The GOP Civil War

[Abbazorkzog]

Principle is stupid. Pragmatism and compromise is the name of the game.

Not when our planet is supposedly being hijacked by a sociopath State Capitalist superclass intent on preserving the dominion of neoconservative foreign policy.

 

[cabse5]

Perhaps it was that "simple" 59-point economic plan and his social issue stance that kept the tent so small. Trading X% of the republicant (or demorat) base for X% of the independents is always a good deal in the general election.

Democratic, Republican Identification Near Historical Lows

I don't know. I don't think Romney kowtowed to Conservatives, I think Romney is a dyed-in-the-wool Conservative. Conservatives liked his 59 point economic plan (as long as free trade was further implemented/expanded).

 

[Crovax]

The Republicans have litmus tests: God, abortion, taxes, guns, etc. The Dems are far more flexible. Dems have plenty of overlap; the GOP calls those who overlap RINO, and then purges them from the party whenever possible. Kicking out Boehner is a perfect example of that.

Can you name 1 congressional democrat who opposes abortion, same sex marriage, gun control, or wants to lower taxes across the board?

 

[eohrnberger]

Principle is stupid. Pragmatism and compromise is the name of the game.

No, I don't think so. It's a mixture.

Yes, there are times when it's best to be pragmatic and compromise.
There are other times where you need to be principled.

It's never an all black or all white situation a you are portraying it.
Think about some of the principles with which you conduct your life.
Would be so willing to be pragmatic and compromise on those?

 

[ttwtt78640]

I don't know. I don't think Romney kowtowed to Conservatives, I think Romney is a dyed-in-the-wool Conservative. Conservatives liked his 59 point economic plan (as long as free trade was further implemented/expanded).

Free trade is impossible (incompatable?) with subsidies. Subsidies (protections) are demnded by lobbists so free trade will not happen. The "safey net" is a huge subsidy in that wages need not cover the cost of labor.

Free Trade Definition | Investopedia

 

[fmw]

A bunch of socialists trying to get a win. Failed attempt is all it was.

A candidate (trump) with bad manners and a lack of common sense. That's all it is.

 

[calamity]

Ummm...I'm not for banning abortion, you know. I speak against abortion because I see no reason to endorse it. As for your other claim, I support people deciding on their own to help others and endorse mutual aid societies to help towards those ends.

Being against abortion but not for banning it is indeed welcome in the D party. That's actually the position taken by Hillary's running mate, in fact. As for welfare, it was Hillary's husband who first reformed it to exclude most able-bodied adults. But, if you're for letting poor children starve or go without healthcare, you'll never be accepted by the Dems.

 

[vesper]

Greetings, Vesper. :2wave:

:agree: :thumbs: Good to see you back fighting - I've missed you!

Off topic, but have you heard from SmartMouthWoman? With all the mess going on in Austin, I hope she is okay! :shock:

Hey Pol hope all is well with you!
I just feel the Republican party has become the 21st Century Whig party.
No I have not heard for SMW. Hope all is well.

 

[calamity]

No, I don't think so. It's a mixture.

Yes, there are times when it's best to be pragmatic and compromise.
There are other times where you need to be principled.

It's never an all black or all white situation a you are portraying it.
Think about some of the principles with which you conduct your life.
Would be so willing to be pragmatic and compromise on those?

Very few of my "principles" have not evolved with time. I used to be anti-death penalty, then for it, now I am more or less gray on it. Guns: was against them, now I am totally in favor of lawful, sane citizens having the right to bear arms. SSM: was against, now see why it should be a legal right. And, so it goes down the list. Was anti-war; now see lots of reasons to blow **** up. etc.

 

[Henrin]

Being against abortion but not for banning it is indeed welcome in the D party. That's actually the position taken by Hillary's running mate, in fact. As for welfare, it was Hillary's husband who first reformed it to exclude most able-bodied adults. But, if you're for letting poor children starve or go without healthcare, you'll never be accepted by the Dems.

So you have to be for welfare to be a democrat. Do you see how that is a litmus test?

 

[calamity]

Can you name 1 congressional democrat who opposes abortion, same sex marriage, gun control, or wants to lower taxes across the board?

Your wording is too GOP--black and white.

Hillary's running mate, a current US Senator, is against abortion even though he understands that it is a legal right. He opposes gun control across the board but supports extended background checks and some limits on magazine capacity. And, I'm not sure supporting tax cuts "across the board" is even a remotely sane position to take. So, I hope no Democrat is stupid enough to stand on that principle.

 

[calamity]

So you have to be for welfare to be a democrat. Do you see how that is a litmus test?

No, just they just need to be opposed to starving children.

 

[calamity]

Not when our planet is supposedly being hijacked by a sociopath State Capitalist superclass intent on preserving the dominion of neoconservative foreign policy.

:roll:

A major party isn't going to sell CT...well, Donald's might.

 

[Henrin]

No, just they just need to be opposed to starving children.

Why would I support ideas to reestablish mutual aid societies if I'm not opposed to starving children?

 

[calamity]

Why would I support ideas to reestablish mutual aid societies if I'm not opposed to starving children?

Well, feel free to sell it. Ideas limiting government programs are welcome in the D party, especially if you're running in a red state. You'll get resistance though if you push to remove the safety net.

 

[jonny5]

Principle is stupid. Pragmatism and compromise is the name of the game.

Principle is the foundation. Pragmatism and compromise leads to authoritarianism.

 

[jonny5]

The country wasnt founded by pragmatists who compromised. It was founded by people of principle who would rather die than act opposite to their beliefs.

 

[Abbazorkzog]

:roll:

A major party isn't going to sell CT...well, Donald's might.

You mean like the Russian-Wikileaks Conspiracy to get Trump elected? :lol:

 

[eohrnberger]

Very few of my "principles" have not evolved with time. I used to be anti-death penalty, then for it, now I am more or less gray on it. Guns: was against them, now I am totally in favor of lawful, sane citizens having the right to bear arms. SSM: was against, now see why it should be a legal right. And, so it goes down the list. Was anti-war; now see lots of reasons to blow **** up. etc.

I think the examples that you cite are positions, and not principles.

I'm was thinking more like the principle of free speech, something which can't be compromised (well other than the shouting fire in a crowded theater), and the principle of self determination.

So yes, I believe there are things which cannot be compromised.

 

[Crovax]

Your wording is too GOP--black and white.

Hillary's running mate, a current US Senator, is against abortion even though he understands that it is a legal right. He opposes gun control across the board but supports extended background checks and some limits on magazine capacity. And, I'm not sure supporting tax cuts "across the board" is even a remotely sane position to take. So, I hope no Democrat is stupid enough to stand on that principle.

So you can't name one.

"I strongly support the right of women to make their own health and reproductive decisions and, for that reason, will oppose efforts to weaken or subvert the basic holding of Roe v. Wade." -Tim Kaine

And supporting an assualt weapon ban and a magazine ban is supporting gun control.

 

[calamity]

So you can't name one.

"I strongly support the right of women to make their own health and reproductive decisions and, for that reason, will oppose efforts to weaken or subvert the basic holding of Roe v. Wade." -Tim Kaine

And supporting an assualt weapon ban and a magazine ban is supporting gun control.

Only to the black and white club in the GOP is someone who disagrees with abortion but supports the right to choose pro-abortion and someone who owns guns but wants to put limits on some of the more dangerous weapons out there considered a gun control advocate.

 

[calamity]

I think the examples that you cite are positions, and not principles.

I'm was thinking more like the principle of free speech, something which can't be compromised (well other than the shouting fire in a crowded theater), and the principle of self determination.

So yes, I believe there are things which cannot be compromised.

I guess my only hard principle is to treat others as I wish to be treated, both literally and figuratively, personally or by proxy.

 

[eohrnberger]

I guess my only hard principle is to treat others as I wish to be treated, both literally and figuratively, personally or by proxy.

You know, if everyone really lived by this, the world would be a better place. A much better place. This is a good principle on which to live by.

 

[Unitedwestand13]

The country wasnt founded by pragmatists who compromised. It was founded by people of principle who would rather die than act opposite to their beliefs.

The why was there no bloodbath at the constitutional convention?

 

[Crovax]

Only to the black and white club in the GOP is someone who disagrees with abortion but supports the right to choose pro-abortion and someone who owns guns but wants to put limits on some of the more dangerous weapons out there considered a gun control advocate.

First off as I quoted Tim Kaine is no longer personally against abortion.

However that is irrelevant, no matter his personal beliefs his political positions are exactly the same as every other democrat. They are the ones that have absolutely no variety in their party. There are plenty of GOP on both sides of what you claim to be "litmus tests", democrats are all on the same side of them.