• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Republican Party seems as divided, angry as ever

I think you should ask this guy...



You DIDN’T just do that did you? Posting some edited version of McConnell’s statement is so juvenile and beneath a ‘top shelf’ poster. Note the balance of the interview that contained the portion you posted:

McConnell: “If President Obama does a Clintonian backflip, if he’s willing to meet us halfway on some of the biggest issues, it’s not inappropriate for us to do business with him… I don’t want the president to fail; I want him to change.”
When did McConnell say he wanted to make Obama a ‘one-term president’? - The Washington Post

Doesn’t it hack you off when others post such unmitigated misrepresentative crap from ‘our’ side?
 
You DIDN’T just do that did you? Posting some edited version of McConnell’s statement is so juvenile and beneath a ‘top shelf’ poster. Note the balance of the interview that contained the portion you posted:

When did McConnell say he wanted to make Obama a ‘one-term president’? - The Washington Post

Doesn’t it hack you off when others post such unmitigated misrepresentative crap from ‘our’ side?

He did answer the question though about party politics coming before the country, though probably not in the way he intended.
 
Yes, he showed “poise”.
Compared to the clown show being run by Mavericky Maverick McMaverickson and his sidekick Grifter-To-Nowhere, even factoring Joe “Suaveness of a ‘70s Porn Star” Biden? Undoubtably.
Well apparently not “light skinned enough” for a sizable chunk of the country lost its mind when the nigger got into the Whitehouse. A smattering of such from the second, lesser wave.

Geraldine Ferraro had it right. He had no other qualifications. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/12/us/politics/12campaign.html?_r=0
Yeah, and if Romney was a ‘spic’ he’d be in the Whitehouse now. :roll:

Although bitterness about the short-shrift that has been given to women in politics, and her personally, can eat into you like that. *sigh*

P.S. Time has shown her decidedly wrong.
 
Besides myself, I know of numerous other conservatives that are abandoning the GOP because they have no interest in being associated with the idiots demanding that their presidential candidate show skepticism towards evolution.

And yet they'll vote for the conservative president under the guise as a Libertarian. Conservatives leaving the GOP means nothing really.
 
Compared to the clown show being run by Mavericky Maverick McMaverickson and his sidekick Grifter-To-Nowhere, even factoring Joe “Suaveness of a ‘70s Porn Star” Biden? Undoubtably.

If "poise" has become the standard of electing a President then the bar has been set so low that anyone, no matter their history or experience, can become President. The standard has never been so low as it is in the case of Barrack Obama. Never.

Well apparently not “light skinned enough” for a sizable chunk of the country lost its mind when the nigger got into the Whitehouse. A smattering of such from the second, lesser wave.

Yes, these were the Democrats who were talking of his skin color, and that would include Barrack Obama.

Yeah, and if Romney was a ‘spic’ he’d be in the Whitehouse now. :roll:

This is how typical Leftists talk. Have you no shame?

Although bitterness about the short-shrift that has been given to women in politics, and her personally, can eat into you like that. *sigh*

Again, you are not making any sense.


P.S. Time has shown her decidedly wrong.

Ferraro was right.
 
It's a shame that Democrats aren't passionate enough to have factions like this. But I suppose it's also testament to how polarized and extremist the individual stances within the Republican Party tend to be, like the "all taxes are theft" crowd, or the hyper religious crowd. Neither is particularly willing to compromise and get along with anyone. In contrast, Democrats seem to be much more able to compromise with each other. The progressive civil rights crowd, the environmentalist crowd, the pro social safety nets crowd... they manage to work together a lot better than different groups of Republicans do.

I think the right wing has too many positions that it's too stubborn about. But perhaps the left could stand to yell a little louder (or at least yell at all) about a few issues, to keep the party from complacency. I appreciate that this cohesion makes the left win more elections, but it also makes it drag in the mud a bit more.
 
If “poise" has become the standard of electing a President then the bar has been set so low that anyone, no matter their history or experience, can become President.
It was not even close to his only strength, nor his only accomplishment. Further, wrapped up in and underlying the poise was not only a demonstration of knowledge of a whole lot of relevant subjects but a demonstrated interest in learning more.

In short, a competent technocrat (Ferraro’s crabby whining notwithstanding). Being big on meritocracy and not having a f’ing goober making the calls, that heavily appealed to me.

Yes, these were the Democrats who were talking of his skin color,
Indeed. Reid ham-handedly trying to allay the white folks that it was a ‘non-threatening negro’ (because sadly that does very much matter, even still), and Team Hillary playing hardball gutter politics. ((Why did you leave out Jesse Jackson talking about how he was going to pluck Obama’s cherry’s? )) Welcome to the USA, a place that has a whole lot of growing up to do.
and that would include Barrack Obama.
Say what now?
This is how typical Leftists talk. Have you no shame?
Well I guess Romney had the crafty sense to keep it till he thought nobody that would tell was listening. :roll:

But yeah, I feel pretty damn comfortable saying that in a tone of sarcasm. I shutter to think how many people, even on this forum, hold that belief true in their heart of hearts. :( There is absolutely NO SHAME to be had in calling that BS out. None. Pretty damn pathetic of you to think there is.
 
Last edited:
It's a shame that Democrats aren't passionate enough to have factions like this. But I suppose it's also testament to how polarized and extremist the individual stances within the Republican Party tend to be, like the "all taxes are theft" crowd, or the hyper religious crowd. Neither is particularly willing to compromise and get along with anyone. In contrast, Democrats seem to be much more able to compromise with each other. The progressive civil rights crowd, the environmentalist crowd, the pro social safety nets crowd... they manage to work together a lot better than different groups of Republicans do.

I think the right wing has too many positions that it's too stubborn about. But perhaps the left could stand to yell a little louder (or at least yell at all) about a few issues, to keep the party from complacency. I appreciate that this cohesion makes the left win more elections, but it also makes it drag in the mud a bit more.
I've always felt that the Democrats' biggest weakness is that they tend to be pansies. They aren't as passionate as they could be and therefore, they've missed a lot of opportunities.

In any case, I think the cohesion in the left might be due to the compatibility of different ideas with the group that doesn't exist on the right. For example, civil rights and social safety nets go together well and environmentalism goes pretty well with both of those. All three ideals reinforce each other. However, on the right, there are two incompatible ideals fighting for attention: interfere in people's lives to make them more Christian vs. get government out of people's lives. That kind of issue makes conflict necessary.
 
It's a shame that Democrats aren't passionate enough to have factions like this.
<insert Will Rogers’ most famous/infamous quote about the Democratic party>

It isn’t a lack of factions. It is perhaps a somewhat higher level of tolerance of each other. *shrug*
 
Democrats always compromise when the bottom line is that they get something for free that someone else had to work and pay for.

They had to import forty million, low information third worlders over the past thirty years to maintain their insane stances, but the main thing is that liberals got elected to national positions from which they could bray instructions to their cattle.
 
It was not even close to his only strength, nor his only accomplishment. Further, wrapped up in and underlying the poise was not only a demonstration of knowledge of a whole lot of relevant subjects but a demonstrated interest in learning more.

What was his accomplishment? Certainly he should have learned more but it would have wise to do that before he ran for President.
In short, a competent technocrat (Ferraro’s crabby whining notwithstanding). Being big on meritocracy and not having a f’ing goober making the calls, that heavily appealed to me.

It was Obama who got the goober vote!

Indeed. Reid ham-handedly trying to allay the white folks that it was a ‘non-threatening negro’ (because sadly that does very much matter, even still), and Team Hillary playing hardball gutter politics. ((Why did you leave out Jesse Jackson talking about how he was going to pluck Obama’s cherry’s? )) Welcome to the USA, a place that has a whole lot of growing up to do.

All left wingers as well. The left is all about race, as you have also demonstrated in your posts.

Well I guess Romney had the crafty sense to keep it till he thought nobody that would tell was listening. :roll:

You're talking in code again.

But yeah, I feel pretty damn comfortable saying that in a tone of sarcasm. I shutter to think how many people, even on this forum, hold that belief true in their heart of hearts. :( There is absolutely NO SHAME to be had in calling that BS out. None. Pretty damn pathetic of you to think there is.

Ah, yes, it was all said in a tone of sarcasm. Isn't it always? I certainly don't mind calling your racist BS out, nor any other leftist racism that has always been a constant in their history.
 
Ah, yes, it was all said in a tone of sarcasm. Isn't it always? I certainly don't mind calling your racist BS out, nor any other leftist racism that has always been a constant in their history.
There isn’t an eye roll big enough for this line of yours, or the rest of your post. You ignored the quotation marks?

F U and welcome to the Ignore List.
 
And yet they'll vote for the conservative president under the guise as a Libertarian. Conservatives leaving the GOP means nothing really.

I really have no idea what point you are trying to make
 
Angry is an understatement. Just ask Trump
 
Back
Top Bottom