2016 Election: No Conservatives need apply-

You made this statement:
This is because of the Progressives having dragged this country so far too the left in the last 10 years.

I did not force you to say that. I agree with you....except the country went voluntairly....there was no gun to the head

 

The people have been brainwashed by your high priests in the media and academia--they need to be put back on the right path.

So your only problem with him is that he is "RACIST!"?

There is nothing racist about preserving an ethnic majority. If we are racists for trying to preserve it, you are racists for trying to reverse it. How can you not see this logic?

 

I love this place. You just can't make this stuff up!

 

Whites are only a demographic majority that will eventually end.

Politically the "white majority" is teetering on extinction and will probably disappear entirely by 2020 or 2024.

 

Honestly, I feel as though Obama took the sails out of the Ron Paul Liberty revolution(He was the Libertarian-Populist on that side of the aisle as well.) I had briefly heard of Dr. Paul back then, and knowing what I know now, I feel as though Ron Paul should have and would have been President if Obama weren't running. The populism really wasn't existent on the Right yet, but who knows there may have been alot of cross voting. Who would seriously go for McCain/Romney?

That of course is mere hypothesis for an election long past us, and not dealing with this year's mess. And to answer your thread

1)Yes, Trump's not a conservative by trade.
2) Trump's existence means the end of the GOP. The Neo-cons are fractured, and they can't win the independent vote in the future, even when Donald Trump loses.

They'll just be the unattractive voices they always were, the fringe religious conservatives will keep nominating candidates to lose in electoral landslides. Really, unless the GOP realigns I see it done as a political party.

 

And why is that?

Did it just happen randomly, or is it a fixture of the universe?

This is a pathetic attempt at derailing, by the way.

 

Libertarians were harping, vote Democrat to teach the republicans a lesson. Then when the Democrats won control of both legislative houses, they elected hardline progressives Pelosi and Reid to the leadership roles. Then Obama ran as an non-establishment candidate. After he got elected, he proved himself to be not only an establishment, but also a hardline progressive. No there was no guns to the heads of Americans, but they were definitely duped into some bad choices that dragged this country to the left.

 

Yeah. They hated Obama so much they elected him twice. LOL

 

See you missed the whole point of small steps. In 2008, the DNC had control of both houses and the Presidency. In 2010, they lost the Congress. In 2012, they retained the White House, but lost ground in both houses. In 2014, they lost the Senate. In 2016, they lose the White House.

 

Your crystal ball is broken. The democrats are projected to not only win the presidency but also the senate.

 

You need a new projector!!!

 

Shhhh.....your Trump Derangement Syndrome is showing and it's embarrassing...





Trump Derangement Syndrome is crippling the left
By John Podhoretz September 21, 2016


People are losing it over Donald Trump. The people I’m talking about are mostly liberals and Democrats who are watching with horror as the election they happily thought Hillary Clinton had put away in August has become a squeaker in September. Their attitude is that any word uttered about the election that doesn’t serve as an open denunciation of Trump is an implicit endorsement of Trump.

Let someone mention the bad behavior of the Clinton Foundation and the response is likely to be a shriek of outrage that you didn’t say something worse about the Trump Foundation. Say that Hillary is a liar, which she is, and immediately you are told Trump is a WORSE LIAR!!!!

I’m enjoying this meltdown. I’m sorry if that’s mean. I can’t help myself. For months last year when Republicans and conservatives were raising alarm bells about his rise, the general response from Democrats and liberals was a certain measure of unholy glee at what they perceived to be the collapse and self-destruction of the GOP.

It’s not that they thought Trump was a good thing, but that as a bad thing, he was delivering to distressed Republicans and conservatives a just punishment for their sins.

Well, now they know. Now they know what it feels like to see Trump defy gravity to some degree and seem to lap a candidate they find acceptable at worst and at best a world-historical agent of change.

And just like Republicans and conservatives did back then, Democrats and liberals are eating their own. They’re lashing out at anyone they think isn’t openly seeking to destroy Trump — at Matt Lauer for failing to give Trump a hard-enough time in his half-hour interview the other week, or at Jimmy Fallon for being Jimmy Fallon with Trump on the “Tonight Show” instead of being Edward R. Murrow with Joseph McCarthy.

For months now, serious members of the mainstream media have been arguing with a straight face that it’s not only acceptable but necessary for the press to favor Hillary over Trump because Trump is such a unique threat to our civilization all conventional rules of conduct (which the liberal media ignore anyway on a regular basis) can be openly tossed aside in pursuit of his defeat. This was the argument made by Jim Rutenberg.

Who is Jim Rutenberg? He’s the media columnist of The New York Times.

They’re going crazy, and as Mike Myers’s pretentious German character Dieter said, “their agony is gorgeous.” Two examples of their derangement are too delicious not to be aired out.

First, they continue to argue that Trump was insanely irresponsible to call the terror attack in New York a bombing before it was definitively determined it was a bombing. Well, it was a bombing, and therefore, so what now? Even more telling is the fact that Hillary Clinton rose to her feet on her plane to condemn Trump for his irresponsibility — and then she, too, called it a bombing!

Second, they’ve now spent two days litigating a stupid tweet from Donald Trump Jr. — not one from Trump himself but from his son. It was a boneheaded analogy suggesting if you knew three Skittles in an entire bag would kill you, you wouldn’t eat the bag, and Syrian refugees are like that.

But to see the response to it from horrified mainstream media types and liberal solons, you would’ve thought Trump himself had just set off a pressure-cooker bomb. Oh, the shame of it! The scandal! The embarrassment! The national horror! The New York Times saw fit to put its story on Skittles-gate on the front page, for God’s sake. The front page.

When Bonasera the undertaker comes to the Godfather to seek revenge for a crime against his daughter at the beginning of the greatest movie ever made, he asks Don Corleone to “make them suffer like she suffered.”

The Godfather turns him down. “That I cannot do,” he says.

Well, right now, my own personal invisible Godfather seems to have accepted my silent plea. And now those gleeful Hillary-ites that were having the time of their lives back in December and January and February are suffering as I suffered — suffering, as Bonasera said, this very day.

 

Yep, on the GOP side, you have an Ike Republican, and Ike had nothing good to say about the few conservatives that huddled in the corners of congress in his day, plotting to turn our economy over to the elites one day. BTW, they managed to do this with Reagan getting elected, and then Bush Sr. Clinton, Bush Jr., Obama, doing their part in turning our economy over to the elite globalists, whose scheme has given us depression era jobless rates. Oh, the real stats, that are not cooked, show us to be around 22 percent employed. According to Shadow Stats. Not to mention destroying the middle class and putting more people into poverty.

Then there is Hillary, who follows in the tradition of Bush, Clinton, Bush, and Obama, in refusing to represent the people the democratic party used to represent, the working and middle class.

So, we only have one candidate that MIGHT represent the American people, and that would be trump, unless he, like Hillary is lying about it.

 

The idea that progressives have dragged American to the left for the last 10 years is utter nonsense, and is evidence for a total disconnect from reality.

This nation has been dragged by neocons, in both parties, on behalf of our rich elites, our rulers, and it has been dragged by neoliberalism, of both parties, on behalf of our rich elites. Oh, if you want to just talk about social issues, sure, modern liberals have dragged us to the left, but these emotional issues is not what has destroyed our republic, and replaced it with oligarchy. These social issues was used to keep the dems and repubs, the voters, distracted from the economic treason being committed by the collusion of politicians and our sociopathic elites. And the destruction of a republic.

So, the social liberals and the social conservatives were too busy fighting one another over social issues, while a log was being shoved up their arses. The elites care nothing about these issues, and only about restructuring our economy to enrich themselves to the max, at the cost to the rest of us. So, both left and right voters were played like a beer joint fiddle, helped tremendously by the media which is owned by 6 huge corporations, which are in turn owned by these same rich elites, the oligarchs. Should make an average guy feel like a mark for a confidence man, but obviously Hillary supporters are disconnected from reality. OR, they like a log being shoved up their arses.

 

The idea that the people are "dragged around" shows utter contempt for the electorate. If the country is more liberal it is because the people want it that way.

 

The facts are the facts and it is always better to deal with reality IMO.

Furthermore a direct factual response to your accusation that the OP "wants toto destroy the white majority" is not an attempt at derailing the thread.

 

How did that work out in the USSR when only members of the party were allowed to vote and everyone else was disenfranchised? Or perhaps the Apartheid regime would be a more appropriate example where only whites were allowed to vote because only they knew what was best for everyone else?

 

Hmm...I don't think so, and your quote actually enforces the OP. (click the lil blue button to see quote)

In my Opinion.

For instance, are you a member of the real concept of the tea party back in 2010, if so do you support Trump?
Or
Are you of the party that wanted a 1 term Obama but mixed with the tea party, Do you support Trump?

The second is what i call the Alt-right.
Both (*)(*)(*)(*) me off, but the first is a government President Obama tried to work with...At first I applauded his presidential response...then we learned the truth...It was too late.

For me, that mistake will never happen again.

Edit: "You" does not mean respondent...but "You" in the common fashion of reading from a point of view.

 

My responses are the colorized ones.

 

Can you cite evidence that Libertarians voted for Democrats in 2006 and 2008?

 

Mine are simply written down-

1. "But Mexico is going to pay for that!" Trump has never fully explained the logistics of that. "Tariffs on Mexico" will pay for it? He has to get Congress to pass the tariffs, and Ryan and McConnell won't do it. "Taxing money sent by wire-transfer back to Mexico"? Again, requires a Congressional law and unles it ILLEGALLY targeted people by ethnicity, it would mean it would target American businesses and banks that sent money to Mexico by wire-transfer......think Republicans would support that?

Plus, no Government workers could be contracted until the money was actually allocated. Plus, money from "tariffs" or "taxes on wire-transfers" goes into the General Revenue....so again, we're back to Congress having to allocate tax dollars to fund the Wall....and Trump TRYING to CLAIM it "wasn't our money...it's Mexico."

So? It would be a Government works project funded by tax dollars....aka New Deal progressivism.

I guarantee like Trump....you've given this ZERO detailed examination.


2. "To get back our jobs! Why should good workers be on welfare?" Not an answer. Tariffs are a Left-of-Center trade policy.....not a "free market" Right-of-Center trade policy.

3. "We paid into it!" Again, not relevant. Ryan and Ideological Conservatives want to "reform" SS and Medicare by "partially" privatizing them....to "get Government out of it". Trump wants them untouched....same as Clinton.

4. "Says who? There are other ways to pay..." Says Trump. He's called for more defense spending AND more infrastructure spending. That spending requires revenue....to get revenue to have taxes....so? It's "tax and spend" on increased Government spending....progressivism.

5. "Very few sane people want to control the goings on in a nonrelated person's uterus." Again, you're admitting Trump is LYING about being "pro-life"....fine.

However, the Republican Party Platform supports restricting abortion. BTW, I'm sure the millions of pro-lifers out there on YOUR side of the political aisle are happy you are calling them "insane."


6. "Just as long as these are not used to oppress Christians, why not?" Again, address the "traditional marriage" Christian conservatives....on the Right. THEY are the ones still hoping the Obergefell Decision is overturned.


7. "Wouldn't you prefer that society help support working families' babies than welfare illegitimate ones?"

A. Trump makes no distinctions in his plan for if the mother is married. B. Again, this is a Government mandate on business to supply maternity leave. When did the Government mandating things on business become "conservativism"???


8. "Trump employs many females and has two daughters." Great...not relevant to my point. Do Ideological Conservatives accept the idea that women are discriminated against on pay equity? Yes or No?

9. "Trump believes in independence and autonomy for the US, not a global dioctatorship." Cool. Does Trump blame George W. Bush for 9/11 happening? Yes or No? (video standing by). Does Trump blame Bush, Cheney, Wolfowitz, et al for LYING us into the Iraq War? Yes or No? (video standing by).

Are these the ideas of a "conservative" or more like those of somebody on the Left?


10. "Proof Putin killed anyone?" Unless you are a paid Russian blogger, or so cultishly devoted to Trump and his odd "bromance" with Putin.....what "conservative" would try to defend an ex-KGB Russian dictator, whose political opponents "just happen" to "die in fatal accidents"... as a "nice guy"???? Would Reagan do that???


11. "Weren't they?" Yes, except to the George Zimmerman fans on the Right who defend ANYBODY who shoots a black man or black teen. And those folks are Trump supporters.



12. "Self protection is not bigotry." What are you "protecting yourself from"? Be specific and list everything.


13. "He knows how to get things done, and IMO his methods will besurprising and less dependent on government than you think."

Does Trump know how things "get done" in the Federal Government? Does he (or you) imagine that he'll just say "Do this" and Congress will bow and scrap and say "Yes sir".....in other words, like it is in his private business where he is the CEO and everybody else are employees?

Does he (or you) understand the "separation of powers" as delineated in the U.S. Constitution?


14. "Trump chose a true conservative as vice president, which seems to me to counter all of this."

So who'll run the agenda under a "Trump Administration"? Trump or Mike Pence?

- - - Updated - - -

Did you notice that you didn't even try (as Merwen did to his credit)....to refute any of my points???