How ‘Owning the Libs’ Became the GOP’s Core Belief...

[Hang on Sloopy]

In 1952, the political mainstream was inflamed by the boorishness and recklessness of another conservative demagogue: Wisconsin’s Sen. Joseph McCarthy, then at the height of his infamous communist “witch hunt” within the federal government. McCarthy would eventually overreach to the extent that he was overwhelmingly censured by the Senate, including roughly half of its members from his own party.

One prominent conservative willing to defend McCarthy, much to the chagrin of nearly everybody to the left of the John Birch Society, was Irving Kristol. The godfather of neoconservatism wrote contemporaneously in Commentary that “there is one thing that the American people know about Senator McCarthy: He, like them, is unequivocally anti-Communist. About the spokesman for American liberalism, they feel they know no such thing.”

To Kristol, the certainty McCarthy signaled was worth commending, despite his argument’s lack of substance or his corrosive rhetorical style. McCarthy was a staunch anti-communist, but that was almost secondary to how thoroughly he infuriated his opponents, leaving no question as to where he stood. And given the incentives presented by social media toward ever more extreme political positions, it’s no wonder such stark, if reductive, contrasts are even more appealing today, to the extent that a spiritual heir of McCarthy’s could even win the White House.

How ‘Owning the Libs’ Became the GOP’s Core Belief

The weird journey of a tongue-in-cheek catchphrase from conservative-mocking putdown to the defining tenet of the Republican Party’s way of life.

www.politico.com

Interesting take on how someone like Donald Trump could win the Presidency. The politics of division have been going on for years.

Why run a platform when painting the opposition as the enemy has become an effective tool for winning elections. In a corporate duopoly there are only two options.

The GOP is going to win again. Its a “when” not an “if”

McCarthy was wise and smart enough to see what 2021 would like. Executing Hollywood commies should have been a priority

Hollywood is the last place on earth you will find communism. The town is a tribute to capitalism and is one of the most conservative things in modern life. You are confusing communism with a few artistic people showing concern for the plight of the planet and its citizens.

Because you are damaged goods you just label it "communism" when in fact it is just normal behaviour. Its another sign that the world has moved on and left you and your arse scratching mates behind in the C20th. Get some help.

Thanks for pointing out the hypocrisy of Hollywood. A place where nearly everyone espouses anti capitalistic and liberal views, yet all of them became rich off of a capitalistic system, and made their money portraying things they hate, and will tell you are wrong.

There you go again. Liberal views are just common decency. Held by most people across the world who dont live in your narrow partisan hate bubble.

Give me an example of these liberal views in relation to Hollywood.

No hate bubble. You want an example of what specifically? Most Hollywood types are liberal, they believe in and practice liberal policy. What examples are you looking for.

For the record, Republicans have common decency as well, the difference is how they believe society should be.

For example, liberals believe that if you have money, they should be able to take it from you, and give it to someone else. How is that "decent"? Sure, for the person receiving that money, its great, for the person who had to earn that money, or make sacrifices and take risks to make that money, not so great.

Its noble that you on the left want to help the poor, I think we should all do that, but nobody should be forced into helping the poor. Oddly, all those liberals who talk about how we need to help the poor...you don't see them reaching into their own pockets, you see them trying to make government take it from someone else.

Honestly, there is no difference between the left and the right, other than the path to solving issues. Left wing media will make you believe that all right wingers are thes monstrous hate filled, evil people who want to do harm to everyone else. Nothing could be further from the truth. Its just spin and lies from those left wing talking heads. Both sides have compassion, both sides have common decency.

The right says "just leave us alone and do what the constitution says", the left says "do what we want or were going to punish you with our cancel culture, or our labels that we will put on you to make you look bad and try to silence you."

The left is capable of, and frequently does display and enact as much or more hate than the right. For a group that claims to be about diversity, inclusion, tolerance, you only desire those things if it fits in your bubble, anyone else needs to be ostracized from society and shut out.

Your desire to force others to your way of thinking is, probably, the ultimate show of hate.

Serious question. I've heard so much about the so called cancel culture, but I'm still not sure what it is supposed to be. If I dislike what a public figure says, and I mention that, am I part of the cancel culture? What about not buying a product I don't want? Is that CC? It honestly looks like you found a new phrase to describe those that don't agree with you. Please explain what you mean by the term, and please be specific.

It simply means while Hop on Pop is vulgar, Cardi B is a literal genius. And a model for young girls everywhere.

It is just being a blind hypocrite and a GD stupid idiot.

I make these things so simple even a blind hypocrite like you should understand there Bertha.

Not really an answer to the question, but I'll try to make some sense of your silliness. Are you saying it has something to do with taste in music? I don't care for Cardi B, and have no idea who or what Hop on Pop is. Am I part of the cancel culture?

If you can't make sense of what I said than you're dumber than I thought you were. I'm not going down to 3rd grade level to explain it. Now pick up that pile of rubble on AF1 and fucking govern.

And you gave the type answer that is so common for crazy right wingers. I should have known better than to hope for more.

How about having your job and family in danger if you sayone thing that is not approved. Quit your horse shit with me.

 

[Jets]

How ‘Owning the Libs’ Became the GOP’s Core Belief...

I think this is par for course across both major parties these days. It seems few people root for America anymore, but rather for "their team."

No doubt. Tribal politics tends to be the rule rather than the exception.

 

[BULLDOG]

In 1952, the political mainstream was inflamed by the boorishness and recklessness of another conservative demagogue: Wisconsin’s Sen. Joseph McCarthy, then at the height of his infamous communist “witch hunt” within the federal government. McCarthy would eventually overreach to the extent that he was overwhelmingly censured by the Senate, including roughly half of its members from his own party.

One prominent conservative willing to defend McCarthy, much to the chagrin of nearly everybody to the left of the John Birch Society, was Irving Kristol. The godfather of neoconservatism wrote contemporaneously in Commentary that “there is one thing that the American people know about Senator McCarthy: He, like them, is unequivocally anti-Communist. About the spokesman for American liberalism, they feel they know no such thing.”

To Kristol, the certainty McCarthy signaled was worth commending, despite his argument’s lack of substance or his corrosive rhetorical style. McCarthy was a staunch anti-communist, but that was almost secondary to how thoroughly he infuriated his opponents, leaving no question as to where he stood. And given the incentives presented by social media toward ever more extreme political positions, it’s no wonder such stark, if reductive, contrasts are even more appealing today, to the extent that a spiritual heir of McCarthy’s could even win the White House.

How ‘Owning the Libs’ Became the GOP’s Core Belief

The weird journey of a tongue-in-cheek catchphrase from conservative-mocking putdown to the defining tenet of the Republican Party’s way of life.

www.politico.com

Interesting take on how someone like Donald Trump could win the Presidency. The politics of division have been going on for years.

Why run a platform when painting the opposition as the enemy has become an effective tool for winning elections. In a corporate duopoly there are only two options.

The GOP is going to win again. Its a “when” not an “if”

McCarthy was wise and smart enough to see what 2021 would like. Executing Hollywood commies should have been a priority

Hollywood is the last place on earth you will find communism. The town is a tribute to capitalism and is one of the most conservative things in modern life. You are confusing communism with a few artistic people showing concern for the plight of the planet and its citizens.

Because you are damaged goods you just label it "communism" when in fact it is just normal behaviour. Its another sign that the world has moved on and left you and your arse scratching mates behind in the C20th. Get some help.

Thanks for pointing out the hypocrisy of Hollywood. A place where nearly everyone espouses anti capitalistic and liberal views, yet all of them became rich off of a capitalistic system, and made their money portraying things they hate, and will tell you are wrong.

There you go again. Liberal views are just common decency. Held by most people across the world who dont live in your narrow partisan hate bubble.

Give me an example of these liberal views in relation to Hollywood.

No hate bubble. You want an example of what specifically? Most Hollywood types are liberal, they believe in and practice liberal policy. What examples are you looking for.

For the record, Republicans have common decency as well, the difference is how they believe society should be.

For example, liberals believe that if you have money, they should be able to take it from you, and give it to someone else. How is that "decent"? Sure, for the person receiving that money, its great, for the person who had to earn that money, or make sacrifices and take risks to make that money, not so great.

Its noble that you on the left want to help the poor, I think we should all do that, but nobody should be forced into helping the poor. Oddly, all those liberals who talk about how we need to help the poor...you don't see them reaching into their own pockets, you see them trying to make government take it from someone else.

Honestly, there is no difference between the left and the right, other than the path to solving issues. Left wing media will make you believe that all right wingers are thes monstrous hate filled, evil people who want to do harm to everyone else. Nothing could be further from the truth. Its just spin and lies from those left wing talking heads. Both sides have compassion, both sides have common decency.

The right says "just leave us alone and do what the constitution says", the left says "do what we want or were going to punish you with our cancel culture, or our labels that we will put on you to make you look bad and try to silence you."

The left is capable of, and frequently does display and enact as much or more hate than the right. For a group that claims to be about diversity, inclusion, tolerance, you only desire those things if it fits in your bubble, anyone else needs to be ostracized from society and shut out.

Your desire to force others to your way of thinking is, probably, the ultimate show of hate.

Serious question. I've heard so much about the so called cancel culture, but I'm still not sure what it is supposed to be. If I dislike what a public figure says, and I mention that, am I part of the cancel culture? What about not buying a product I don't want? Is that CC? It honestly looks like you found a new phrase to describe those that don't agree with you. Please explain what you mean by the term, and please be specific.

It simply means while Hop on Pop is vulgar, Cardi B is a literal genius. And a model for young girls everywhere.

It is just being a blind hypocrite and a GD stupid idiot.

I make these things so simple even a blind hypocrite like you should understand there Bertha.

Not really an answer to the question, but I'll try to make some sense of your silliness. Are you saying it has something to do with taste in music? I don't care for Cardi B, and have no idea who or what Hop on Pop is. Am I part of the cancel culture?

If you can't make sense of what I said than you're dumber than I thought you were. I'm not going down to 3rd grade level to explain it. Now pick up that pile of rubble on AF1 and fucking govern.

And you gave the type answer that is so common for crazy right wingers. I should have known better than to hope for more.

How about having your job and family in danger if you sayone thing that is not approved. Quit your horse shit with me.

Sounds to me like you have a problem with your employer. Are you questioning his ability to hire and fire you at will? Isn't that part of the so called "right to work" laws that the right is so fond of?

 

[Grumblenuts]

Relative to the Dems, the GOP has lots of problems besides blindly supporting (subsidizing!) Trump. They've unquestioningly stood behind the nuclear industry (dead as a doornail), Exxon Mobil and the fossil fuel industries (most dying fast), and hegemonic corporate supremacy in general which simply has to stop. They also tend to hate Medicare For All, Social Security, and food stamps with a vengeance. That said though, the Dems tend to either support the same shit or refuse to seriously fight against any of it. It was reported back in 2016 (long before Covid-19) that tons of people were dying unnecessarily in hospitals. A bit of excitement followed but it goes on. Corporate Medicare billing fraud (about $350 billion a year).. nothing. The IRS now being way too small to investigate big corporate tax evaders, so just a nuisance to working slobs any more. Nothing happening to solve these things in DC. Only activists and groups fighting locally. Fuck the duopoly Parties. They're just in the way.

 

[busybee01]

In 1952, the political mainstream was inflamed by the boorishness and recklessness of another conservative demagogue: Wisconsin’s Sen. Joseph McCarthy, then at the height of his infamous communist “witch hunt” within the federal government. McCarthy would eventually overreach to the extent that he was overwhelmingly censured by the Senate, including roughly half of its members from his own party.

One prominent conservative willing to defend McCarthy, much to the chagrin of nearly everybody to the left of the John Birch Society, was Irving Kristol. The godfather of neoconservatism wrote contemporaneously in Commentary that “there is one thing that the American people know about Senator McCarthy: He, like them, is unequivocally anti-Communist. About the spokesman for American liberalism, they feel they know no such thing.”

To Kristol, the certainty McCarthy signaled was worth commending, despite his argument’s lack of substance or his corrosive rhetorical style. McCarthy was a staunch anti-communist, but that was almost secondary to how thoroughly he infuriated his opponents, leaving no question as to where he stood. And given the incentives presented by social media toward ever more extreme political positions, it’s no wonder such stark, if reductive, contrasts are even more appealing today, to the extent that a spiritual heir of McCarthy’s could even win the White House.

How ‘Owning the Libs’ Became the GOP’s Core Belief

The weird journey of a tongue-in-cheek catchphrase from conservative-mocking putdown to the defining tenet of the Republican Party’s way of life.

www.politico.com

Interesting take on how someone like Donald Trump could win the Presidency. The politics of division have been going on for years.

Why run a platform when painting the opposition as the enemy has become an effective tool for winning elections. In a corporate duopoly there are only two options.

The GOP is going to win again. Its a “when” not an “if”

Ronald Reagan did not run on the politics of division. He ran a policy oriented campaign in 1980 as he ran on cutting taxes and a strong defense. During the 80's you had Gingrich and Jack Kemp talking about a opportunity society. The Heritage Foundation among others outlined a conservative war on policy. Sadly iy began to unravel. George Bush was forced to run on social issues that included a racist Willie Horton ad. Gingrich became morew redical as he started the politics of division. Trump took up the mantle in 2016.

 

[Correll]

In 1952, the political mainstream was inflamed by the boorishness and recklessness of another conservative demagogue: Wisconsin’s Sen. Joseph McCarthy, then at the height of his infamous communist “witch hunt” within the federal government. McCarthy would eventually overreach to the extent that he was overwhelmingly censured by the Senate, including roughly half of its members from his own party.

One prominent conservative willing to defend McCarthy, much to the chagrin of nearly everybody to the left of the John Birch Society, was Irving Kristol. The godfather of neoconservatism wrote contemporaneously in Commentary that “there is one thing that the American people know about Senator McCarthy: He, like them, is unequivocally anti-Communist. About the spokesman for American liberalism, they feel they know no such thing.”

To Kristol, the certainty McCarthy signaled was worth commending, despite his argument’s lack of substance or his corrosive rhetorical style. McCarthy was a staunch anti-communist, but that was almost secondary to how thoroughly he infuriated his opponents, leaving no question as to where he stood. And given the incentives presented by social media toward ever more extreme political positions, it’s no wonder such stark, if reductive, contrasts are even more appealing today, to the extent that a spiritual heir of McCarthy’s could even win the White House.

How ‘Owning the Libs’ Became the GOP’s Core Belief

The weird journey of a tongue-in-cheek catchphrase from conservative-mocking putdown to the defining tenet of the Republican Party’s way of life.

www.politico.com

Interesting take on how someone like Donald Trump could win the Presidency. The politics of division have been going on for years.

Why run a platform when painting the opposition as the enemy has become an effective tool for winning elections. In a corporate duopoly there are only two options.

The GOP is going to win again. Its a “when” not an “if”

Except that Trump had a very meaty platform, and ran an issue heavy campaign and made what appeared to be a good faith effort to live up to most of it, especially considering the handicap of hysterical and illegal "RESIST" from the dems and the Deep State and then of course COVID.


SO, other than the fact that everything you said was wrong, good op.

 

[Correll]

In 1952, the political mainstream was inflamed by the boorishness and recklessness of another conservative demagogue: Wisconsin’s Sen. Joseph McCarthy, then at the height of his infamous communist “witch hunt” within the federal government. McCarthy would eventually overreach to the extent that he was overwhelmingly censured by the Senate, including roughly half of its members from his own party.

One prominent conservative willing to defend McCarthy, much to the chagrin of nearly everybody to the left of the John Birch Society, was Irving Kristol. The godfather of neoconservatism wrote contemporaneously in Commentary that “there is one thing that the American people know about Senator McCarthy: He, like them, is unequivocally anti-Communist. About the spokesman for American liberalism, they feel they know no such thing.”

To Kristol, the certainty McCarthy signaled was worth commending, despite his argument’s lack of substance or his corrosive rhetorical style. McCarthy was a staunch anti-communist, but that was almost secondary to how thoroughly he infuriated his opponents, leaving no question as to where he stood. And given the incentives presented by social media toward ever more extreme political positions, it’s no wonder such stark, if reductive, contrasts are even more appealing today, to the extent that a spiritual heir of McCarthy’s could even win the White House.

How ‘Owning the Libs’ Became the GOP’s Core Belief

The weird journey of a tongue-in-cheek catchphrase from conservative-mocking putdown to the defining tenet of the Republican Party’s way of life.

www.politico.com

Interesting take on how someone like Donald Trump could win the Presidency. The politics of division have been going on for years.

Why run a platform when painting the opposition as the enemy has become an effective tool for winning elections. In a corporate duopoly there are only two options.

The GOP is going to win again. Its a “when” not an “if”

Ronald Reagan did not run on the politics of division. He ran a policy oriented campaign in 1980 as he ran on cutting taxes and a strong defense. During the 80's you had Gingrich and Jack Kemp talking about a opportunity society. The Heritage Foundation among others outlined a conservative war on policy. Sadly iy began to unravel. George Bush was forced to run on social issues that included a racist Willie Horton ad. Gingrich became morew redical as he started the politics of division. Trump took up the mantle in 2016.

Willie Horton was left out of prison on a furlong program and raped and tortured an innocent couple.


That was a stunning policy failure and a completely valid campaign issue.


Anyone that can look at that and cry "wacism" as though that all that was, is a fucking retarded asshole.

 

[Lesh]

In 1952, the political mainstream was inflamed by the boorishness and recklessness of another conservative demagogue: Wisconsin’s Sen. Joseph McCarthy, then at the height of his infamous communist “witch hunt” within the federal government. McCarthy would eventually overreach to the extent that he was overwhelmingly censured by the Senate, including roughly half of its members from his own party.

One prominent conservative willing to defend McCarthy, much to the chagrin of nearly everybody to the left of the John Birch Society, was Irving Kristol. The godfather of neoconservatism wrote contemporaneously in Commentary that “there is one thing that the American people know about Senator McCarthy: He, like them, is unequivocally anti-Communist. About the spokesman for American liberalism, they feel they know no such thing.”

To Kristol, the certainty McCarthy signaled was worth commending, despite his argument’s lack of substance or his corrosive rhetorical style. McCarthy was a staunch anti-communist, but that was almost secondary to how thoroughly he infuriated his opponents, leaving no question as to where he stood. And given the incentives presented by social media toward ever more extreme political positions, it’s no wonder such stark, if reductive, contrasts are even more appealing today, to the extent that a spiritual heir of McCarthy’s could even win the White House.

How ‘Owning the Libs’ Became the GOP’s Core Belief

The weird journey of a tongue-in-cheek catchphrase from conservative-mocking putdown to the defining tenet of the Republican Party’s way of life.

www.politico.com

Interesting take on how someone like Donald Trump could win the Presidency. The politics of division have been going on for years.

Why run a platform when painting the opposition as the enemy has become an effective tool for winning elections. In a corporate duopoly there are only two options.

The GOP is going to win again. Its a “when” not an “if”

Sorry, don't see today's GOP as winning again EVER.

The thesis of the piece is that you can win by making the other guys the "enemy." But look at what the GOP has done to itself.
Most of the country believes the GOP responsible for 1/6. They've made themselves the enemy of democracy itself.
Within the party anyone not a Trumpinista is the "enemy." They've made themselves enemies of themselves.

The GOP spent 60 years building this "Coalition of the Dumb."
The GOP coalition has nothing politically in common. Guns and abortions? Abortions and Immigrants? Immigrants and anti-vax? Single issue voters whose only shared trait is hate. They have no policies. They don't know how to govern. But when it comes to hate? Man they got that down right.

For the GOP to win again:
Make the GOP a private organization
Kill all the primaries
Reform the membership. Entrance exams and entrance fees. You don't become Republican by registering Republican.
Return the GOP to its roots. The Economy. Get rid of the silo issues as a party. Individuals can support or oppose whatever social issue they want but the party sticks to economics.

It'll be a slow long walk with the party reduced to 1/3 or less of elected officials.

BUT, there are lots of Democrats and Independents who would vote for a Republican platform if they knew the candidate wasn't some nutjob.

The problem is that it is still a duopoly. Voters tend to be shortsighted and capricious. The GOP will look like a viable alternative if too many voters turn against the Democratic Party. In addition, the GOP controls more state legislatures than the DP does. If we add to that the Presidents party tends to lose seats during the midterms, there is a reasonable chance the republican party could be voted back into power.

Pretty hard when every single GOP incumbant will have voted against the checks we just got in our bank accounts

 

[Lesh]

That was a stunning policy failure and a completely valid campaign issue.

One that had Zero to do with Dukakis

 

[Correll]

In 1952, the political mainstream was inflamed by the boorishness and recklessness of another conservative demagogue: Wisconsin’s Sen. Joseph McCarthy, then at the height of his infamous communist “witch hunt” within the federal government. McCarthy would eventually overreach to the extent that he was overwhelmingly censured by the Senate, including roughly half of its members from his own party.

One prominent conservative willing to defend McCarthy, much to the chagrin of nearly everybody to the left of the John Birch Society, was Irving Kristol. The godfather of neoconservatism wrote contemporaneously in Commentary that “there is one thing that the American people know about Senator McCarthy: He, like them, is unequivocally anti-Communist. About the spokesman for American liberalism, they feel they know no such thing.”

To Kristol, the certainty McCarthy signaled was worth commending, despite his argument’s lack of substance or his corrosive rhetorical style. McCarthy was a staunch anti-communist, but that was almost secondary to how thoroughly he infuriated his opponents, leaving no question as to where he stood. And given the incentives presented by social media toward ever more extreme political positions, it’s no wonder such stark, if reductive, contrasts are even more appealing today, to the extent that a spiritual heir of McCarthy’s could even win the White House.

How ‘Owning the Libs’ Became the GOP’s Core Belief

The weird journey of a tongue-in-cheek catchphrase from conservative-mocking putdown to the defining tenet of the Republican Party’s way of life.

www.politico.com

Interesting take on how someone like Donald Trump could win the Presidency. The politics of division have been going on for years.

Why run a platform when painting the opposition as the enemy has become an effective tool for winning elections. In a corporate duopoly there are only two options.

The GOP is going to win again. Its a “when” not an “if”

Sorry, don't see today's GOP as winning again EVER.

The thesis of the piece is that you can win by making the other guys the "enemy." But look at what the GOP has done to itself.
Most of the country believes the GOP responsible for 1/6. They've made themselves the enemy of democracy itself.
Within the party anyone not a Trumpinista is the "enemy." They've made themselves enemies of themselves.

The GOP spent 60 years building this "Coalition of the Dumb."
The GOP coalition has nothing politically in common. Guns and abortions? Abortions and Immigrants? Immigrants and anti-vax? Single issue voters whose only shared trait is hate. They have no policies. They don't know how to govern. But when it comes to hate? Man they got that down right.

For the GOP to win again:
Make the GOP a private organization
Kill all the primaries
Reform the membership. Entrance exams and entrance fees. You don't become Republican by registering Republican.
Return the GOP to its roots. The Economy. Get rid of the silo issues as a party. Individuals can support or oppose whatever social issue they want but the party sticks to economics.

It'll be a slow long walk with the party reduced to 1/3 or less of elected officials.

BUT, there are lots of Democrats and Independents who would vote for a Republican platform if they knew the candidate wasn't some nutjob.

The problem is that it is still a duopoly. Voters tend to be shortsighted and capricious. The GOP will look like a viable alternative if too many voters turn against the Democratic Party. In addition, the GOP controls more state legislatures than the DP does. If we add to that the Presidents party tends to lose seats during the midterms, there is a reasonable chance the republican party could be voted back into power.

Pretty hard when every single GOP incumbant will have voted against the checks we just got in our bank accounts

So, you admit that your base is built upon the idea of buying votes?

 

[Correll]

That was a stunning policy failure and a completely valid campaign issue.

One that had Zero to do with Dukakis

One that was his personal responsibility.


That you people cried wacism, is you showing that you are willing to give a man a pass on getting a woman raped and tortured by a violent murderer, for partisan politics.

 

[eyesmile]

In 1952, the political mainstream was inflamed by the boorishness and recklessness of another conservative demagogue: Wisconsin’s Sen. Joseph McCarthy, then at the height of his infamous communist “witch hunt” within the federal government. McCarthy would eventually overreach to the extent that he was overwhelmingly censured by the Senate, including roughly half of its members from his own party.

One prominent conservative willing to defend McCarthy, much to the chagrin of nearly everybody to the left of the John Birch Society, was Irving Kristol. The godfather of neoconservatism wrote contemporaneously in Commentary that “there is one thing that the American people know about Senator McCarthy: He, like them, is unequivocally anti-Communist. About the spokesman for American liberalism, they feel they know no such thing.”

To Kristol, the certainty McCarthy signaled was worth commending, despite his argument’s lack of substance or his corrosive rhetorical style. McCarthy was a staunch anti-communist, but that was almost secondary to how thoroughly he infuriated his opponents, leaving no question as to where he stood. And given the incentives presented by social media toward ever more extreme political positions, it’s no wonder such stark, if reductive, contrasts are even more appealing today, to the extent that a spiritual heir of McCarthy’s could even win the White House.

How ‘Owning the Libs’ Became the GOP’s Core Belief

The weird journey of a tongue-in-cheek catchphrase from conservative-mocking putdown to the defining tenet of the Republican Party’s way of life.

www.politico.com

Interesting take on how someone like Donald Trump could win the Presidency. The politics of division have been going on for years.

Why run a platform when painting the opposition as the enemy has become an effective tool for winning elections. In a corporate duopoly there are only two options.

The GOP is going to win again. Its a “when” not an “if”

The GOP won't win again. Dems have figured out how to expedite fraudulent elections without being held to account. If the gop wants to win, they'll do the same thing.

Nonsense. Right wing Republicans can’t win elections so they claim fraud

You just don’t have the votes. There just aren’t enough angry old white men to get it done so you have one option. Keep the opponent from voting... any way you can

400,000 more mail in votes received than sent out in Pennsylvania alone. Hundreds of sworn affidavits to the fraud Republicans and non partisans observed in swing States .. when not being kicked out of counting locations in violation of the law.
The list goes on and on but if it were true then why was it all dismissed you might ask, and the answer is they were terrified the leftist mobs would burn down the cities even worse than they had already over several months before.

It's not that Republicans didn't have the votes it's that they generally don't commit voter fraud especially on such a large scale.

 

[Lesh]

400,000 more mail in votes received than sent out in Pennsylvania alone.

What case was that "evidence" presented in? NONE? Because it's bullshit?
THAT is why courts "ignored it". It was not REAL

Hundreds of sworn affidavits to the fraud Republicans and non partisans observed in swing States .. when not being kicked out of counting locations in violation of the law.

Newsflash...you can lie on an affidavit. You can also claim to have knowledge of a conversation that you actually didn't have.

THAT was what we found just recently regarding the "I heard them talking" affidavit.

Postal Service Finds No Evidence Of Mail Ballot Fraud In Pa. Case Cited By Top Republicans

All the evidence indicates the election was the world's biggest swindle..........................."Reich NAZIs" I'm combining two posts, both from our pet corner of Hitler-fetishism. Mainly to save bandwidth. And for ease of understanding. The 'election was stole'n. It 'was a fraud'...

www.usmessageboard.com

I asked for evidence that courts refused to look at and you provided that?

Gibberish?

 

[Jets]

In 1952, the political mainstream was inflamed by the boorishness and recklessness of another conservative demagogue: Wisconsin’s Sen. Joseph McCarthy, then at the height of his infamous communist “witch hunt” within the federal government. McCarthy would eventually overreach to the extent that he was overwhelmingly censured by the Senate, including roughly half of its members from his own party.

One prominent conservative willing to defend McCarthy, much to the chagrin of nearly everybody to the left of the John Birch Society, was Irving Kristol. The godfather of neoconservatism wrote contemporaneously in Commentary that “there is one thing that the American people know about Senator McCarthy: He, like them, is unequivocally anti-Communist. About the spokesman for American liberalism, they feel they know no such thing.”

To Kristol, the certainty McCarthy signaled was worth commending, despite his argument’s lack of substance or his corrosive rhetorical style. McCarthy was a staunch anti-communist, but that was almost secondary to how thoroughly he infuriated his opponents, leaving no question as to where he stood. And given the incentives presented by social media toward ever more extreme political positions, it’s no wonder such stark, if reductive, contrasts are even more appealing today, to the extent that a spiritual heir of McCarthy’s could even win the White House.

How ‘Owning the Libs’ Became the GOP’s Core Belief

The weird journey of a tongue-in-cheek catchphrase from conservative-mocking putdown to the defining tenet of the Republican Party’s way of life.

www.politico.com

Interesting take on how someone like Donald Trump could win the Presidency. The politics of division have been going on for years.

Why run a platform when painting the opposition as the enemy has become an effective tool for winning elections. In a corporate duopoly there are only two options.

The GOP is going to win again. Its a “when” not an “if”

Except that Trump had a very meaty platform, and ran an issue heavy campaign and made what appeared to be a good faith effort to live up to most of it, especially considering the handicap of hysterical and illegal "RESIST" from the dems and the Deep State and then of course COVID.


SO, other than the fact that everything you said was wrong, good op.

”Everything i said was wrong”.

One is entitled to their opinion...

 

[ThisIsMe]

Hell, look at these forums. Many times I've seen lefties use derogatory words and phrases to describe people, especially women, and when you call them on it, they either deflect, or ignore you.

Probably because they meant and took it as satire, you as crude hypocrisy.

No, that wasn't it, they weren't even aware they were doing it until I brought it up


However, according to your excuse, are you saying its ok to use demeaning and derogatory words toward women, as long as its done in satire?

Yes, when done well. No, when done poorly. Nothing should be off limits in comedy. Crying is too often all we've got without laughter, and laughing at ourselves first and foremost seems required to maintain sanity.

Well, what I'm talking about wasn't comedy, so, it doesn't fit in that category

 

[Grumblenuts]

Well, what I'm talking about wasn't comedy, so, it doesn't fit in that category

I believe you didn't find it funny.

 

[ThisIsMe]

In 1952, the political mainstream was inflamed by the boorishness and recklessness of another conservative demagogue: Wisconsin’s Sen. Joseph McCarthy, then at the height of his infamous communist “witch hunt” within the federal government. McCarthy would eventually overreach to the extent that he was overwhelmingly censured by the Senate, including roughly half of its members from his own party.

One prominent conservative willing to defend McCarthy, much to the chagrin of nearly everybody to the left of the John Birch Society, was Irving Kristol. The godfather of neoconservatism wrote contemporaneously in Commentary that “there is one thing that the American people know about Senator McCarthy: He, like them, is unequivocally anti-Communist. About the spokesman for American liberalism, they feel they know no such thing.”

To Kristol, the certainty McCarthy signaled was worth commending, despite his argument’s lack of substance or his corrosive rhetorical style. McCarthy was a staunch anti-communist, but that was almost secondary to how thoroughly he infuriated his opponents, leaving no question as to where he stood. And given the incentives presented by social media toward ever more extreme political positions, it’s no wonder such stark, if reductive, contrasts are even more appealing today, to the extent that a spiritual heir of McCarthy’s could even win the White House.

How ‘Owning the Libs’ Became the GOP’s Core Belief

The weird journey of a tongue-in-cheek catchphrase from conservative-mocking putdown to the defining tenet of the Republican Party’s way of life.

www.politico.com

Interesting take on how someone like Donald Trump could win the Presidency. The politics of division have been going on for years.

Why run a platform when painting the opposition as the enemy has become an effective tool for winning elections. In a corporate duopoly there are only two options.

The GOP is going to win again. Its a “when” not an “if”

McCarthy was wise and smart enough to see what 2021 would like. Executing Hollywood commies should have been a priority

Hollywood is the last place on earth you will find communism. The town is a tribute to capitalism and is one of the most conservative things in modern life. You are confusing communism with a few artistic people showing concern for the plight of the planet and its citizens.

Because you are damaged goods you just label it "communism" when in fact it is just normal behaviour. Its another sign that the world has moved on and left you and your arse scratching mates behind in the C20th. Get some help.

Thanks for pointing out the hypocrisy of Hollywood. A place where nearly everyone espouses anti capitalistic and liberal views, yet all of them became rich off of a capitalistic system, and made their money portraying things they hate, and will tell you are wrong.

There you go again. Liberal views are just common decency. Held by most people across the world who dont live in your narrow partisan hate bubble.

Give me an example of these liberal views in relation to Hollywood.

No hate bubble. You want an example of what specifically? Most Hollywood types are liberal, they believe in and practice liberal policy. What examples are you looking for.

For the record, Republicans have common decency as well, the difference is how they believe society should be.

For example, liberals believe that if you have money, they should be able to take it from you, and give it to someone else. How is that "decent"? Sure, for the person receiving that money, its great, for the person who had to earn that money, or make sacrifices and take risks to make that money, not so great.

Its noble that you on the left want to help the poor, I think we should all do that, but nobody should be forced into helping the poor. Oddly, all those liberals who talk about how we need to help the poor...you don't see them reaching into their own pockets, you see them trying to make government take it from someone else.

Honestly, there is no difference between the left and the right, other than the path to solving issues. Left wing media will make you believe that all right wingers are thes monstrous hate filled, evil people who want to do harm to everyone else. Nothing could be further from the truth. Its just spin and lies from those left wing talking heads. Both sides have compassion, both sides have common decency.

The right says "just leave us alone and do what the constitution says", the left says "do what we want or were going to punish you with our cancel culture, or our labels that we will put on you to make you look bad and try to silence you."

The left is capable of, and frequently does display and enact as much or more hate than the right. For a group that claims to be about diversity, inclusion, tolerance, you only desire those things if it fits in your bubble, anyone else needs to be ostracized from society and shut out.

Your desire to force others to your way of thinking is, probably, the ultimate show of hate.

Serious question. I've heard so much about the so called cancel culture, but I'm still not sure what it is supposed to be. If I dislike what a public figure says, and I mention that, am I part of the cancel culture? What about not buying a product I don't want? Is that CC? It honestly looks like you found a new phrase to describe those that don't agree with you. Please explain what you mean by the term, and please be specific.

You know exactly what it is, I don't understand why you are asking.

Sure, you have the right to conduct your business as you wish.

The left doesn't see it as cancel culture because It doesn't generally happen to them.

Cancel culture is when someone is fires, removed, or boycotted from something because they have said or done something that the left considers to be hateful or harmful. The issue is, what that person may have done may not have been hateful at all, but the left deems it to be, and thus action has to be taken.

Top 10 recent examples of cancel culture

“Mr. Bean” actor Rowan Atkinson compared cancel culture to a “medieval mob looking for someone to burn.”

m.washingtontimes.com

Goya foods. There's an example. Liberals did a boycott on them because they had good things to say about trump.

The bachelor host who was railed, not because he defended her, but because he simply suggested she be allowed to tell her side of things.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

In 1952, the political mainstream was inflamed by the boorishness and recklessness of another conservative demagogue: Wisconsin’s Sen. Joseph McCarthy, then at the height of his infamous communist “witch hunt” within the federal government. McCarthy would eventually overreach to the extent that he was overwhelmingly censured by the Senate, including roughly half of its members from his own party.

One prominent conservative willing to defend McCarthy, much to the chagrin of nearly everybody to the left of the John Birch Society, was Irving Kristol. The godfather of neoconservatism wrote contemporaneously in Commentary that “there is one thing that the American people know about Senator McCarthy: He, like them, is unequivocally anti-Communist. About the spokesman for American liberalism, they feel they know no such thing.”

To Kristol, the certainty McCarthy signaled was worth commending, despite his argument’s lack of substance or his corrosive rhetorical style. McCarthy was a staunch anti-communist, but that was almost secondary to how thoroughly he infuriated his opponents, leaving no question as to where he stood. And given the incentives presented by social media toward ever more extreme political positions, it’s no wonder such stark, if reductive, contrasts are even more appealing today, to the extent that a spiritual heir of McCarthy’s could even win the White House.

How ‘Owning the Libs’ Became the GOP’s Core Belief

The weird journey of a tongue-in-cheek catchphrase from conservative-mocking putdown to the defining tenet of the Republican Party’s way of life.

www.politico.com

Interesting take on how someone like Donald Trump could win the Presidency. The politics of division have been going on for years.

Why run a platform when painting the opposition as the enemy has become an effective tool for winning elections. In a corporate duopoly there are only two options.

The GOP is going to win again. Its a “when” not an “if”

McCarthy was wise and smart enough to see what 2021 would like. Executing Hollywood commies should have been a priority

Hollywood is the last place on earth you will find communism. The town is a tribute to capitalism and is one of the most conservative things in modern life. You are confusing communism with a few artistic people showing concern for the plight of the planet and its citizens.

Because you are damaged goods you just label it "communism" when in fact it is just normal behaviour. Its another sign that the world has moved on and left you and your arse scratching mates behind in the C20th. Get some help.

Thanks for pointing out the hypocrisy of Hollywood. A place where nearly everyone espouses anti capitalistic and liberal views, yet all of them became rich off of a capitalistic system, and made their money portraying things they hate, and will tell you are wrong.

There you go again. Liberal views are just common decency. Held by most people across the world who dont live in your narrow partisan hate bubble.

Give me an example of these liberal views in relation to Hollywood.

No hate bubble. You want an example of what specifically? Most Hollywood types are liberal, they believe in and practice liberal policy. What examples are you looking for.

For the record, Republicans have common decency as well, the difference is how they believe society should be.

For example, liberals believe that if you have money, they should be able to take it from you, and give it to someone else. How is that "decent"? Sure, for the person receiving that money, its great, for the person who had to earn that money, or make sacrifices and take risks to make that money, not so great.

Its noble that you on the left want to help the poor, I think we should all do that, but nobody should be forced into helping the poor. Oddly, all those liberals who talk about how we need to help the poor...you don't see them reaching into their own pockets, you see them trying to make government take it from someone else.

Honestly, there is no difference between the left and the right, other than the path to solving issues. Left wing media will make you believe that all right wingers are thes monstrous hate filled, evil people who want to do harm to everyone else. Nothing could be further from the truth. Its just spin and lies from those left wing talking heads. Both sides have compassion, both sides have common decency.

The right says "just leave us alone and do what the constitution says", the left says "do what we want or were going to punish you with our cancel culture, or our labels that we will put on you to make you look bad and try to silence you."

The left is capable of, and frequently does display and enact as much or more hate than the right. For a group that claims to be about diversity, inclusion, tolerance, you only desire those things if it fits in your bubble, anyone else needs to be ostracized from society and shut out.

Your desire to force others to your way of thinking is, probably, the ultimate show of hate.

A list of films that illustrate this would help. I think yo will struggle. I cant think of a single movie that supports abortion, or gun control or any that promote an anti american view of the world..
I thnk that this demon is in your head.

 

[Grumblenuts]

It is often the case that those who are the least entitled to complain about something do so the loudest.

 

[22lcidw]

400,000 more mail in votes received than sent out in Pennsylvania alone.

What case was that "evidence" presented in? NONE? Because it's bullshit?
THAT is why courts "ignored it". It was not REAL

Hundreds of sworn affidavits to the fraud Republicans and non partisans observed in swing States .. when not being kicked out of counting locations in violation of the law.

Newsflash...you can lie on an affidavit. You can also claim to have knowledge of a conversation that you actually didn't have.

THAT was what we found just recently regarding the "I heard them talking" affidavit.

Postal Service Finds No Evidence Of Mail Ballot Fraud In Pa. Case Cited By Top Republicans

All the evidence indicates the election was the world's biggest swindle..........................."Reich NAZIs" I'm combining two posts, both from our pet corner of Hitler-fetishism. Mainly to save bandwidth. And for ease of understanding. The 'election was stole'n. It 'was a fraud'...

www.usmessageboard.com

I asked for evidence that courts refused to look at and you provided that?

Gibberish?

On the other hand we will help others to destroy your areas now. Just like you would do. Wait....Biden and Kamala are gong to fly down to Miami....Wait...they are going to fly ....Two pure unadulterated racists for different reasons as President and Vice President! They even attacked each other as the same in vicious manners before the election. Harris is one of the most non likable candidates in American history.