Heeding Bannon's Call, Election Deniers Organize to Seize Control of GOP

The purge, as I made clear, would mostly occur in the future, though my second post, with a further SNIP from the article, gives examples of its already having begun, your unawareness of it, notwithstanding.

Your POV seems to be that anyone not willing to be blindly obedient to Trump, is not a real Republican. If this is the case, you would be an ideal candidate, to join the movement. If I have mistaken your view, please describe what distinguishes the two.

 

The ultimate proof, the conversation ending proof, is that progressive ideology doesn't work. Has the climate change approach of California reduced wildfires? Has the gun-control ideology of Chiraq led to reduced gang violence? Has the police defunding of Minneapolis resulted in less crime? Has anything in the progressive playbook worked, ever? The answer is no. And yet its popularity has skyrocketed because of how ample the supply of people who believe in it is - people who are largely dependent upon the very doomed system they support - people who the left has spent decades importing, over-breeding, and/or indoctrinating.

We used to fill the tank that is our country with high test jet fuel. Now we will it with sludge. The engine will stop and then all the the people who never expected anything but a free ride will quite simply be ****ed.

 

This is a specious argument; climate change cannot be addressed in any one given area, by just the actions of that area-- it is a worldwide problem, necessitating planetary remediation. You know this, right?

My, aren't you being selective in your examples. Try looking at Australia.

Ridiculous to even treat that slogan as progressive policy idea, without defining it. Ludicrous to assume such a major change (of implementing other means of addressing situations that the police are not the ideal ones to be tasked with, and for which, police do not receive adequate training) could have been so quickly accomplished. And unrealistic to believe that the results of this shifting of funds from police, to other services that would then lighten the burden on police, would yet be seen in data, even had this all been done, which it hasn't. I think I have only read of a pilot program (& I thought it was in Chicago), which was going to attempt to send mental health personnel to address circumstances, for which they would be a more appropriate responder, than police. So, if you are contending that Minneapolis has these services which substitute for the police, in warranted cases, all up and running at their intended capacities, you will need to supply validation of this. It sounds to me that, on this issue, your information is about equal to where it was, on Climate Change.

Well, one would obviously need define terms, here, but Social Security Insurance-- without getting into a debate over its problems (that is not the subject of this thread)-- one would have to call both a success, in addressing the problem of senior poverty, as it had been, as well as call it a, "progressive," idea. There are many others, FYI. But, also, big plans, affecting big problems, take much time to perfect, and also to achieve tangible results. For example, the ACA is a progressive program that has absolutely been successful in expanding peoples' access to healthcare; this is undeniable. Just as true is the fact that it far from perfect. But it was never meant to be; it was a necessary breaking of the ice, in this direction. The work, as you will see, shall continue, on that tack, for the actual threat to our nation of rising medical costs is a monumental EMERGENCY, and has been seen as such, for several decades, even before the ACA. Fixing such things take time, and do not occur without growing pains. But progress has been made. To suggest otherwise, only makes you sound ignorant (IMO).

 

Covid is not an obvious caevat. It's still mostly about issues and one's point of view.

 

The media wasn't all that successful. The people that followed the Nazi maga hat crowd sealed that.

 

I don't think so. 6000 of the 10,000 or so years is already gone.

 

Roman empire died. Britain empire died. Life went on.

 

This is nothing new. The RW declared war on America,

We are under attack. This is already a war.

 

1. Of course! Which is why its a perfectly valid thing to criticize. I accept that we have to do something about our climate impact but the 'we' in that equation is nothing short of every single country on this planet. I think, conceptually, its a justifiable trade off that we take some short term hits in order to do long term good. But if the hits aren't spread equally I'm not interesting in supporting them because a) not fair, and b) pointless without total participation. I see no good reason to hurt our economy and our energy stability with climate policies with the likes of China and India and various African nations not doing the same. So this is why I'll hit progressives on the subject, because all their AGW/NGD policies have no hope of producing an actual climate improvement. All they'll accomplish is the creation of massive bureaucracies for Democrat donors to staff, the redistribution of hundreds of billions a year into the hands of organizations and entities that Democrat donors operate, and all at a cost of higher prices across the board for you and I - because when you muck with energy you muck with literally everything.

2. What does America's high gang/crime cities have a wholllllee lot of that Australia doesn't?

3. Minneapolis (and a few of its suburb) have put 'defund the policy' through as a policy in both ballot measure form and general city council procedural motion. The gist of how they define is pretty much exactly as one would expect; reduction of policing capacity via elimination of funding.

4. And we have to point out that social security is bankrupt thanks in no small part to Congress robbing it to fund massive projects just as they did when it came time to meet certain ACA funding demands. Also worth folding in that when it comes to the endless waves of 3rd world invaders and 'refugees' that the left uses to replace Americans that don't vote for them, they suck even more money out of things like SS and the ACA thus escalating the depletion. So, no, we cant call these successes because when a certain generation goes to retire expecting the SS checks they spent their whole lives paying into they will a) not get them, or get them at severe reductions, and b) endure that hit at a time when massive inflation has set in. So once again, another progressive failure.

 

we have sat back long enough and allowed democrats to run our elections the vast majority especially in high population areas Democrats have ran the precincts the polling places processing and counting the votes
hell the largest county in GA poll workers were hired from a temp agency ran by Stacey Abrams if that isn't a conflict of interest I don't know what is and what ever so called republicans allowed that to happen doesn't deserve to keep their job
its time we stop burring our heads in the sand and get involved make sure the process is and stays legit and stop trusting democrats to be fair and honest with our elections

 

This is a conspiracy theory. The purge would be of non Republicans. Or Republicans that are no longer really Republicans.

Trump is the leader of the Republican Party the Republicans chose him for a reason.

If you find yourself not really lining up with the Republican party anymore maybe it's not your party anymore.

 

Yup. Forever lessened.

 

For your peace of mind, I'll tell you that I looked it up, when apexofpurple corrected me, to say that it had billions of years left. The whole universe is thought to be only 14 billion years old, and I know that stars die out all the time. But he was correct. The length of time a star will survive is directly inverse to its mass. Massive stars may only last as from 30 to a few hundred million years. But our own should last about 10 billion. As the Earth is only about 4.5 billion years old, we've still got a good bit of time. That being said, some time closer to the end, but prior to its actually running out of fuel, the sun will begin to grow in size, and will consume its inner satellites, including Earth. Still, that's a long ways off. I don't know where your 10,000 year number, or the 6000 years that are, "already gone," come from, but it wasn't a scientific text. A religious one?

 

I could argue all four of these points, further, but none is germaine to my thread, so we'll both have to wait for another day.

 

I said, in the post to which you are "responding":

DEFinning said: ↑
...
Your POV seems to be that anyone not willing to be blindly obedient to Trump, is not a real Republican. If this is the case, you would be an ideal candidate, to join the movement. If I have mistaken your view, please describe what distinguishes the two.
<End Snip>

Though you did not distinguish your own, from the view that being a "real Republican," means one must agree with Trump, on all things, it is clear from your response that this is how you feel. This is more properly the argument of a religious devotee to some guru, thought of as holy & beyond flaw or error-- IOW, Divine-- than any reasonable political view. It has NEVER been the case, that being the member of any major, U.S. political party, has precluded the possibility of disagreeing with the leader of that party, on any given issue. Note how Democrats do have opinions that differ from President Joe Biden's.

The idea of uniformity of thought, in all things, is a ridiculous litmus test, which totally defeats there being any benefit in pooling various perspectives. It is limiting, narrow-minded, foolish, & UNDEMOCRATIC, in nature. You are iterating nothing but a call for an autocratic tyrant. Sorry, but I'm not going to wish you good luck, with that.

 

All the more reason, I would think, one with that outlook would see the importance in being aware of the opposition's strategy.

 

I'm sorry reality is a hard thing for you to accept and you have to throw a fit when the facts don't line up with what you want them to be.

You can cry in spring hopelessly at the sky to your heart's delight about Trump nobody cares.

you are making an argument in bad faith.

My point of view has nothing to do with this and it's not the stupid nonsense you made up to belittle everyone you disagree with.

If you want to be treated like an adult act like one.

I didn't present my view I stated facts Donald Trump was the most popular Republican ever.

If you want to believe in some conspiracy theory like how they're all against you and plotting that's your business. Republicans voted for Donald Trump because they liked him.

this is just fit throwing because you don't get to dictate to Republicans what Republican means.

Republicans like Donald Trump he was the most popular Republican president of all time.

If you want to pretend that this is some sort of religious cult because that's easier than facing facts be my guest I think it would be healthier for you to accept reality than to pretend there's a conspiracy against you.

Yes your straw man is ridiculous but that's why people create them so they have something fake and ridiculous to fight against so they can avoid reality.

There isn't uniformity of thought because people voted for Donald Trump. These people aren't brainwashed it's not a conspiracy it's not like a religion there's no blind following they just disagree with you and you can't handle it.

Why do you evoke democracy if you despise it? Donald Trump was elected the Democratic process made him the most popular Republican president of all time not blind following or whatever other horse manure you fabricated.

You can throw a 10-stage fit about me arguing like a four year old but I'm not the one presenting conspiracy theories and despising democracy when it doesn't go my way, that's you.

 

Yes. And I understand their strategy. They made that clear on Jan 6th.

 

Right now the strategy seems to be given enough rope.

 

Well, respectfully, this is a bit more nuanced than that was. But, you are correct, that subversion of democracy does appear to be the Republican wheel, that's getting all the traction.

 

I didn't see anything nuanced about an attack on the Capitol.

Political strategies are in play of course. But that doesn't change the fact that this is already a war.

 

.
* That is exactly what I said. Your initial reply to me had been that this was nothing new, that Republicans have been at war with our Democratic system since 1/6. So I answered that the strategy reported on, in my thread, is a more nuanced way to overthrow democracy, than Jan. 6ths frontal assault on the Capitol.

You seem, also, to be compulsive about making the point that this is a partisan war, as if that is all one needs to know; as if no other information is useful. I could not disagree more strongly that, to use your analogy, being in a "war," mentality, alone, is nowhere near as good a preparation to fight that war, as is being aware, as well, of enemies troop positions, movements, & intentions.

 

“Sniff sniff” smells like an upcoming election steal

That fraud charge that Trump made to “go away” should be prosecuted by one of the states.

Mind you a lot of this could be a major grift as well

 

What charge do you mean?

How so?

 

Exactly which laws are they saying should be ignored?