• 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!

In new Lincoln Project ad, former Navy SEAL asks if Trump is 'a coward' afraid of Putin or 'complici

Lutherf said:
What? The video in the OP was by the Lincoln Project. I noted that the name, "Lincoln Project", was very similar to the "Lincoln Battalion" and that one of the main reasons the battalion picked that name was to kind of mask the idea that they were communists. The implication, naturally, was that the Lincoln Project may well have picked their name for the same reason.
Click to expand...

..And Lincoln Logs, Lincoln automobiles, Lincoln Financial, yada, yada, yada.....your stuff is all wet!



Provide some back up or ...........
 
Rexedgar said:
..And Lincoln Logs, Lincoln automobiles, Lincoln Financial, yada, yada, yada.....your stuff is all wet!



Provide some back up or ...........
Click to expand...

Lincoln logs, Lincoln motors and Lincoln financial have not chosen to support a political ideology that is wholly infected with communists and abandon the Constitution merely because they hate Donald Trump.
 
Lutherf said:
Lincoln logs, Lincoln motors and Lincoln financial have not chosen to support a political ideology that is wholly infected with communists and abandon the Constitution merely because they hate Donald Trump.
Click to expand...

Better get your folks to check under your bed tonight!

As you have been asked, where are the ‘communists’ in the Lincoln Project?
 
Rexedgar said:
Better get your folks to check under your bed tonight!

As you have been asked, where are the ‘communists’ in the Lincoln Project?
Click to expand...

The Lincoln Project is supporting communists. If they choose to call themselves "republicans" or "conservatives" or "Christmas Trees" it doesn't change the fact that they are supporting communism in the US.
 
Lutherf said:
The Lincoln Project is supporting communists. If they choose to call themselves "republicans" or "conservatives" or "Christmas Trees" it doesn't change the fact that they are supporting communism in the US.
Click to expand...

Non reply....
 
Lutherf said:
They want to get rid of a president that they believe is a threat to the institutional aristocracy they have created.
Click to expand...

Lutherf said:
What? The video in the OP was by the Lincoln Project. I noted that the name, "Lincoln Project", was very similar to the "Lincoln Battalion" and that one of the main reasons the battalion picked that name was to kind of mask the idea that they were communists. The implication, naturally, was that the Lincoln Project may well have picked their name for the same reason.
Click to expand...

You think that communists have infiltrated the Republican party, the right-wing party of a country that's known to be center-right by global standards. That's a far stretch just on it's lonesome . . .

. . . but then you insist that these 'communists' hate Trump because they wish to sustain their aristocracy? Which is it, are they communists, or are they plutocrats? Plutocracy is inherently antithetical to Communism, which seeks to topple the ruling class, seize the means of production, and end up with a classless, stateless society.

As for 'Lincoln Batalion' being similar to 'Lincoln Project' . . . no, they aren't. Abraham is one of the most beloved presidents of our nation's history, and the Republicans absolutely love to remind us that he was one of their own, regardless of whether or not they actually espouse any of the reasons that he was and is so highly praised. His name is on stuff. Lots of stuff. The pattern-seeking part of your brain is simply working too hard, my friend.

Is it really that hard for you to beleive that the entiriety of your party, or the entiriety of right-leaners, are not in lock-step with your dear leader? Do people not diverge from their party leadership in your reality? Is it neccessary, so that you can sleep at night, that you concoct some incoherant hypothesis about communist aristocrats?
 
Lutherf said:
I find it interesting that the Lincoln Project selected that name as it's rather reminiscent of the Lincoln Battalion of the Spanish Civil war...Communists using the name of someone totally NOT Communist as a way to look less offensive.
Click to expand...

I do not know if these guys are communists. But they are not real republicans. Real republicans wouldn't knowingly vote for someone who is going to a 100% of the time enact policies they disagree with and appoint judges who are going to uphold those liberal polices they disagree with. For these guys to try to convince people to vote for Biden means that they never believe any of the republican values they claimed to believe. it amounts to abolitionists telling us to vote for slave owners or pro-lifers telling us to vote for abortionist or civil rights supporters telling us to vote for segregationists.
 
Last edited:
Welkin said:
You think that communists have infiltrated the Republican party, the right-wing party of a country that's known to be center-right by global standards. That's a far stretch just on it's lonesome . . .

. . . but then you insist that these 'communists' hate Trump because they wish to sustain their aristocracy? Which is it, are they communists, or are they plutocrats? Plutocracy is inherently antithetical to Communism, which seeks to topple the ruling class, seize the means of production, and end up with a classless, stateless society.

As for 'Lincoln Batalion' being similar to 'Lincoln Project' . . . no, they aren't. Abraham is one of the most beloved presidents of our nation's history, and the Republicans absolutely love to remind us that he was one of their own, regardless of whether or not they actually espouse any of the reasons that he was and is so highly praised. His name is on stuff. Lots of stuff. The pattern-seeking part of your brain is simply working too hard, my friend.

Is it really that hard for you to beleive that the entiriety of your party, or the entiriety of right-leaners, are not in lock-step with your dear leader? Do people not diverge from their party leadership in your reality? Is it neccessary, so that you can sleep at night, that you concoct some incoherant hypothesis about communist aristocrats?
Click to expand...

Donald Trump, rough as he may be, understands and appreciates that the power of a nation is greatest when the people of the nation are most free to benefit from their ingenuity and innovate as they see necessary. He understands that strength comes from having faith in your fellow man rather than fear of him. He understands that we, the people of the United States, not necessarily the politicians of the United States, are, by necessity, the leaders of these United States, whether we are "deplorable" or not.
 
Lutherf said:
Donald Trump, rough as he may be, understands and appreciates that the power of a nation is greatest when the people of the nation are most free to benefit from their ingenuity and innovate as they see necessary. He understands that strength comes from having faith in your fellow man rather than fear of him. He understands that we, the people of the United States, not necessarily the politicians of the United States, are, by necessity, the leaders of these United States, whether we are "deplorable" or not.
Click to expand...

Your flowery perception of your leader only addresses my final paragraph, and not in any terribly substantial way. I suggested that you were comming up with insanely incoherant points out of a desperate need to protect your cult master, and you responded by waxing poetic about how great you think he is, without actually owning up to any of your nonsense or addressing my challenges to your assertions. Are you going to actually defend that aristocratic communist gibberish, or can you? Are you going to acknowledge that it's pretty stupid to make a connection to two group names simply because they both use, 'Lincoln', or not?
 
dcaraz said:
How many conservative Republicans are willing to challenge President Trump's unwillingness to confront Russia's former spy master?



In new Lincoln Project ad, former Navy SEAL asks if Trump is 'a coward' afraid of Putin or 'complicit'
Click to expand...

So is the final intel in on this Russian/Taliban storyline about bounties? It's real? It really happened?
I haven't seen it. Got the link?
No No, not this neo-con Lincoln Project story.
I mean the actual intel findings.
Without that you have nothing.
 
Lutherf said:
People that choose to support political candidates and political movements that espouse communist ideals, even if merely because they oppose the person on another ticket, may as well be commies themselves. If what someone supports has the effect of implementing, protecting or promoting a system of government based on the supremacy of a central government, the use of that central government to control economic markets and to not just encourage but actually arrange social outcomes then they are communists whether they know it or not.
Click to expand...
Joe Biden is a communist? Who knew?

What are these "communist ideals," you rail against, Social Security, Medicare?

You speak vaguely about the "central government" and "control of economic markets," so you don't get caught defending specifics that really don't exist. But what are these ills of the central government? Can you imagine the inefficiency of running Social Security and Medicare state-by-state -- with 50 different systems?

The bottom line is that there are things better left to the states and other things that require national coherence. Look at how bad the Covid-19 response has been when we have a leader who is opposed to the federal government taking the lead. We have 50 states doing whatever they want incoherently in a way that nearly guarantees that we won't get rid of the disease any time soon.
 
Welkin said:
Your flowery perception of your leader only addresses my final paragraph, and not in any terribly substantial way. I suggested that you were comming up with insanely incoherant points out of a desperate need to protect your cult master, and you responded by waxing poetic about how great you think he is, without actually owning up to any of your nonsense or addressing my challenges to your assertions. Are you going to actually defend that aristocratic communist gibberish, or can you? Are you going to acknowledge that it's pretty stupid to make a connection to two group names simply because they both use, 'Lincoln', or not?
Click to expand...

You rather obviously either don't understand what I wrote or, more likely, don't care because you have your own idea of what "truth" is really don't feel a need to entertain any other thoughts on the subject.

The entirety of the GOP is not in lock step with Trump. You LITERALLY posted your comment in a thread about a faction of the GOP that outright opposes Trump and supports Joe Biden.

Donald Trump is not about "party leadership". He is about Americans leading America. He's about insuring that anyone who has a desire to lead in this nation is not denied the opportunity to try to lead.
 
MTAtech said:
Joe Biden is a communist? Who knew?

1) What are these "communist ideals," you rail against, Social Security, Medicare?

You speak vaguely about the "central government" and "control of economic markets," so you don't get caught defending specifics that really don't exist. But what are these ills of the central government? Can you imagine the inefficiency of running Social Security and Medicare state-by-state -- with 50 different systems?

2) The bottom line is that there are things better left to the states and other things that require national coherence. Look at how bad the Covid-19 response has been when we have a leader who is opposed to the federal government taking the lead. We have 50 states doing whatever they want incoherently in a way that nearly guarantees that we won't get rid of the disease any time soon.
Click to expand...

1) Essentially it is - from each according to their ability (to pay more taxes), to each according to their need (for more "free" stuff).

2) Indeed there are (and should be) federal government powers, but they are few and specifically defined (listed or enumerated) by our Constitution. The leftist (Communist?) idea that anything deemed to be 'important' automagically elevates it to a (new?) federal government power is both ridiculous and dangerous.
 
MTAtech said:
Joe Biden is a communist? Who knew?

What are these "communist ideals," you rail against, Social Security, Medicare?

You speak vaguely about the "central government" and "control of economic markets," so you don't get caught defending specifics that really don't exist. But what are these ills of the central government? Can you imagine the inefficiency of running Social Security and Medicare state-by-state -- with 50 different systems?

The bottom line is that there are things better left to the states and other things that require national coherence. Look at how bad the Covid-19 response has been when we have a leader who is opposed to the federal government taking the lead. We have 50 states doing whatever they want incoherently in a way that nearly guarantees that we won't get rid of the disease any time soon.
Click to expand...

Joe Biden, and at this point even George W Bush, are supporting communist causes. It's kind of like that Bill Clinton, "I didn't inhale" distinction.

If you're at the party and they pass you the joint you have a few choices. You can take a puff and join right in (Obama, AOC, etc.), you can say no and walk away (Tulsi Gabbard), you can pretend that you were never there and blame it all on someone else (Nancy Pelosi, GWB), or you can simply, LEGITIMATELY, not have a damned idea what's going on because your egg was scrambled a couple of decades ago and now you're just spouting off whatever someone else is feeding you...even if those words are coming from commies.
 
Lutherf said:
Joe Biden, and at this point even George W Bush, are supporting communist causes. It's kind of like that Bill Clinton, "I didn't inhale" distinction.

If you're at the party and they pass you the joint you have a few choices. You can take a puff and join right in (Obama, AOC, etc.), you can say no and walk away (Tulsi Gabbard), you can pretend that you were never there and blame it all on someone else (Nancy Pelosi, GWB), or you can simply, LEGITIMATELY, not have a damned idea what's going on because your egg was scrambled a couple of decades ago and now you're just spouting off whatever someone else is feeding you...even if those words are coming from commies.
Click to expand...

What you are underscoring is the truth that we are a deeply divided nation and are likely to remain one for a long time.

What are the divisions I’m talking about?

One side of American politics considers the modern welfare state — a private-enterprise economy, but one in which society’s winners are taxed to pay for a social safety net — morally superior to let the poor starve capitalism we had before the New Deal. It’s only right, this side believes, for the affluent to help the less fortunate.

The other side believes that people have a right to keep what they earn, and that taxing them to support others, no matter how needy, amounts to theft. That’s what lies behind the modern right’s fondness for violent rhetoric: many activists on the right really do see taxes and regulation as tyrannical impositions on their liberty.

There’s no middle ground between these views. One side saw health reform, with its subsidized extension of coverage to the uninsured, as fulfilling a moral imperative: wealthy nations, it believed, have an obligation to provide all their citizens with essential care. The other side saw the same reform as a moral outrage, an assault on the right of Americans to spend their money as they choose.

In any case, your definition of "communism" is far wider than the real definition of communism. The idea that AOC's proposal to change the top marginal tax-rate, to a rate that is 20 points LOWER than what existed under Eisenhower (91%), is communism, is quite silly.
 
Last edited:
MTAtech said:
What you are underscoring is the truth that we are a deeply divided nation and are likely to remain one for a long time.

What are the divisions I’m talking about?

One side of American politics considers the modern welfare state — a private-enterprise economy, but one in which society’s winners are taxed to pay for a social safety net — morally superior to let the poor starve capitalism we had before the New Deal. It’s only right, this side believes, for the affluent to help the less fortunate.

In any case, your definition of "communism" is far wider than what the real definition of communism.

The other side believes that people have a right to keep what they earn, and that taxing them to support others, no matter how needy, amounts to theft. That’s what lies behind the modern right’s fondness for violent rhetoric: many activists on the right really do see taxes and regulation as tyrannical impositions on their liberty.

There’s no middle ground between these views. One side saw health reform, with its subsidized extension of coverage to the uninsured, as fulfilling a moral imperative: wealthy nations, it believed, have an obligation to provide all their citizens with essential care. The other side saw the same reform as a moral outrage, an assault on the right of Americans to spend their money as they choose.
Click to expand...

What is too often ignored is that having an ever more generous federal "safety net" removes the need for "job creators" to pay that (ever elusive?) "living wage". It is far less expensive for "job creators" to pay a bit more in taxes (especially since that added cost of sales is simply added to the retail price - thus passed on to the general public) to supply "safety net" benefits to a few (15%?) of their lowest wage workers than to pay all of those lowest wage workers enough to survive without those "safety net" benefits.

We have a single-payer national defense system, yet that does not hinder the highly profitable MIC from increasing costs (and profits) as they see fit. The myth that our congress critters would (or even could) design a single-payer medical care system to eliminate "for profit" medical care providers (who supply them loads of campaign cash) should have been crushed by the creation of PPACA - a 100% demorat effort of only a decade ago.

We also have a single-payer public K-12 education system which also manages to increase its costs far faster than general inflation while not delivering what*most would consider decent results (aka competent HS graduates). One of the reasons that employers (both public and private) are increasingly insisting that "qualified" applicants have a college degree is that having a HS diploma is no longer a guarantee that an applicant is even able to read and comprehend training/safety material, much less follow basic instructions, write a report/evaluation or show up (on time) on a regular basis.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
What is too often ignored is that having an ever more generous federal "safety net" removes the need for "job creators" to pay that (ever elusive?) "living wage". It is far less expensive for "job creators" to pay a bit more in taxes (especially since that added cost of sales is simply added to the retail price - thus passed on to the general public) to supply "safety net" benefits to a few (15%?) of their lowest wage workers than to pay all of those lowest wage workers enough to survive without those "safety net" benefits.

We have a single-payer national defense system, yet that does not hinder the highly profitable MIC from increasing costs (and profits) as they see fit. The myth that our congress critters would (or even could) design a single-payer medical care system to eliminate "for profit" medical care providers (who supply them loads of campaign cash) should have been crushed by the creation of PPACA - a 100% demorat effort of only a decade ago.

We also have a single-payer public K-12 education system which also manages to increase its costs far faster than general inflation while not delivering what*most would consider decent results (aka competent HS graduates). One of the reasons that employers (both public and private) are increasingly insisting that "qualified" applicants have a college degree is that having a HS diploma is no longer a guarantee that an applicant is even able to read and comprehend training/safety material, much less follow basic instructions, write a report/evaluation or show up (on time) on a regular basis.
Click to expand...
Your conclusion is undercut by the fact that the U.S. safety net isn't nearly as generous as our European counterparts and they have no trouble being competitive or creating jobs. In fact Universal Health Care Would Boost Entrepreneurship.
 
MTAtech said:
Your conclusion is undercut by the fact that the U.S. safety net isn't nearly as generous as our European counterparts and they have no trouble being competitive or creating jobs. In fact Universal Health Care Would Boost Entrepreneurship.
Click to expand...

I never claimed that it was harder to be completive or to create jobs because of the "safety net". My claim was that current single-payer systems in the US do not result in reduced costs.
 
Lutherf said:
I find it interesting that the Lincoln Project selected that name as it's rather reminiscent of the Lincoln Battalion of the Spanish Civil war...Communists using the name of someone totally NOT Communist as a way to look less offensive.
Click to expand...
You do know the Lincoln Project is run by George Conway right?

Lmao. Wow, how embarrassing.

Wookies > Trekkies
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom