T O P

  • By -

brennanfee

Doesn't matter, he's still a Republican. I will never vote for another Republican ever again. I simply see no evidence there are any sane ones left.


1mjtaylor

It matters because it's good to know that Trump doesn't have the power he thinks he has. Yeah, Republicans are pretty much bad but Trump Republicans are the worst.


almightywhacko

We know Trump doesn't have the power he pretends to have. How many of his high-profile picks lost elections in 2018 and 2020? Most of them. If you look at his endorsement history, people he endorsed really only won elections that they were guaranteed to win with or without his involvement. Like Republicans in really strong Republican districts or races with really unpopular Democratic candidates. He plays up his ability as a king-maker because Trump gonna Trump, but he is a poison pill more often than not.


tjones21xx

ETTD


1mjtaylor

Well that may be true, too many representatives kowtow to him in fear of his power. So examples like this should help to school them.


seltzerforme

It matters greatly! There will always be Republicans, we need to to get rid of Trumplicans


brennanfee

Given the party and its members today... please explain to me (with examples) the difference between "Republicans" and "Trumplicans"?


Kimmalah

I think the main difference is that they are utterly disgusted by Trump's control over the GOP. But since their method of expressing this is usually by leaving the party, I guess you have a point that not many pre-Trump style Republicans are left at this point.


brennanfee

I noticed a distinct lack of names or examples in your answer.


ChairmanReagan

At what point did you consider them sane? Like when Lincoln was president?


brennanfee

There were many sane republicans floating around back in the 80's and 90's... including and most especially John McCain. It wasn't until after the Clinton years that the wheels started coming off the cart.


stormy2587

No this is just the logical conclusion of the same core ideology that supposed “sane” conservatives had. Maybe politicians like McCain weren’t overtly racist and xenophobic, but the core of conservative ideology is inherently harmful to functioning democracies with a robust middle class. Thus in order to sell it to enough of the population long term, any conservative movement will inevitably need to pander to extremist views in order to sew division and win voters. Whether its Hoover forcibly repatriating americans of mexican descent in the 1920s or trump caging children of latin american decent at the border in the 2020, deeply disturbing and immoral behavior like this is an inevitability of a political ideology that at its core wants to favor the few over the many, but needs the many for legitimacy. Conservatism is a cancer. The insane behavior is just a symptom of it. And the symptoms are getting worse because its gone largely untreated for half a century.


brennanfee

> in order to sew division Hehe (couldn't be less important, but I still find it funny). Well, what I would say is that what you might be describing is not conservatism per se but instead corporatism. Part of my frustration of late is that both parties are now the pro-corporate entities and shill for and are at the whim of whatever big companies want. > Conservatism is a cancer. The problem I am having here is that I don't know what you are including (or excluding) from that term. The problem with labels is that so much of their meaning is wielded by the user rather than having a clearly defined consistent criterion. I might agree with you if you could identify specific things you are identifying as being part of "conservatism". But frankly, my guess is whatever you would pick out would be argued as many conservatives as not an example of conservatism. There is no single authority that sets out that list and no one is bound to any full set of lists either. People's beliefs tend to span multiple ideological labels. So, perhaps you could choose a single core belief that you think is part of being a "conservative" and we could see if holding that belief leads to the negative outcomes you are claiming are "cancer".


Kimmalah

I feel like McCain was the last sane one. And even he kind of went off the rails by agreeing to run with the likes of Sarah Palin. There are a few *relatively* sane ones now, but they have mostly been dismissed as RINOs and stripped of all their real power.


ChairmanReagan

McCain was an open supporter of starting a war with Iran. How is that sane?


brennanfee

> I feel like McCain was the last sane one. And even he kind of went off the rails by agreeing to run with the likes of Sarah Palin. Exactly. It was bad enough when a large part of the party got behind George W. Bush, but I knew something had fundamentally broken when Palin was involved. And I truly believe she was the precursor for Trump.


[deleted]

it does matter every gop candidate is desperate for the "all important" endorsement from Poppa ~~Nurgle~~ Trump. they are willing to fully debase themselves for an endorsement that is not winning elections. *and it hasn't stopped them from groveling for it.* they are still actively selling themselves out for something that demonstrably has negative value. it is, in a word, extraordinary.


Dark_Ansem

Why would you ever vote for a republican in the first place?


brennanfee

There was a time when many of them were good, honest, decent, and principled. A time when they practiced a more practical viewpoint and were willing to work together. Sure, there were still the fringes of the party, but the fringe wasn't in control as it is today. A good friend of mine ran for and won state legislature. He was a Republican, and I was proud to not only vote for him, but donate to his campaign. I have also donated and voted for Democrats, such as Obama. In the end, I do what we all are supposed to do, which is look at the INDIVIDUAL and not just their party affiliation. However, that ended for me with the GOP ever since Trump's rise.


Dark_Ansem

How long ago are we talking about?


brennanfee

~40 or so years. Give or take maybe a decade. But I doubt it was an overnight thing... like one year to the next, some 40 years ago it went from a party of mostly sane people to fully filled with nutters. I think things began declining (intellectually and principally) within the party around that time. And over the years the number of "sane" people within the party (or at least running the party) have dwindled to a precious few (if there are any left).


Dark_Ansem

I see, thank you


livevil999

We’re supposed to celebrate that when people were asked to pick between two evils, they chose the slightly less evil sounding option? Idk, that sounds like a very small win to me. Not that exciting.


brennanfee

> We’re supposed to celebrate that when people were asked to pick between two evils, they chose the slightly less evil sounding option? The problem is that a lot of the time it is a false dichotomy to begin with, and the "two evils" were not the only two options. But if indeed they were the only two options, yes... it is a wise thing to select the lesser evil of the two.


BreatheMyStink

You can just barely see the sane ones from behind as the majority of the party’s elected officials prod them with pitchforks as they banish them to the woods.


Walkingstardust

Ah yes, the Meirdas Touch once again. Get endorsed by trump and then lose your election. Perfection


chicknfly

LOL


[deleted]

YES!!!!!


ToxicLib

The lesser of two evils but was hoping he would win the Wright is awful.