• 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!

Who do you think will win the Republican nomination?

Who do you think will win the Republican nomination?


  • Total voters
    70
I've done some reading today and thus far I'd say that a Cain/Daniels or Daniels/Cain ticket might be my preference, if I could have it my way.
 
I've done some reading today and thus far I'd say that a Cain/Daniels or Daniels/Cain ticket might be my preference, if I could have it my way.

I think the VP candidate this year will be a another no name with charisma. Cain seems to only spew talking points, thats not charisma, and Daniels doesn't have it. Besides, it would be better for Cain to be on Daniels economic team than for him to be president from a conservative point of view. I still question both of their commitment to small government in the economy considering both support the existence of the FED and both supported TARP et al.
 
How so? You have in all your posting been FAIL at answering this one simple question.

You pose questions - get direct answers then you want bait and troll to make it about you so you can complain that I am making it about you.

You ask "how so"?

here is what the summary of Hoffer's TRUE BELIEVER concept said

Hoffer argues that all mass movements such as fascism, communism, and religion spread by promising a glorious future.

the right wing tea party/right libertarian/republican subscribes exactly to this belief. If only we can adopt their values, their beliefs, their ideas, their cures for what ails us then American can be saved from leftist socialism/communism/bolshevism/progressivism/trotskyism/leninism and liberalism. The American future is bright if only we adopt their belief system.


To be successful, these mass movements need the adherents to be willing to sacrifice themselves and others for the future goals.

Shared sacrifice is the mantra here in Michigan coming from the lips of right wing Republican True Believers who have taken over the state legislature and have passed many laws taking away peoples rights. On a national level we hear from the Right how such programs as Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security are going to have to be pared back or even axed completely - more sacrifice for the masses so that the greater good can be achieved

To do so, mass movements need to glorify the past and devalue the present.

Just read threads here and its evident how many of the believers of the right are obsessed with the good old days of the late 1700's and their sainted Founding Fathers. The days before the 20th century and the evil progressive movement and the even more hated New Deal of FDR and routinely demonized in favor of the good old days of the Gilded Age or even further back in the heyday of the tri-corner hat. The present is looked at as the nadir of America and we are in danger of the destruction of the nation according to the True Believers of the right.

Mass movements appeal to frustrated people who are dissatisfied with their current state, but are capable of a strong belief in the future.

This is easily seen by the appeal of folks like Beck and Limbaugh and their worshipping acolytes who hate what America now is and feel that they are no longer valued or important.

As well, mass movements appeal to people who want to escape a flawed self by creating an imaginary self and joining a collective whole. Some categories of people who may be attracted to mass movements include poor people, misfits, and people who feel thwarted in their endeavors.

tea party anyone?

You asked - I delivered point by point.
 
You pose questions - get direct answers then you want bait and troll to make it about you so you can complain that I am making it about you.

You ask "how so"?

If you think I am baiting and trolling you, report me. Last and only warning.


here is what the summary of Hoffer's TRUE BELIEVER concept said



the right wing tea party/right libertarian/republican subscribes exactly to this belief. If only we can adopt their values, their beliefs, their ideas, their cures for what ails us then American can be saved from leftist socialism/communism/bolshevism/progressivism/trotskyism/leninism and liberalism. The American future is bright if only we adopt their belief system.

How so, specifically, show me exactly by example how this is how everyone who is not a liberal and thinks like you, is. Please, by all means.,


Shared sacrifice is the mantra here in Michigan coming from the lips of right wing Republican True Believers who have taken over the state legislature and have passed many laws taking away peoples rights. On a national level we hear from the Right how such programs as Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security are going to have to be pared back or even axed completely - more sacrifice for the masses so that the greater good can be achieved

So what compromises were union thugs and idiots willing to make? None. Now they want to whine when the numbers need to match? Please, sacrifices need to be made, we cant continue to pay for that which we can not afford.


Just read threads here and its evident how many of the believers of the right are obsessed with the good old days of the late 1700's and their sainted Founding Fathers. The days before the 20th century and the evil progressive movement and the even more hated New Deal of FDR and routinely demonized in favor of the good old days of the Gilded Age or even further back in the heyday of the tri-corner hat. The present is looked at as the nadir of America and we are in danger of the destruction of the nation according to the True Believers of the right.

I don't see any references in this thread to founding fathers, etc as you claimed, Perhaps you are exhibiting some of what you accuse these bogeyman of.


This is easily seen by the appeal of folks like Beck and Limbaugh and their worshipping acolytes who hate what America now is and feel that they are no longer valued or important.

Limbaugh and beck hate America? It's not valued or important?

Can you link to these absurd claims... :lamo


tea party anyone?

You asked - I delivered point by point.


no, you failed to deliver, you repeated the same empty rhetoric you always do. :shrug:
 
from the Rev

If you think I am baiting and trolling you, report me. Last and only warning.

Warning? From you? What exactly are you warning me about and in what capacity are you acting?

And if I fail to heed your last and only warning - what will you do next to me?
 
from the Rev

Please, sacrifices need to be made, we cant continue to pay for that which we can not afford.

from the summary of beliefs of the TRUE BELIEVER

To be successful, these mass movements need the adherents to be willing to sacrifice themselves and others for the future goals.

thanks rev for a picture perfect illustration of the True Believer. Combine that with your own previous admissions to being a tea party follower, and a rightist libertarian, and its a signed and sealed confession.

thanks again.
 
from the Rev



from the summary of beliefs of the TRUE BELIEVER



thanks rev for a picture perfect illustration of the True Believer. Combine that with your own previous admissions to being a tea party follower, and a rightist libertarian, and its a signed and sealed confession.

thanks again.

What Rev said was entirely sensible. I don't know how you can take something like that, twist it and make it seem like Rev is some kind of dogmatic mouth-watering ideologue. His sentiments are shared by many on all sides.
 
What Rev said was entirely sensible. I don't know how you can take something like that, twist it and make it seem like Rev is some kind of dogmatic mouth-watering ideologue. His sentiments are shared by many on all sides.

Shared sacrifice only works if everyone is sacrificing. Its seems the Michigan the only ones that are sacrificing are small local, poor communities who are being ruled like a corporation.
 
What Rev said was entirely sensible. I don't know how you can take something like that, twist it and make it seem like Rev is some kind of dogmatic mouth-watering ideologue. His sentiments are shared by many on all sides.

I only know of one side which shares his sentiments. The Rev himself, by his own admission has said he is a rightist leaning libertarian who also is a tea party participant and admirer.
 
Shared sacrifice only works if everyone is sacrificing. Its seems the Michigan the only ones that are sacrificing are small local, poor communities who are being ruled like a corporation.

Add in pensioners and it pretty much is the picture.
 
Shared sacrifice only works if everyone is sacrificing. Its seems the Michigan the only ones that are sacrificing are small local, poor communities who are being ruled like a corporation.

The entire state is in shambles. It isn't just the poor, small towns being affected. They have the highest unemployment rate in the country and the largest population decrease since 2000.
 
Alright, I'm not actually clear on what the Michigan state legislature did and how people responded. Could someone enlighten me?
 
The entire state is in shambles. It isn't just the poor, small towns being affected. They have the highest unemployment rate in the country and the largest population decrease since 2000.

Does that give the governor the right to rule in the manner of a despot?


Alright, I'm not actually clear on what the Michigan state legislature did and how people responded. Could someone enlighten me?

Essentially, Michigan state legislators gave the Governor the authority to dismiss local officials and in their place put a emergency manager with all their powers. The justification is that Michigan is so messed up that it needs to be ran like a corporation.
 
Last edited:
In a race between the candidates listed above, I'd say Pawlenty. "Not very exciting" really isn't strong enough a negative to make up for the other candidates' flaws (Romney's health care thing, Palin's inexperience, etc). Him or Mitch Daniels. Both have their own obstacles to overcome, though. Pawlenty's flip-flop on cap-and-trade is going to leave a lot of people wondering what his principles are, and if he even has any that aren't just whatever he needs to win.

At this point I'm really hoping for a surprise Paul Ryan candidacy at the last moment or something. The Republicans really failed at giving us much to work with.
 
In what manner?

Read the edit. City managers are appointed by the governor, only answerable to the governor, and has both the power of the local legislature and the executive branch (for the locality)
 
Read the edit. City managers are appointed by the governor, only answerable to the governor, and has both the power of the local legislature and the executive branch (for the locality)

And yet he just managed a huge bipartisan victory by passing a largely leftist budget plan with both houses having a republican majority.

We don't elect city managers in Texas, either...and I'm not aware of them being responsible to anybody but the city council (slightly variance there).

Do you have links to the negative effects of this method of governance he has chosen?
 
And yet he just managed a huge bipartisan victory by passing a largely leftist budget plan with both houses having a republican majority.

We don't elect city managers in Texas, either...and I'm not aware of them being responsible to anybody but the city council (slightly variance there).

Do you have links to the negative effects of this method of governance he has chosen?

If you are conservative, you should be against edit its not city manages, its an emergency manage who has the power to dissolve local elected bodies and give the power to himself. It takes control away from the local population and places it in the power of 1 person. That is anti-american FFS.
 
Last edited:
If you are conservative, you should be against city managers dissolving local elected bodies and giving the power to himself. It takes control away from the local population and places it in the power of 1 person. That is anti-american FFS.

I'm neither for nor against it at this point in time. Michigan elected the governor, who asked the legislature (which Michigan elected) to pass legislation allowing him to select city managers. Though indirectly, the entire process was completed through representative government. If the city managers begin dictating outside of existing laws I'll have an issue.
 
I'm neither for nor against it at this point in time. Michigan elected the governor, who asked the legislature (which Michigan elected) to pass legislation allowing him to select city managers. Though indirectly, the entire process was completed through representative government. If the city managers begin dictating outside of existing laws I'll have an issue.

Emergency managers remove local control.
 
Emergency managers remove local control.

Again, are they dictating outside of existing law? Are they creating rules that aren't on the books to control the citizenry? Have they lined the streets with armed mercenaries with orders to shoot-to-kill for any violations? Are they instituting citywide curfews for all residents? Are they dictating which businesses can open when and why? Are they stopping cars into and out of the city for inspections?

What are they doing?
 
Back
Top Bottom