• 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!

'So Sorry I Voted for Trump'

Perotista said:
I for one, am glad it failed. Trump promised something better, not something ten times worse than the ACA. What I liked about it is that there were a few republican senators who voted against the AHCA and the repeal. I wonder if they, the GOP senators were voting the wishes of the people of their state? If so, kudo's to them who did vote against the AHCA if it was according to the wishes of the people who sent them to Washington to begin with.

Then a triple shame on all Democratic senators who voted against the wishes of the people in their state when the ACA was first passed. Who should senators, either party be responsible to first? The people of their state or to their political party?
Click to expand...

How is that repeal and replace working for ya, proof when the GOP gets the reigns, they cant steer the cart.
 
yankintx said:
How is that repeal and replace working for ya, proof when the GOP gets the reigns, they cant steer the cart.
Click to expand...

Let me repeat the question, whom are senators suppose to represent first? The people of their state or the party they belong to?
 
Perotista said:
Let me repeat the question, whom are senators suppose to represent first? The people of their state or the party they belong to?
Click to expand...

Your statement goes along way towards explaining the splits in the GOP, thus there inability to govern effectively. The GOP should just splinter officially.
 
yankintx said:
Your statement goes along way towards explaining the splits in the GOP, thus there inability to govern effectively. The GOP should just splinter officially.
Click to expand...

I think that answers the question. You think a Representative and a senator owe more loyalty to their party than to the people back home in their district and state. That I think is the problem with Washington today, too partisan and too polarized. Where political party is number one, the people or the nation way down the list of priorities.

I am old enough to remember when there were hardly any party line votes. When both parties had their conservative and liberal wings. Party line voting is fairly recent. Perhaps the last 20-30 years. I think what you don't realize is during the 40's, 50's 60's, 70's is the Democratic Party was known as the big tent party. They averaged between 45-50% of the electorate identifying themselves as Democrats. This is what led the Democrats to control the House for 40 straight years and 56 out of 60 years. For quite a lot of my life I never dreamed I would see the day when the Republicans had control of the House.

Then beginning in the 80's the Democratic Party Strength dropped to 35% of the total electorate till around 2010. Since then those who identify with the Democratic Party has slipped down to 28%. It's not that the Republicans gain from this desertion of folks from the Democratic Party, hey haven't Republicans have average 25-32% of the electorate since FDR and today are down to 25%. It's independents that has grown, from 18% of the total electorate to 42%. No political home for them, for those Americans in the center, center right or center left. Now both parties are hated by more Americans than liked.

Probably because both parties put party above the people, above the nation, above country. Thank you for your honest answer.

Trends in Party Identification, 1939-2014 | Pew Research Center
 
Perotista said:
I think that answers the question. You think a Representative and a senator owe more loyalty to their party than to the people back home in their district and state. That I think is the problem with Washington today, too partisan and too polarized. Where political party is number one, the people or the nation way down the list of priorities.

I am old enough to remember when there were hardly any party line votes. When both parties had their conservative and liberal wings. Party line voting is fairly recent. Perhaps the last 20-30 years. I think what you don't realize is during the 40's, 50's 60's, 70's is the Democratic Party was known as the big tent party. They averaged between 45-50% of the electorate identifying themselves as Democrats. This is what led the Democrats to control the House for 40 straight years and 56 out of 60 years. For quite a lot of my life I never dreamed I would see the day when the Republicans had control of the House.

Then beginning in the 80's the Democratic Party Strength dropped to 35% of the total electorate till around 2010. Since then those who identify with the Democratic Party has slipped down to 28%. It's not that the Republicans gain from this desertion of folks from the Democratic Party, hey haven't Republicans have average 25-32% of the electorate since FDR and today are down to 25%. It's independents that has grown, from 18% of the total electorate to 42%. No political home for them, for those Americans in the center, center right or center left. Now both parties are hated by more Americans than liked.

Probably because both parties put party above the people, above the nation, above country. Thank you for your honest answer.

Trends in Party Identification, 1939-2014 | Pew Research Center
Click to expand...

You are quite right that, while party lines are still less binding in the US than in most European etc countries, the subservience in the US has increased markedly.
 
joG said:
You are quite right that, while party lines are still less binding in the US than in most European etc countries, the subservience in the US has increased markedly.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Elections have also turned away from substance debate, debates on ideals, problem solving ideas, visions into personal destruction. Dredging up every bit of dirty detail on candidates since the day they were born. Outside of the wall and make America great again, what do most Americans remember about Trump and his stances and ideas? With Clinton, it was a third Obama term, I don't even remember what her campaign slogan was. Only the name calling and each side out to destroy the other personally comes to mind. No ideas, no vision, no nothing. I suppose the avid Clinton and Trump supporters can list a dozen things they said they stood for. But what came across to most voters was the vindictiveness of both candidates.
 
Perotista said:
I think that answers the question. You think a Representative and a senator owe more loyalty to their party than to the people back home in their district and state. That I think is the problem with Washington today, too partisan and too polarized. Where political party is number one, the people or the nation way down the list of priorities.

I am old enough to remember when there were hardly any party line votes. When both parties had their conservative and liberal wings. Party line voting is fairly recent. Perhaps the last 20-30 years. I think what you don't realize is during the 40's, 50's 60's, 70's is the Democratic Party was known as the big tent party. They averaged between 45-50% of the electorate identifying themselves as Democrats. This is what led the Democrats to control the House for 40 straight years and 56 out of 60 years. For quite a lot of my life I never dreamed I would see the day when the Republicans had control of the House.

Then beginning in the 80's the Democratic Party Strength dropped to 35% of the total electorate till around 2010. Since then those who identify with the Democratic Party has slipped down to 28%. It's not that the Republicans gain from this desertion of folks from the Democratic Party, hey haven't Republicans have average 25-32% of the electorate since FDR and today are down to 25%. It's independents that has grown, from 18% of the total electorate to 42%. No political home for them, for those Americans in the center, center right or center left. Now both parties are hated by more Americans than liked.

Probably because both parties put party above the people, above the nation, above country. Thank you for your honest answer.

Trends in Party Identification, 1939-2014 | Pew Research Center
Click to expand...


Your welcome, see you at the hearings!!
 
A lot of the problem is the people who voted in the primaries. We had a few decent republican choices but the majority went for Trump, so that's who we were stuck with on the GOP side.

On the democratic side we had Sanders, Clinton, and a couple of former governors. Clinton and Sanders were the 2 favorites but the party was split by voters who favored Sanders socialism over those who favored Clinton's semi-socialist stances. We were stuck with an old has-been for the front runner who had numerous allegations against her.

So in the end we can blame the Trumpettes and the Hillbots for their support of 2 lousy candidates.
 
Perotista said:
Given the two choices the major parties put forth, the only sane choice was to vote third party or not vote at all. When neither major party candidate is wanted to be the next president by 60% of Americans, something is dreadfully wrong with how our candidates are chosen, perhaps even the whole two party system. What difference did it make who won, evil A or evil B? Either way, you still had evil. Oh, for the want of a decent candidate.
Click to expand...

Agreed 100%. Our system of 'democracy' is completely twisted and needs dramatic reform. If we are to continue the hierarchical government system then we are better off going with Fred Foldvary's idea of cellular democracy. At least that would cut into money corrupting politics.
 
Geoist said:
Agreed 100%. Our system of 'democracy' is completely twisted and needs dramatic reform. If we are to continue the hierarchical government system then we are better off going with Fred Foldvary's idea of cellular democracy. At least that would cut into money corrupting politics.
Click to expand...

Interesting concept. Seems cumbersome. But it is bottom up government instead of top down government we have today.
 
Perotista said:
Are you saying either way, Trump or Clinton there would be an impeachment? Possible. Stuff happens when both major parties nominate candidates that are disliked by 60% of all Americans. I don't think anyone outside of avid Trump supporters ever thought he would win. Nate Silver of 538 gave Trump a 30% chance. He was laughed off the stage. But he also alluded to the dislike factor. One couldn't tell exactly how that would turn out.

Next time I would advise the Democratic Party not to choose their candidate four years early. Not to rig the primaries in one candidates favor. Also to take the opposition seriously and not take the election for granted. I wonder if the Dems learned anything. Probably not.
Click to expand...

During her tenure as secretary of state, polls showed she was the most popular person in politics in this country. It was something like an 80% popularity. But once she announced her candidacy and the rightwing propaganda machine kicked into gear, the ignorant got spooked and bought the nonsense being spewed about her.

I am all for freedom of speech and press. But really, such deliberate lying by the right, such as with Fox News and Sean Hannity, are a true disservice to this country and undermine the credibility of the media, one of the cornerstones of democracy.

And no, CNN and NYT are not the same thing on the left. There is no equivalence.
 
yankintx said:
Your statement goes along way towards explaining the splits in the GOP, thus there inability to govern effectively. The GOP should just splinter officially.
Click to expand...

You mean into the cattle and the cowboys who herd and round them up for elections? Basically, the major part of the GOP is just composed of a large number of cattle which are spooked and whipped by a handful of plutocrats, the cowboys, who round them up and take them where they want them. It's just this time around, the cattle got whipped and spooked so much they went into a full-on stampede and ran over their handlers. The poor beasts can only take so much freaking out and paranoia before they go berserk, apparently. The handlers have to learn there are limits to how much they can beat them and make loud noises.

But the two groups can't splinter. You can't have cattle without cowboys. The cattle wouldn't know what to think or do. And the cowboys wouldn't have a job without their cattle.
 
Last edited:
ataraxia said:
During her tenure as secretary of state, polls showed she was the most popular person in politics in this country. It was something like an 80% popularity. But once she announced her candidacy and the rightwing propaganda machine kicked into gear, the ignorant got spooked and bought the nonsense being spewed about her.

I am all for freedom of speech and press. But really, such deliberate lying by the right, such as with Fox News and Sean Hannity, are a true disservice to this country and undermine the credibility of the media, one of the cornerstones of democracy.

And no, CNN and NYT are not the same thing on the left. There is no equivalence.
Click to expand...

It's one thing to be secretary of state and be popular in that job. It is possible that most folks thought she was a good secretary of state. But it is also possible that even though they think or thought she was a good secretary of state to not want her as president. Two different jobs. There's been a lot of people who held positions in different cabinets that although I thought they were excellent at what ever job they held in that cabinet, I wouldn't want them as president. Apples and oranges when it comes to secretary of state and president. Not even close.

What is your fixation with Fox? 2-3 million viewers. Hannity, maybe a 100,000 or double that. You had 130 million people vote last election. Those Fox viewers were minuscule to the over all numbers.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom