• 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!

Has the GOP Lost all Credibility?

Unitedwestand13 said:
I don't want to return to the governing philosophy of the Hoover administration, which stood by and did not do enough to address the crisis of the Great Depression.
Click to expand...

The New Deal prolonged the misery of the Great Depression...not ended it. And Hoover spend more as a percentage of the GDP than FDR did after the 1929 crash.

The 1920/21 Depression was fought with lower tax rates for everyone and a balanced budget. The result was the DOW and unemployment reached near pre-crash levels within 3 1/2 years and the national debt dropped by over 10%.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depression_of_1920–21

The Hoover and FDR admins. spent like mad and tried to run the economy (especially FDR). The result? Even ten years after the '29 crash...the DOW still never got to more than 52% of it's pre-crash high and the unemployment rate was still FIVE TIMES HIGHER (3.2% vs. 17.2%) than it was before the crash. Plus, the national debt had risen by almost 150%.

US National Debt by Year – Polidiotic

The Great Depression Statistics

The notion that you have to spend your way out of a recession/depression has been proven wrong by history...time and again.

During a recession/depression, you look after those who need (not just want) help and you let the economy fix itself.
 
Last edited:
calamity said:
When an un-elected, unconfirmed high level adviser to the President tries to create back-channel communications with an adversarial foreign government, and the GOP steps up to defend or excuse that action, have they not lost all credibility?

Trump, Republicans push back on Kushner reports - POLITICO

The partisan hackery is almost unbelievable. I guess, all that matters to these people is party. Must defend the Trumpsters.
Click to expand...

There is nothing illegal...or even unusual...about back-channel lines of communication and it is of no consequence that an "un-elected, unconfirmed legal adviser" (btw, is THAT what Kusher is...a legal advisor?) does the work to establish the channel.

As far as Russia being an "adversarial government", perhaps this line of communication would serve to lessen...or, even, remove...that adversarial condition. Do you think that's a bad thing? Heck, didn't Hillary and Obama attempt to do that with the "reset"? Maybe Trump...with this line of communication can succeed where Obama and Hillary failed.

I agree with you about the partisan hackery...except it's not "almost" unbelievable. It's TOTALLY unbelievable the amount of partisan hackery coming out of the left. Must destroy the President.
 
DA60 said:
The New Deal prolonged the misery of the Great Depression...not ended it. And Hoover spend more as a percentage of the GDP than FDR did.

The 1920/21 Depression was fought with lower tax rates for everyone and a balanced budget. The result was the DOW and unemployment reached near pre-crash levels within 3 1/2 years and the national debt dropped by over 10%.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depression_of_1920–21

The Hoover and FDR admins. spent like mad and tried to run the economy (especially FDR). The result? Even ten years after the '29 crash...the DOW still never got to more than 52% of it's pre-crash high and the unemployment rate was still FIVE TIMES HIGHER (3.2% vs. 17.2%) than it was before the crash. Plus, the national debt had risen by almost 150%.

US National Debt by Year – Polidiotic

The Great Depression Statistics

The notion that you have to spend your way out of a recession/depression has been proven wrong by history...time and again.

During a recession/depression, you look after those who need (not just want) help and you let the economy fix itself.
Click to expand...

And yet the Great Depression ended in the United States when country adjusted to the needs of world war 2.

World war 2 provided the necessary influx of government spending in order to end the Depression.
 
Middleground said:
So in your words, replace a bias with a bias. :roll:
Click to expand...

Actually, that's not what he is saying at all.

He's saying that the MSM puts out stories, but then we find out those stories are fake news. But we don't find that out from the MSM...it's the conservative media that exposes the fakery by providing the facts.

Take, for instance, that recent thing about Trump not listening to the Italian President through headphones to hear a translation of his speech. That started from some British reporter...was taken up by the American MSM...and splashed around the world. Until, that is, we find out from conservative sources that Trump wears a single earpiece...not those headsets everyone else wears...and that he WAS listening to the translation. Blatant fake news from the MSM. And THEN...the MSM is suddenly silent. They don't mention that they were wrong. They just drop the whole thing.

This has happened numerous times.

So yeah...the MSM has lost all credibility.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
And yet the Great Depression ended in the United States when country adjusted to the needs of world war 2.

World war 2 provided the necessary influx of government spending in order to end the Depression.
Click to expand...

Technically, the Great Depression ended in the mid-30's...but the effects of it and the disasterous government spending/controls of the New Deal lingered until WW2.


I have shown you the statistical facts.

The 1920/21 Depression ended completely in 3 1/2 years with a balanced budget (even a surplus).

The 1930's saw massive unemployment and economic stagnation 'despite' massive government spending.

The conclusion is obvious...government stimulus hurts economies in the long run, not helps them.


I am not going to debate endlessly on this.

I have made my points and backed them up with unbiased, statistics/facts....you don't agree - fine.


We are done here.

Good day.
 
Exquisitor said:
As for the GOP excusing him, they should not. They should charge him with a crime, give him what they say, a slap on the wrist? This way he at least learns he did something wrong. They should have done this to Mrs. Clinton too, but no, it has to be all or nothing, send them to prison or let them slide. Charge him with something minor and then he has to do his job on probation. Then he'd know he did something wrong.
Click to expand...

What criminal charge do you suggest for Trump? Maybe you can catch him spitting on the sidewalk?
 
Mycroft said:
There is nothing illegal...or even unusual...about back-channel lines of communication and it is of no consequence that an "un-elected, unconfirmed legal adviser" (btw, is THAT what Kusher is...a legal advisor?) does the work to establish the channel.

As far as Russia being an "adversarial government", perhaps this line of communication would serve to lessen...or, even, remove...that adversarial condition. Do you think that's a bad thing? Heck, didn't Hillary and Obama attempt to do that with the "reset"? Maybe Trump...with this line of communication can succeed where Obama and Hillary failed.

I agree with you about the partisan hackery...except it's not "almost" unbelievable. It's TOTALLY unbelievable the amount of partisan hackery coming out of the left. Must destroy the President.
Click to expand...

Indeed.

Jared Kushner 'discussed back channel for talking to Russia about Syria'
AP source: Kushner back channel with Russia involved Syria

Having backchannels to Russia isn't new.
John F. Kennedy had a Russian back channel.
The Lady Who Warmed Up the Cold War - The Daily Beast Reagan had a backchannel during the cold war.

But they also appear to have a risk of going wrong.
This is why presidents want backchannels and how it can go wrong ...

McMaster was not concerned about it: 'would not be concerned' about Russia back channel - Chicago Tribune
Neither was Kelly from the DHS: DHS Secretary: A Backchannel Between Trump And Russia 'Not A ...

All this media hysteria over the back channel is indeed that, media hysteria.
Joy Ann Reid vs. Kim Strassel: Russia-Kushner 'Backchannel' Hysteria ...

And Kushner's proposed backchannel was little more than a discussion, no action was taken, and it was never set up.

So the media wants to prosecute someone who had an idea that was discarded and never implemented? My. How, well, umm, how fascist of them, I think.

This whole episode, once again, shows how dishonest the media is. Given the 'news' coverage, you'd have thought that Kushner was selling the country out to the Russians.

Once again we see a number of DP posters here, taking that dishonest coverage and pushing their meme that Jushner should be shot at dawn as a traitor.

Frankly, both the media and these DP posters, have been crying wolf far too often, both have been proven wrong far too often to be taken any more seriously than Chicken Littles.
 
eohrnberger said:
Indeed.

Jared Kushner 'discussed back channel for talking to Russia about Syria'
AP source: Kushner back channel with Russia involved Syria

Having backchannels to Russia isn't new.
John F. Kennedy had a Russian back channel.
The Lady Who Warmed Up the Cold War - The Daily Beast Reagan had a backchannel during the cold war.

But they also appear to have a risk of going wrong.
This is why presidents want backchannels and how it can go wrong ...

McMaster was not concerned about it: 'would not be concerned' about Russia back channel - Chicago Tribune
Neither was Kelly from the DHS: DHS Secretary: A Backchannel Between Trump And Russia 'Not A ...

All this media hysteria over the back channel is indeed that, media hysteria.
Joy Ann Reid vs. Kim Strassel: Russia-Kushner 'Backchannel' Hysteria ...

And Kushner's proposed backchannel was little more than a discussion, no action was taken, and it was never set up.

So the media wants to prosecute someone who had an idea that was discarded and never implemented? My. How, well, umm, how fascist of them, I think.

This whole episode, once again, shows how dishonest the media is. Given the 'news' coverage, you'd have thought that Kushner was selling the country out to the Russians.

Once again we see a number of DP posters here, taking that dishonest coverage and pushing their meme that Jushner should be shot at dawn as a traitor.

Frankly, both the media and these DP posters, have been crying wolf far too often, both have been proven wrong far too often to be taken any more seriously than Chicken Littles.
Click to expand...

No, the secret communications aren't new, but usually private citizens don't have that.
 
calamity said:
Post 14, cited below, is much closer to the reality of the situation than the nonsense written above.
Click to expand...
6 of 1, half dozen the other

There is absolutely no motive for the gop to compromise with a group that can not be appeased. Even when the gop does nake concessions we have to listen to hiw it was an insicere gollow gesture trying to mask how they are really just a bunch of deplorable, racist, homphobes deep down inside.

If you want to live in peace it takes both sides to desire it. The left is showing no interest in it.

Heres a challenge for you. Find me one link from abc, nbc, or cbs, in the past 10 years that portrays something the gop did (other than condemning something else in the gop) in a positive light. You will be hard pressed to find such a story.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
 
rocket88 said:
No, the secret communications aren't new, but usually private citizens don't have that.
Click to expand...

We aren't talking about "private citizens".
 
rocket88 said:
No, the secret communications aren't new, but usually private citizens don't have that.
Click to expand...

True.

Being part of a presidential transition team is that a role for a private citizen? Or is that a role as part of the orderly transition of power?
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
Conservative media is not even covering the trump administration's mistakes.

They are going out of their way to not talk about trump and his administration
Click to expand...

Conservative media covered Trump's attack in Syria in excruciating detail and that was the biggest blunder he's made in his presidency. More false statements to justify your hate.
 
Kobie said:
You can "hardly believe the MSM" because you don't want to believe it.
Click to expand...

It is not a question of the content. It is things like the amount of froth they whip up out of no new news.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
Conservative media is not even covering the trump administration's mistakes.

They are going out of their way to not talk about trump and his administration
Click to expand...

Really? Which news sources would you mean?
 
Years ago a very popular book in right wing circles was NONE DARE CALL IT TREASON. It seems that in the intervening decades, the right wing has gone from reading it to practicing it.

If any Democratic President did this, there would be all holy hell breaking loose and he could not be impeached fast enough. The images of dead American soldiers flag would be invoked thousands of times each day by GOP politicians wrapping themselves in the flag.
 
eohrnberger said:
Indeed.

Jared Kushner 'discussed back channel for talking to Russia about Syria'
AP source: Kushner back channel with Russia involved Syria

Having backchannels to Russia isn't new.
John F. Kennedy had a Russian back channel.
The Lady Who Warmed Up the Cold War - The Daily Beast Reagan had a backchannel during the cold war.

But they also appear to have a risk of going wrong.
This is why presidents want backchannels and how it can go wrong ...

McMaster was not concerned about it: 'would not be concerned' about Russia back channel - Chicago Tribune
Neither was Kelly from the DHS: DHS Secretary: A Backchannel Between Trump And Russia 'Not A ...

All this media hysteria over the back channel is indeed that, media hysteria.
Joy Ann Reid vs. Kim Strassel: Russia-Kushner 'Backchannel' Hysteria ...

And Kushner's proposed backchannel was little more than a discussion, no action was taken, and it was never set up.

So the media wants to prosecute someone who had an idea that was discarded and never implemented? My. How, well, umm, how fascist of them, I think.

This whole episode, once again, shows how dishonest the media is. Given the 'news' coverage, you'd have thought that Kushner was selling the country out to the Russians.

Once again we see a number of DP posters here, taking that dishonest coverage and pushing their meme that Jushner should be shot at dawn as a traitor.

Frankly, both the media and these DP posters, have been crying wolf far too often, both have been proven wrong far too often to be taken any more seriously than Chicken Littles.
Click to expand...

The MSM simply reported on Kushner's dumbass action. They didn't make him do it. Geez, you folks are consumed with a big case of TDSS.
 
Vetplus40 said:
The MSM simply reported on Kushner's dumbass action. They didn't make him do it. Geez, you folks are consumed with a big case of TDSS.
Click to expand...

Nor did Kushner actually do anything. It was little more than a topic of discussion.

So now the media wants to convict Kushner, not on what he actually did, but on what he was considering doing, and have convinced many of the same, by reporting only 1/2 of the whole story.

1/2 of the truth, a hallmark of propaganda, in this case political propaganda.
 
eohrnberger said:
Nor did Kushner actually do anything. It was little more than a topic of discussion.

So now the media wants to convict Kushner, not on what he actually did, but on what he was considering doing, and have convinced many of the same, by reporting only 1/2 of the whole story.

1/2 of the truth, a hallmark of propaganda, in this case political propaganda.
Click to expand...

False. Kushner asked to do it. That's several steps beyond just "considering" it. :roll:
 
calamity said:
False. Kushner asked to do it. That's several steps beyond just "considering" it. :roll:
Click to expand...

Was it done? Was the backchannel, that most other presidential administrations had, put into place?

I don't recall a single report of it having been put into place.

So there was nothing actually done here. :roll:
 
Imagine for a moment that Trump is still a Democrat. That's not a huge stretch, as he's been one most of his life and is a long way from being a conservative.

Imagine that Russia meddled in our election and helped Democrat Trump be elected.

Imagine the Republicans not wanting to investigate and supporting the Russian connection, whatever it may be.

Imagine the Republicans not calling the Democratic president a Communist for cozying up to Russia.

Can't imagine that? Me neither.
 
calamity said:
False. Kushner asked to do it. That's several steps beyond just "considering" it. :roll:
Click to expand...

Yep, and several hundred miles from having any possible bearing on alleged election rigging collusion with Russia or anyone else. ;)
 
calamity said:
When an un-elected, unconfirmed high level adviser to the President tries to create back-channel communications with an adversarial foreign government, and the GOP steps up to defend or excuse that action, have they not lost all credibility?

Trump, Republicans push back on Kushner reports - POLITICO

The partisan hackery is almost unbelievable. I guess, all that matters to these people is party. Must defend the Trumpsters.
Click to expand...

Of the (probably) hundreds of partisan hack OP's you've spewed, this one is the most ironic. Pot...kettle.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom