• 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!

The True Party Of No

Camer☑n;1066534105 said:
Hmmm....so they don't put forward any affirmative policies, and their platform is basically to undo the last decade of legislation on healthcare, economic regulation, and taxation. How is it inaccurate to call that the "party of no"?
Click to expand...

Platforms are just worthless pieces of paper. They mean nothing. I have no idea why they even have platforms that don't accurately represent what the leaders actually want to do. That's especially true in Trump's case. The party platform in completely different than what he will do and what he believes in and he is under no obligation to conform to the party platform. In case you didn't realize, both parties want to help the American people but have opposing views on how to do it and both parties claim the other's policies are completely wrong. Republicans aren't against healthcare. They believe too many regulations stifle jobs and believe that if people and especially businesses are taxed too much that that hurts the economy and jobs. As this thread is all about, time will tell starting next year if the Democrats are the party of no or not. You falsely believe that if you have justification to be the party of no then you are not really the party of no. That is exactly how the Republicans felt when they were the party of no and that is exactly how you feel know in justifying the Democrats being the party of no.
 
Moderate Right said:
No. I actually wasn't. I was trying to show the hypocrisy of the left trying to claim that Republicans are the party of no when, in fact, both parties are the party of no. The only real difference is that now the shoe is on the other foot but it is the same shoe for both parties. In other words, the Republicans are not the only party of no and the truth needs to be known.
Click to expand...

From your first post. For the last 6 years the Democrats have been the true party of no
 
RickJames3000 said:
Yes indeed. You might want to either steel yourself or carve out your little safe space right now.
Click to expand...

Um, we're in control now, I think I'll be alright. ;)

At least you're not in denial about the next 8 to 12 years. ;);)
 
countryboy said:
Did Republicans stop a single wasteful Obama budget? Yeah, didn't think so. Did Republicans lift a finger to do anything about Obamacare? Yeah no.

Talk about warped views of reality. :roll:
Click to expand...

You really don't remember the resistance to the ACA from Republicans at the time it was passed? I suppose you don't remember the 50+ times they tried to repeal it?
 
countryboy said:
Um, we're in control now, I think I'll be alright. ;)

At least you're not in denial about the next 8 to 12 years. ;);)
Click to expand...

Who is "we"? The coalition that elected Trump or the establishment Republicans?
Or do you not recognize the difference any more?
 
Moderate Right said:
Ok. I admit to having part of my facts partially wrong.
Click to expand...
You mean the facts which essentially provided the framework for your entire argument?

Like I've said many times to you, facts never really seem that important to you. In the few discussions we've had, you just assert things with no idea if they are true and have many times tried to defend them even when they are proven untrue. That's a terrible habit to have, though I will give you credit for finally admitting to being wrong on this.

But, it doesn't change the generalized statement that since Republicans got control of both the Senate and the House, the Democrats have been the party of no
Click to expand...
It changes the narrative entirely. You're trying to claim they were the party of "no" for 6 years, when it was factually untrue. Now you're trying to claim they are the party of no...and what is your evidence again? What are all the things they've said no too in the last year and a half? Because I'm pretty certain it wasn't the Democrats who refused to so much as review Obama's selection to fill a Supreme Court vacancy.

As usual, you're playing quite loose with facts.
Do you think they will aquess to the will of the people or will they be obstructionists?
Click to expand...
More people voted Democrat for both the Presidency and for the Senate than voted Republican.

Perhaps the "will of the people" argument isn't your best option here.
 
MrPeanut said:
From your first post. For the last 6 years the Democrats have been the true party of no
Click to expand...

How does that conflict with what I wrote? By saying the last 6 years the Democrats have been the party of no it implies that the Republicans were the party of no before that, meaning that both parties have been taking turns being the party of no. It is so hard explaining things to liberals because their minds interpret things in a discombobulated manner.
 
Slyfox696 said:
You mean the facts which essentially provided the framework for your entire argument?

Like I've said many times to you, facts never really seem that important to you. In the few discussions we've had, you just assert things with no idea if they are true and have many times tried to defend them even when they are proven untrue. That's a terrible habit to have, though I will give you credit for finally admitting to being wrong on this.

It changes the narrative entirely. You're trying to claim they were the party of "no" for 6 years, when it was factually untrue. Now you're trying to claim they are the party of no...and what is your evidence again? What are all the things they've said no too in the last year and a half? Because I'm pretty certain it wasn't the Democrats who refused to so much as review Obama's selection to fill a Supreme Court vacancy.

As usual, you're playing quite loose with facts.
More people voted Democrat for both the Presidency and for the Senate than voted Republican.

Perhaps the "will of the people" argument isn't your best option here.
Click to expand...

No. The argument is still the same. Since Republicans took over the House and Senate the Democrats have been the party of no and it is my belief they will continue being the party of no come next year. If I remember right, it was you who was already justifying why it is ok for the Democrats to be the party of no.
 
Moderate Right said:
No. The argument is still the same.
Click to expand...
The entire premise of your argument was undermined by actual facts. Your question can still be asked, but your premise has no leg to stand on.

Since Republicans took over the House and Senate the Democrats have been the party of no
Click to expand...
And once more, you make a claim and provide no evidence, even after I asked for it AND gave you evidence to the contrary. It's just like the last thread (which I still haven't and won't read your last post in, as I grew tired of you not caring about facts).

and it is my belief they will continue being the party of no come next year.
Click to expand...
It's possible they will become the obstructionist party. But it's erroneous to claim they held that mantle previously.

If I remember right, it was you who was already justifying why it is ok for the Democrats to be the party of no.
Click to expand...
You don't remember correctly. I've not said anything close to that. As usual, your grasp of the facts is quite weak (though, again, I'll give you credit for prefacing your comment with acknowledging you could be mistaken).
 
Slyfox696 said:
The entire premise of your argument was undermined by actual facts. Your question can still be asked, but your premise has no leg to stand on.

And once more, you make a claim and provide no evidence, even after I asked for it AND gave you evidence to the contrary. It's just like the last thread (which I still haven't and won't read your last post in, as I grew tired of you not caring about facts).

It's possible they will become the obstructionist party. But it's erroneous to claim they held that mantle previously.

You don't remember correctly. I've not said anything close to that. As usual, your grasp of the facts is quite weak (though, again, I'll give you credit for prefacing your comment with acknowledging you could be mistaken).
Click to expand...

Have you given me your thoughts on if the Democrats will be the party of no starting next year? The party of no means that the minority party purposely thwarts or tries to thwart the policies of the majority party in power. Just because you think you have justification to be the party of no does not mean that you are not the party of no. Both sides believe they have the justification to be the party of no while they are in the minority so you cannot use that as an excuse.
 
Moderate Right said:
Have you given me your thoughts on if the Democrats will be the party of no starting next year?
Click to expand...
Yes, I have. You probably missed it because I've been far too busy correcting you on facts. Perhaps if you would say fewer things which are untrue, you could spend more time reading answers to your question.

Just because you think you have justification to be the party of no does not mean that you are not the party of no. Both sides believe they have the justification to be the party of no while they are in the minority so you cannot use that as an excuse.
Click to expand...
Who is making that excuse? You claimed the Democratic Party has been obstructionist, an assertion I proved wrong in multiple ways. You also claim the Republican Party is the will of the people, another claim I showed to be lacking in substance. As to whether Democrats will be obstructionist in the future, I said, "It's possible they will become the obstructionist party.".

At some point, I suggest you spend more time thinking and researching what you say before you say it.
 
Moderate Right said:
For the last 6 years the Democrats have been the true party of no. It was either their way or the highway. With Trump elected president and a Republican Senate and House also elected the Democrats now have the opportunity to prove to America that they are not the party of no and will accept the mandate of the American people. Can they do it or will they remain the party of no and continue to be the true obstructionists?
Click to expand...

I certainly hope Republicans don't see this as a mandate for certain them as this was a middle finger to them as well. The GOP wanted Jeb, not Trump.
 
Slyfox696 said:
Yes, I have. You probably missed it because I've been far too busy correcting you on facts. Perhaps if you would say fewer things which are untrue, you could spend more time reading answers to your question.

Who is making that excuse? You claimed the Democratic Party has been obstructionist, an assertion I proved wrong in multiple ways. You also claim the Republican Party is the will of the people, another claim I showed to be lacking in substance. As to whether Democrats will be obstructionist in the future, I said, "It's possible they will become the obstructionist party.".

At some point, I suggest you spend more time thinking and researching what you say before you say it.
Click to expand...

I get it now. All Democrats good, all Republicans bad. And you have "proof" of all of it.
 
Moderate Right said:
I get it now. All Democrats good, all Republicans bad.
Click to expand...
Obviously you don't get it as I said nothing of the sort. I merely corrected you when you posted things which were untrue. Once again, you show no interest in facts or reality.

Do you think you could actually create a factually accurate post in this thread? I get really tired of reading posts which are untrue.

And you have "proof" of all of it.
Click to expand...
I have proof you constantly say things that are not true. This is another example.
 
Fishking said:
I certainly hope Republicans don't see this as a mandate for certain them as this was a middle finger to them as well. The GOP wanted Jeb, not Trump.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, both parties take elections as a mandate, even when the results are 50.1 to 49.9.
 
Dittohead not! said:
I don't expect any better from the Democrats no, but we'll see. They may just prove me wrong. What do you think they will do?
Click to expand...

Pretty much the same as you, and to be fair, I expect the Repubs will complain bitterly about it.
 
Moderate Right said:
Unfortunately, both parties take elections as a mandate, even when the results are 50.1 to 49.9.
Click to expand...
This is correct. It's about gamesmanship and trying to alter perception to get done the things the party wants do.

You created a post which is correct.
 
Slyfox696 said:
Obviously you don't get it as I said nothing of the sort. I merely corrected you when you posted things which were untrue. Once again, you show no interest in facts or reality.

Do you think you could actually create a factually accurate post in this thread? I get really tired of reading posts which are untrue.

I have proof you constantly say things that are not true. This is another example.
Click to expand...

You mean like yours? There are more truths than just your truth.
 
RickJames3000 said:
Who is "we"? The coalition that elected Trump or the establishment Republicans?
Or do you not recognize the difference any more?
Click to expand...

Fair warning, I don't suffer stupid **** for long. If you expect to have any sort of dialogue with me, cut the crap.
 
countryboy said:
Fair warning, I don't suffer stupid **** for long. If you expect to have any sort of dialogue with me, cut the crap.
Click to expand...

You can quit suffering right now if you like. If you don't write dumb **** I won't respond to your posts.
 
Moderate Right said:
I'm just saying that Democrats are hypocrites for saying that Republicans are the party of no if they do the very same thing. Both parties are the party of no.
Click to expand...

I don't care for such false equivalency. On principle, political opposition is supposed to oppose the ruling coalition as a part of the checks and balances that ensure equilibrium and accountability. Despite the multitude of grievances I have against democrats and liberals, as an opposition, they abide by that ideal; republicans, however - and the far right in general - don't, as they make of obstructionism their conduit to power. Throughout the past 8 years, republicans made it clear over and over again that they will obstruct Obama in order to eviscerate his presidencies and erase his legacy, and the evidence of such malicious obstructionism is superabundant and ingrained in the nation's memory.

Say no evil, hear no evil; republicans have no one but themselves to blame for the reckoning they believe to be at hands. The erosion of governance in the U.S and the disintegration of the political order remain the one unquestionable reality of the country.
 
Moderate Right said:
We shall see. Your problem is that the Republicans actually said it. Would it really have been any different if they hadn't verbalized it? Will it really be any different if the left does not verbalize it with Trump and yet try to stop him at every turn? There really isn't a difference. One side was honest and told the truth. You're side thinks just because they don't verbalize it, somehow it is different. Be honest. You and every Democrat hope that Trump is a one term president and you will do anything to make him that.
Click to expand...

Personally, I am not a Democrat. That is not why I am unhappy with Trump being President.
 
Gaztopian said:
I don't care for such false equivalency. On principle, political opposition is supposed to oppose the ruling coalition as a part of the checks and balances that ensure equilibrium and accountability. Despite the multitude of grievances I have against democrats and liberals, as an opposition, they abide by that ideal; republicans, however - and the far right in general - don't, as they make of obstructionism their conduit to power. Throughout the past 8 years, republicans made it clear over and over again that they will obstruct Obama in order to eviscerate his presidencies and erase his legacy, and the evidence of such malicious obstructionism is superabundant and ingrained in the nation's memory.

Say no evil, hear no evil; republicans have no one but themselves to blame for the reckoning they believe to be at hands. The erosion of governance in the U.S and the disintegration of the political order remain the one unquestionable reality of the country.
Click to expand...

Wow. Are you still going to believe this when Democrats do everything they can to obstruct Republican policy intiatives and do their best to make Trump a one term president? Please tell me which Republican policies Democrats are not going to obstruct.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom