VIOLENCE: Republican promises “bullets not ballots” if Trump loses in 2024

[bigrebnc1775]

Aaand…we circle back to the beginning.

Which lies?

And back to the facts since 2016 it's been democrat lie after lie

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Because the country needs leadership that unites us. The sad thing is partisans, on both sides, see that as a bad thing.

Indeed, they should. Do you think they will?

You're taking about the party. I'm taking about the people. In any case, when I talk about consensus government, that doesn't mean we all have to agree, it just means that government won't act unless we do. ie we won't pass laws that half the people hate.

Of course Republicans won’t. That certainly doesn’t make it the Dems responsibility to satisfy your desire for a candidate you like better than Joe. Other than being a bit doddering, what’s your problem with Joe?

In case you haven’t noticed. There will be no candidate or president that unites us.
Republicans are far too gone for that. On the state level they’re doing everything in their power to hold power. Often times against the will of the majority of their voters.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

And back to the facts since 2016 it's been democrat lie after lie

Yes. You’ve said so. Repeatedly.

Which lies?

 

[dblack]

Hmmm

Other than being a bit doddering, what’s your problem with Joe?

He has no ability to unite the country. And/or no desire to do so.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Hmmm

He has no ability to unite the country. And/or no desire to do so.

Why should he and how can he?

Again. Why is it that the Dems are always expected to be the bigger men and fix all of our problems?

He can only do his best. Even then he will be attacked and vilified.

Sorting out our differences will require good faith actors from both parties who are willing to work together to do so.

Good faith is in woefully short supply on the Republican side.

 

[dblack]

Why should he and how can he?

So many ways. Most of them involve backing off of the liberal agenda to "transform America". He could refuse to sign legislation that is passed on a party line vote. He could recognize that people who aren't on board with the Democrats policy goals aren't deplorable. Instead of relying on a slim partisan majority to slam through legislation, he could actually make a case to those who don't agrre. You know, real persuasion, real leadership.

As far as why, the fact that you even ask the question, that you really don't get why unity is better that division, is right at the core of our dysfunction.

Again. Why is it that the Dems are always expected to be the bigger men and fix all of our problems?

Lol.

I don't expect that. At all. I fully expect the opposite

 

[Hutch Starskey]

So many ways. Most of them involve backing off of the liberal agenda to "transform America". He could refuse to sign legislation that is passed on a party line vote. He could recognize that people who aren't on board with the Democrats policy goals aren't deplorable. Instead of relying on a slim partisan majority to slam through legislation, he could actually make a case to those who don't agrre. You know, real persuasion, real leadership.

As far as why, the fact that you even ask the question, that you really don't get why unity is better that division, is right at the core of our dysfunction.

Lol.

I don't expect that. At all. I fully expect the opposite

Again. You’re expecting the Dems to fix our problems. As if they should abandon their initiatives, that their voters elected them to do, in favor of watered down nonsense.
Feeling divided because the party in power is enacting their agenda is stupid and shortsighted.
In what way(s) has Trump or any other Republican primary candidate for that matter suggested unity or put forth any plan to do so?
Which of their policy priorities are designed to be neutral?
Not a one.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Yes. You’ve said so. Repeatedly.

Which lies?

So you're ignorant

 

[dblack]

Again. You’re expecting the Dems to fix our problems.

Your reading comprehension is poor. I was very clear. I expect the opposite, because ...

As if they should abandon their initiatives, that their voters elected them to do, in favor of watered down nonsense.
Feeling divided because the party in power is enacting their agenda is stupid and shortsighted.

... you actually think unity is short-sighted and stupid. And I'm sure most partisans on the "other side" see it the same way. It doesn't even occur to you how fucked up that is.

In what way(s) has Trump or any other Republican primary candidate for that matter suggested unity or put forth any plan to do so?
Which of their policy priorities are designed to be neutral? Not a one.

Sigh. They haven't. It's that all you got? "The other side is just as bad as us"?? This is why the two party pIssing match is such an insidious problem You actually think "they do it too" is a legitimate excuse for nominating shitty candidates

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Your reading comprehension is poor. I was very clear. I expect the opposite, because ...

... you actually think unity is short-sighted and stupid. And I'm sure most partisans on the "other side" see it the same way. It doesn't even occur to you how fucked up that is.


Sigh. They haven't. It's that all you got? "The other side is just as bad as us"?? This is why the two party posting match is such an insidious problem You actually think "they do it too" is a legitimate excuse for nominating shitty candidates

Dont expect much from that simp

 

[Chillicothe]

They may have wanted it to go to the states, but the january 6th protesters made no attempts to make that happen.

Ummm, yeah they did.

That's why they attacked the Capitol and savagely beat the police who were protecting it and in their way.
They didn't attack the Capitol as simply an exercise in "Be there. Will be wild.".
They....certainly, some---like the Oathkeepers and Proud Boys.......came with a purpose.

And Don Trump and Guiliani and Eastman and Clark and PillowBoy and Bannon.......intended for the purposeful J6Jackass disruption as the deus ex machina to make it happen.

IMHO

 

[Chillicothe]

Simp your irrelevant garbage is still irrelevant since I didn't ask you

Ah, bigwrench, it don' work that way.
I was mildly sure you should know that.

Anyway, if you want to engage posters individually....for personalized intimate exchanges or a tête-à-tête then use the PM function.
Putting it on the public forum......is an implied invitation for comments.
I was mildly sure you knew that too.

My avatar is simply attempting to make you a better, more 'value-added' contributor on this venue.
But good luck. We sincerely think you can be better.

 

[Godboy]

Ummm, yeah they did.

That's why they attacked the Capitol and savagely beat the police who were protecting it and in their way.
They didn't attack the Capitol as simply an exercise in "Be there. Will be wild.".
They....certainly, some---like the Oathkeepers and Proud Boys.......came with a purpose.

And Don Trump and Guiliani and Eastman and Clark and PillowBoy and Bannon.......intended for the purposeful J6Jackass disruption as the deus ex machina to make it happen.

IMHO

How does punching a cop = a US takeover?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Ah,

I didn't ask your for your input or opinion chillifat

 

[Hutch Starskey]

So you're ignorant

Apparently. At least to which you’re referring.
Which lies? Can’t you be a bit more specific?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Your reading comprehension is poor. I was very clear. I expect the opposite, because ...

... you actually think unity is short-sighted and stupid. And I'm sure most partisans on the "other side" see it the same way. It doesn't even occur to you how fucked up that is.


Sigh. They haven't. It's that all you got? "The other side is just as bad as us"?? This is why the two party pIssing match is such an insidious problem You actually think "they do it too" is a legitimate excuse for nominating shitty candidates

I didn’t say unity was short sighted or stupid. That’s all you and your convoluted logic.
I said it requires a good faith effort across the board. I then clearly said that there is no good faith to be had from the right.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Dont expect much from that simp

I expect you to be able to articulate your grievances. It seems you are the one who continues to disappoint.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I expect you to be able to articulate your grievances. It seems you are the one who continues to disappoint.

I have your lack of comprehension is not my fault

 

[Hutch Starskey]

I have your lack of comprehension is not my fault

Can’t comprehend what you don’t enumerate.

 

[dblack]

I didn’t say unity was short sighted or stupid. That’s all you and your convoluted logic.
I said it requires a good faith effort across the board. I then clearly said that there is no good faith to be had from the right.

My bad. Here's what you did say:

... Feeling divided because the party in power is enacting their agenda is stupid and shortsighted.

It's not a matter of feelings. If the party in power passes laws that the minority vehemently opposes, that drives division. It's bad government and only inspires the "revenge politics" cycle. The losing side skulks away vowing to undo everything being forced on them at the first opportunity. The truth is that pushing an agenda that only half the country supports is shortsighted and stupid, even if you can pull it off.

It's good government, and in the long run good politics, to take into account strong objections of the minority. Especially when it comes to legislation that pushes fundamental changes on society (eg ACA). Laws that don't have broad support will be targeted for repeal, modification, nullification, etc as soon as the other side regains power. That leaves us thrashing back and forth between extremes, with each side pushing harder and harder for their unpopular agenda (because they know much of what they accomplish will be undone).