|
Post by flanz on Oct 15, 2016 20:42:10 GMT
www.nytimes.com/2016/10/14/opinion/burning-down-the-house.html?action=click&contentCollection=Politics&module=Trending&version=Full®ion=Marginalia&pgtype=article&_r=0Robert Reich's comment in response to this Op-Ed piece by Tim Egan 17 hrs · As Timothy Egan says, below, in the final days of a horrid campaign an unshackled Trump has become a national threat. Day after day, he rips at the last remaining threads of decency holding America together. His opponent is the devil, he says — “hate her with all your heart.” Forget about the rule of law. “Lock her up!” He’s got angel-voiced children yelling “bitch” and flipping the bird at rallies. He’s got young athletes chanting “build a wall” at Latino kids on the other side. He’s made it O.K. to bully and fat-shame. He’s normalized perversion, bragging about how an aging man with his sense of entitlement can walk in on naked women. Paying taxes is for fools. Those who take pleasure in watching Trump destroy the Republican Party are missing the bigger picture. He’s trying to destroy the country, as well. Civility, always a tenuous thing, cannot be quickly restored in a society that has learned to hate in public, at full throttle. It will take years to repair the awful damage Trump has done. What do you think?
|
|
tincin
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,368
Jul 25, 2014 4:55:32 GMT
|
Post by tincin on Oct 15, 2016 21:53:06 GMT
I believe he knows he isn't going to win which is why he has started the crap about the election being rigged. He wants riots and mayhem if he doesn't win because it's never been about this country, it's always been about his ego.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 19, 2024 1:35:52 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2016 21:55:49 GMT
I have said for a long time that the Republican party will need to implode and possibly build back up as two separate parties. There is no way that those that are far right conservative, religious Republicans can be in the same party as those that are fiscally and Constitutionally conservative but socially liberal. This, however, is not the implosion that I was expecting or hoping for.
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Oct 15, 2016 22:55:11 GMT
I have said for a long time that the Republican party will need to implode and possibly build back up as two separate parties. There is no way that those that are far right conservative, religious Republicans can be in the same party as those that are fiscally and Constitutionally conservative but socially liberal. This, however, is not the implosion that I was expecting or hoping for. Believe it or not, BF, no one was hoping for this. Even the most liberal among us are horrified. I truly hope the many sane and decent members of your party can pick it back up next time.
|
|
|
Post by femalebusiness on Oct 15, 2016 23:11:06 GMT
I have said for a long time that the Republican party will need to implode and possibly build back up as two separate parties. There is no way that those that are far right conservative, religious Republicans can be in the same party as those that are fiscally and Constitutionally conservative but socially liberal. This, however, is not the implosion that I was expecting or hoping for. Oh man, I want so bad for there to be a party that is socially liberal and fiscally conservative. That would be my dream party.
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Oct 15, 2016 23:12:00 GMT
I have said for a long time that the Republican party will need to implode and possibly build back up as two separate parties. There is no way that those that are far right conservative, religious Republicans can be in the same party as those that are fiscally and Constitutionally conservative but socially liberal. This, however, is not the implosion that I was expecting or hoping for. I think most people fall into the middle, on both sides. What we are witnessing with Trump is an anomaly--a person who, regardless of facts, truth, and lack of integrity has figured out just the right things to say to get people to worship him. It's so very clear to me now, even more so than a week ago. He's a very, very dangerous man.
|
|
|
Post by rebelyelle on Oct 15, 2016 23:22:18 GMT
I have said for a long time that the Republican party will need to implode and possibly build back up as two separate parties. There is no way that those that are far right conservative, religious Republicans can be in the same party as those that are fiscally and Constitutionally conservative but socially liberal. This, however, is not the implosion that I was expecting or hoping for. Believe it or not, BF, no one was hoping for this. Even the most liberal among us are horrified. I truly hope the many sane and decent members of your party can pick it back up next time. Agreed. While I've never supported a Republican for POTUS because I can't get in line with the social aspects of the platform, I've never, ever viewed an R as legitimately dangerous before Trump. I have young brothers of a ddraftable age. I honestly fear for a their safety under a Trump presidency. Of all the horrible things he's said about women, minorities, the disabled...those things speak to his character as a person, and that person isn't very nice. However, it's the way he runs his business that terrifies me. If he wins and runs this country the way he runs his businesses, he's going to piss off a lot of very powerful people who just happen to be our enemies and have access to nuclear weapons. That outcome is unimaginable.
|
|
breetheflea
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,919
Location: PNW
Jul 20, 2014 21:57:23 GMT
|
Post by breetheflea on Oct 15, 2016 23:25:21 GMT
I have said for a long time that the Republican party will need to implode and possibly build back up as two separate parties. There is no way that those that are far right conservative, religious Republicans can be in the same party as those that are fiscally and Constitutionally conservative but socially liberal. This, however, is not the implosion that I was expecting or hoping for. Oh man, I want so bad for there to be a party that is socially liberal and fiscally conservative. That would be my dream party. There is. It's called the Libertarian party.
|
|
|
Post by papersilly on Oct 16, 2016 0:14:55 GMT
Mr. Trump-----don't go away mad, just go away.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 19, 2024 1:35:52 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2016 0:29:52 GMT
Oh man, I want so bad for there to be a party that is socially liberal and fiscally conservative. That would be my dream party. There is. It's called the Libertarian party. That's not quite true......yes, the party is all for legalizing pot but that's as progressive as that party gets.
Their platform doesn't address LGBTQ rights, in fact, if you go to their website, gay rights aren't even mentioned as a platform. They are also a bit too cozy with the NRA for someone with progressive views. They also believe in less regulation in regards to our environment.
|
|
|
Post by scrapaddict702 on Oct 16, 2016 0:47:16 GMT
Trump reminds me of Merry Christmas vs. Happy Holidays.
A few years back, there was a lot of 'Happy Holidays' to show respect for other people with different religious backgrounds who might not celebrate Christmas. There were a few Merry Christmases from the 'defiant' few.
The next year was all 'Merry Christmas and sobeit if anyone might be offended by it' as if it was some sort of victory in a war on Christmas or something. The same mindset is why people were outraged by the red cups at Starbucks last year. 'How could you possibly ignore Christmas specifically and offend so many people' was how it was viewed instead of trying to be all inclusive as the 'happy holidays' trend had been.
Except this defiance of socially acceptable ways of addressing and regarding people who are different than you is a (to use his phrasing) HUGE deal. It's nothing like being defiant and choosing Merry Christmas over Happy Hoidays, it is saying it's okay to mistreat any and every person who doesn't fit your mold of acceptable. His way of not being politically correct is making people feel justified in their bigotry. It's marketed as not being afraid of the 'PC police' and the bigots who have been hushed for decades because of public shame have been fed this idea of it being okay to do it, that they're not going to be forced into silence any longer. But the comparison of common human decency and political correctness is a farce. It is not PC to treat people with respect, it is being a decent human being.
Unfortunately, it seems for many people, the idea of empathy is completely gone. Political correctness and empathy/common human decency have been marketed to be interchangeable. What scares me the most is that there are not only people who still have wayward thinking when it comes to gays (it's a relatively 'new' public concept, so I can kind of understand it) but that there are such large numbers of people who still carry so many prejudices against skin colors and gender after so many decades and think putting those groups down is acceptable. It also makes me sad for what kind of people their children will grow up to become, because these teachings come from home.
|
|
|
Post by femalebusiness on Oct 16, 2016 1:17:21 GMT
There is. It's called the Libertarian party. That's not quite true......yes, the party is all for legalizing pot but that's as progressive as that party gets.
Their platform doesn't address LGBTQ rights, in fact, if you go to their website, gay rights aren't even mentioned as a platform. They are also a bit too cozy with the NRA for someone with progressive views. They also believe in less regulation in regards to our environment.
Yes, and they are too anti-government for me. I feel there is a place for government regulation.
|
|
breetheflea
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,919
Location: PNW
Jul 20, 2014 21:57:23 GMT
|
Post by breetheflea on Oct 16, 2016 3:15:31 GMT
There is. It's called the Libertarian party. That's not quite true......yes, the party is all for legalizing pot but that's as progressive as that party gets.
Their platform doesn't address LGBTQ rights, in fact, if you go to their website, gay rights aren't even mentioned as a platform. They are also a bit too cozy with the NRA for someone with progressive views. They also believe in less regulation in regards to our environment.
From Wikipedia. The Libertarian Party advocates repealing all laws that control or prohibit homosexuality.[100] According to the Libertarian Party's platform, "Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the government's treatment of individuals, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption, immigration or military service laws. And yes the less regulation on everything you can think of is kind of what the party is all about, and probably how they came up with their name...
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 19, 2024 1:35:52 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2016 15:43:54 GMT
That's not quite true......yes, the party is all for legalizing pot but that's as progressive as that party gets.
Their platform doesn't address LGBTQ rights, in fact, if you go to their website, gay rights aren't even mentioned as a platform. They are also a bit too cozy with the NRA for someone with progressive views. They also believe in less regulation in regards to our environment.
From Wikipedia. The Libertarian Party advocates repealing all laws that control or prohibit homosexuality.[100] According to the Libertarian Party's platform, "Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the government's treatment of individuals, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption, immigration or military service laws. And yes the less regulation on everything you can think of is kind of what the party is all about, and probably how they came up with their name...
Don't care what Wikipedia says....you need to go right to the party's web site and you'll see there is NO platform for LGBTQ rights or advocacy. A true progressive would never vote Libertarian.
|
|
ginacivey
Pearl Clutcher
refupea #2 in southeast missouri
Posts: 4,685
Jun 25, 2014 19:18:36 GMT
|
Post by ginacivey on Oct 16, 2016 15:49:48 GMT
Republicans can be in the same party as those that are fiscally and Constitutionally conservative but socially liberal. There is no way that those that are far right conservative, religious Republicans can be in the same party as those that are fiscally and Constitutionally conservative but socially liberal. There is. It's called the Libertarian party. i think that there are MANY people that fall into this category but we are taunted with ' a third party vote is a vote for -------? even Obama made the remark so is there REALLY a third option? gina
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Oct 16, 2016 16:31:52 GMT
From Wikipedia. The Libertarian Party advocates repealing all laws that control or prohibit homosexuality.[100] According to the Libertarian Party's platform, "Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the government's treatment of individuals, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption, immigration or military service laws. And yes the less regulation on everything you can think of is kind of what the party is all about, and probably how they came up with their name...
Don't care what Wikipedia says....you need to go right to the party's web site and you'll see there is NO platform for LGBTQ rights or advocacy. A true progressive would never vote Libertarian.
There's a difference between saying there shouldn't be laws against it and proactively advocating for protection of rights. I think the Libertarian position could best be described as fiscally conservative and socially neutral, and you're right, that's going to turn off a lot of progressives. But it may attract fiscal conservatives who are tired of having their party controlled by the preferences of the religious right.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 19, 2024 1:35:52 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2016 17:05:48 GMT
i think that there are MANY people that fall into this category but we are taunted with ' a third party vote is a vote for -------? even Obama made the remark so is there REALLY a third option? That's my feeling too. When I voted for Perot (who thought that someone would outcrazy him?) it was a vote hoping for 3rd party strength in the future. I knew it was futile in 1992, but I had really hoped that by this time, there would be a strong 3rd party (but what do I know, because I also thought that when I visited the "House of the Future" at the 1982 World Fair that solar would be used much more by this time also). That's why I don't necessarily think that the complete breakdown of the Republican party is a bad thing. It's a bad thing for voters this election cycle to be sure but the party is in need of rebuilding and has been for some time. I just hope that a viable and respectable party (or two) will emerge. Believe it or not, BF, no one was hoping for this. Even the most liberal among us are horrified. And thank you Merge for saying that, but based on the threads and comments in the past few months, horrified isn't really the first word that comes to mind. Gleeful would be more accurate (not you personally, but as a whole). But to be fair, I have no doubt that conservatives would react the same if Hillary went down in flames.
|
|
moodyblue
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,179
Location: Western Illinois
Site Supporter
Jun 26, 2014 21:07:23 GMT
|
Post by moodyblue on Oct 16, 2016 17:26:07 GMT
I do think there are a lot of people who would like a more centrist party, one that is fiscally more conservative, but one that is socially more liberal. I agree that the Libertarian Party isn't exactly that.
And I also think that the Republican Party has lost a lot of people because they continue to take the far right positions on issues on which many people have shifted their thinking. As an example, my mother is 87, and has been a Republican all of her life, although not a straight party-line voter. She told me that she has for the last several years identified herself as an Independent. She moved away from the party after the very religious right took control. I believe there are a lot of people like her - fiscally conservative, doesn't want big government but sees the need for social supports and some regulations, has shifted to more acceptance of liberal positions like gay marriage, and does not want someone else's religious convictions to dictate for others what they can and cannot do.
Perhaps it was inevitable that the Republican Party would need to split, so that the far right religious can have their own party and the more moderate have a political home too. And I think most Republicans don't want to embrace the white nationalists either. But I don't think "gleeful" is how many of us would describe our view of this process; it has been ugly.
|
|
|
Post by kamper on Oct 16, 2016 18:57:04 GMT
I believe he knows he isn't going to win which is why he has started the crap about the election being rigged. He wants riots and mayhem if he doesn't win because it's never been about this country, it's always been about his ego. That exactly!
|
|