggle of pricks, aka GOP elite.

Numbers are hard for you, aren't they?

lol, you are right. If the GOP has the corner on the conservative 50% of the spectrum, then that gives them about 45% conservative and 5% moderate, with a percentage of 90% being conservative and 10% being moderate elite.

The point however still stands, despite my math error. Thank you for helping me keep my shit straight.

You know they have an image icon in the tool bar that makes the image actually show up without the frame, right?

No. I did no know that. I wondered how others were doing it. I'll try it out.

15th icon from the left on my screen.

 

[EverCurious]

I think this is the first time I've seen an attempt to "define" the term, thanks for that. Personally, I have a lot of difficulty both defining and fitting myself in to categories. Best I can usually come up with is actually from that linky in my sig; mostly Libertarian, fiscally Republican, and a bit Democrat/Liberal on the more "moral" social issues side of thing. I need a party who is mostly Republican without all the religious riders :/

We are all so varied and unique in our perspectives that I am surprised how many can so easily define their belief's within a single party. I've never been able to and this often makes me envious of how easy it is for others to vote heh

I dont think of myself as conservative, though all m y friends and family tell me that I am.

I dont care for ideology dictating to me what I can or should believe is true. IMO, only the church can do that, and they are ******* up roundly.

What I do think I am is a 'Truth Seeker'. I want to know what I have in error, or is fallacious, and what is correct and what is True. IF I think I am wrong then I will not advocate or promote that item, and if I find something that seems more truthful I adopt it.

The pursuit of ideological versions of Truth is a recursive feed back loop that consumes itself. We need all points of view to keep the ship of America on course, and to insist that only one ideology holds that truth is a sign of either intellectual laziness, ideological dishonesty or idiocy.

I can follow this. I like truth, it's one of my major problems with the media and politician's or even used car salesmen; because they will twist the truth in order to get what they want.

And I agree, one shouldn't let anyone else's ideology dictate to their own feelings to them - that actually ties into my dislike for organized religion; because relying on someone else's documented beliefs imho is not "true" faith, but "learned" (even forced) faith. A "true" faith comes from within and isn't dictated nor learned, nor can it be swayed by the opinions of others. Organized religion however pushes the opposite, basically that if you don't believe exactly as they tell you to, then, (by proxy or something,) you /lack/ faith. I disagree with that idea.

While I do not believe in "God," I do believe in what can best be described as a form of "spirituality" - though for me this is a chemical/psychological/biological manifestation, rather than an independent "entity" - it still "guides" my decisions and activities in ways that may indeed go against "instinctual" reactions; which is a form of "morals" in a way. I don't believe in a soul in the traditional sense (an "entity" that surpasses death,) but rather I believe in what amounts to the living equivalent of a soul; that what we do in life, especially in our interactions with others, does matter to us as well as to them, and by extension to everyone they interact with - I suppose perhaps one could almost equate this to a global soul, in a way, as I do believe that every one of us must attempt to contribute to making that theoretical "global soul" a "good" soul, rather than a "bad" one. In this context, if we have a "bad" global soul then our species will go extinct, or perhaps that a "bad" soul is counter to species survival. ~shrug~

 

[JimBowie1958]

While I do not believe in "God," I do believe in what can best be described as a form of "spirituality" - though for me this is a chemical/psychological/biological manifestation, rather than an independent "entity" -

Are you familiar with why ancient Greek philosophers abandoned polytheism and embraced the concept of a Creator?

Have yo heard of the Infinite Regression Fallacy?

 

[EverCurious]

I have not, I'll have to look it up. I have a fairly basic understanding of most organized religions as I find I disagree with the initial premises "against" my personal beliefs that I cannot follow, or perhaps continue, with a deeper understanding. As I do like understanding things in depth, this actually troubles me - it is a lot of why I don't proclaim myself a full atheist, but rather an agnostic, but I suppose on the other hand, it also allows me the wiggle-room to completely accept that someone else believes in something... A bit of a double edged sword that causes me to hesitate in delving further into religion(s); after all, if I find the depth wholly unbelievable, then I am likely to lose some of my idk "compassion" and "acceptance" of those beliefs... Not to say that I would wish to "deny" anyone such belief, but rather that I would be less inclined to "defend" their personal beliefs. Like, as it stands now, I have no qualms about defending that someone believes something on a matter of "faith" - even if I disagree with how such "beliefs" are acquired - because I can understand that they do believe, whereas if the underlying faith is wholly unbelievable, it gets filed in the equivalent round file with "crazy" things like some conspiracy theory's... I'm not sure I'm explaining this very well, sorry if it makes limited sense heh