|
|
Post by impulse on Feb 11, 2019 18:04:05 GMT -5
Speaking as a registered Independent who lives in a "battleground" state and tends to lean a hair to the right of center but who isn't stuck on that side (and who has a spouse who is about the same), we won't vote for a Progressive Democrat candidate, no matter how bad Trump is, because we can't get behind their proposals and politics. We'll vote third party or we'll stay home, and the Dems will lose two votes in a state that they desperately need to win in order to retake the White House in 2020. Respectfully, it is disheartening to hear that disagreeing with a few policies that are unlikely to go into effect any time soon if ever would dissuade you from voting out this charlatan. Let's get the country back from the career criminal and then go back to debating progressive versus conservative approaches for the country. |
|
The Captain
CCF Mod Squad
Posts: 4,916 
Member is Online
|
Post by The Captain on Feb 11, 2019 18:27:45 GMT -5
Speaking as a registered Independent who lives in a "battleground" state and tends to lean a hair to the right of center but who isn't stuck on that side (and who has a spouse who is about the same), we won't vote for a Progressive Democrat candidate, no matter how bad Trump is, because we can't get behind their proposals and politics. We'll vote third party or we'll stay home, and the Dems will lose two votes in a state that they desperately need to win in order to retake the White House in 2020. Respectfully, it is disheartening to hear that disagreeing with a few policies that are unlikely to go into effect any time soon if ever would dissuade you from voting out this charlatan. Let's get the country back from the career criminal and then go back to debating progressive versus conservative approaches for the country. A big piece of it for me is that I don't want the Progressives emboldened and thinking that people are actually voting FOR them and their agenda rather than AGAINST Trump. If a Progressive Dem were to run and win, then we'd get more of them in the future, leaving us moderates out of the process completely as each side tacks harder to the edges to see who can take the most extreme positions. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2019 20:13:17 GMT -5
Speaking as a registered Independent who lives in a "battleground" state and tends to lean a hair to the right of center but who isn't stuck on that side (and who has a spouse who is about the same), we won't vote for a Progressive Democrat candidate, no matter how bad Trump is, because we can't get behind their proposals and politics. We'll vote third party or we'll stay home, and the Dems will lose two votes in a state that they desperately need to win in order to retake the White House in 2020. Respectfully, it is disheartening to hear that disagreeing with a few policies that are unlikely to go into effect any time soon if ever would dissuade you from voting out this charlatan. Let's get the country back from the career criminal and then go back to debating progressive versus conservative approaches for the country. And if the situation were reversed would you vote Republican for an ultraconservative? |
|
|
|
Post by impulse on Feb 12, 2019 11:56:32 GMT -5
Well, first, none of the current candidates are ultraprogressive, so the comparison isn't precise. This is nothing new thematically from the last 100 years or so, but I digress.
Second, if the Democratic party were as nakedly corrupt as the Republicans have been for decades, and if the Democratic president was a literal criminal and fraud under credible investigation for colluding with a foreign nation against American interests, was ripping apart families and not tracking the kids, embarrassing our nation on the world stage, had all of his closest advisers and cabinet members being systematically indicted and pleading guilty for crimes, and who was ripping apart policies and regulations that helped insure a habitable planet for my children to inherit, then yes, I would vote for a principled conservative candidate who in good faith was trying to help America. If you could find one in that current batch of scumbags.
I have a longtime friend who is a lifelong Republican who voted for Obama twice and Hillary in 2016 because "these people need to be stopped." I would like to think I would do the same if the situation were reversed.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2019 12:58:00 GMT -5
Well, first, none of the current candidates are ultraprogressive, so the comparison isn't precise. Second... yes, I would vote for a principled conservative candidate who in good faith was trying to help America. If you could find one in that current batch of scumbags.I have a longtime friend who is a lifelong Republican who voted for Obama twice and Hillary in 2016 because "these people need to be stopped." I would like to think I would do the same if the situation were reversed. First. That is from your viewpoint. From a conservative viewpoint several of them are too far left. We see things differently. If you can't see that so be it.
Second. Please re-read the tenor of your posts. What I take from that point is you don't believe that any conservatives are "principled" and worthy of your vote. Maybe I'm wrong & if so I apologize. The last statement also turns me off right away. And you aren't the only one that does this. The name calling of those whose viewpoints differ from yours invalidates any point you try to make even if I agree with you. And again I didn't mean to single you out it's just that you are one a few that has interacted in good faith.
Third. If that is how he decided to work out his personal beliefs good for him. I chose a different route. Neither approach is wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Feb 12, 2019 14:16:21 GMT -5
I am always a bit bemused when commentators castigate the Democrats for being "far-left" and using the term "progressive" as if it were just a notch above mother-f***er on the vulgarity scale.
It may be redundant to mention any of this, but let's recall just a bit of what progressives of both parties have fought to give everyone in this country, from antitrust legislation to standards regulating the production and sale of food and drugs to civil rights legislation, voting rights, protection of workers' rights, the environmental protection movement, national parks, public works, equitable tax laws, the interstate highway system, consumer protection, Medicare, Social Security and unemployment insurance.
None of these is considered socialistic any more, though when the first hints of Progressivism appeared in the late 1890s (when America sure was great), they were seen as signs of the Apocalypse, the descent of the republic into socialism, and further reason to expand the principle of social Darwinism into every aspect of American life. Thank the extremists for much of what we take for granted as our birthright here.
The cry that "both sides" are in thrall to their extreme wings strikes me as self-deluding. The extreme right is hardly the equivalent of what those who call for moderation seem to think is the extreme left, which seems to be the likes of Sanders, AOC, and Elizabeth Warren. Contrast them with the Freedom Caucus crowd like Jim Jordan, Kevin McCarthy, Louie Gohmert, and their ilk.
Are the left-wingers in the Democratic party calling for exclusion as a guiding principle of civic and cultural life in America? That is the calling card and the rallying cry of the GOP now.
Whom do you see as "moderates" in the House and Senate: McConnell? The late unlamented Paul Ryan? Romney? Steve Scalise? Mick Mulvaney? How far to their left would/will they move on issues like health care, religious rights, LGBTQ rights, the problems of privatization, voting rights, public education, clean energy, climate change, and the proper role of government in the life of the commonwealth?
Even Steve Schmidt, a conservative commentator whose eloquence I have been moved by more than once, and an outspoken foe of Trumpism, has already run to support Howard Schultz, another celebrity businessman who thinks that because he brought overpriced designer coffee to the masses, will now lead us all, the benighted, to the Promised Land. This is not moderation, this is regressivism.
Ragging about the usual straw men -- the nanny state, crushing regulations, political correctness -- is a lazy way to avoid dealing with knotty, complex problems. That kind of challenge should be the lifeblood of governing and politics. Good luck getting the GOP to do more than sneer as a public response to anything they don't want to deal with.
At what point does the onus for movement from their entrenched position shift to those who seem dead-set on dragging the country back to the Gilded Age? When do we at last admit that we have problems deeply embedded in our culture that we can only paper over for so long? Confusing liberalism and progressivism with totalitarianism and equating the left with the right are at best avoidance techniques.
It's like the guy whose doctor tells him that his PSA score is steadily inching up and instead of opting for a biopsy finds refuge in the doctor's saying, "Well,we can also just keep an eye on it."
Remember how St. Paul felt about lukewarm Christians...
|
|
|
|
Post by impulse on Feb 12, 2019 14:17:48 GMT -5
Well, first, none of the current candidates are ultraprogressive, so the comparison isn't precise. Second... yes, I would vote for a principled conservative candidate who in good faith was trying to help America. If you could find one in that current batch of scumbags.I have a longtime friend who is a lifelong Republican who voted for Obama twice and Hillary in 2016 because "these people need to be stopped." I would like to think I would do the same if the situation were reversed. First. That is from your viewpoint. From a conservative viewpoint several of them are too far left. We see things differently. If you can't see that so be it.
Second. Please re-read the tenor of your posts. What I take from that point is you don't believe that any conservatives are "principled" and worthy of your vote. Maybe I'm wrong & if so I apologize. The last statement also turns me off right away. And you aren't the only one that does this. The name calling of those whose viewpoints differ from yours invalidates any point you try to make even if I agree with you.
Third. If that is how he decided to work out his personal beliefs good for him. I chose a different route. Neither approach is wrong.
I mean, I can understand if they are too progressive for your tastes, but they are not radically left by an objective global standard. Also, I'm sorry if you are seeing hostile tenor in my posts. I certainly didn't intend any. Also, yes, you are wrong.  I did not state conservative cannot be principled, but I do feel the current elected officials in the Republican party are largely and demonstrably morally bankrupt. Time and time again, they choose self-serving greed, party-over-country, they obstruct, they break or change the rules, they play dirty, they by their votes and records do not care about me or my family, many of in bed with Russian money by way of NRA. It's astounding the open corruption these days, and I will call these folks scumbags all day long. I never said or implied it is not possible for conservatives to be principled. These guys just aren't that. I make a particular and distinct point not to name-call people for disagreeing with me. I am calling these folks scumbags because they are being scumbags. You are disagreeing with me, and I don't think you're a scumbag. I do think you are being as unfair to me as you think I am being to you, though, by saying my arguments are invalidated because you think I am just insulting people for disagreeing. I apologize if I have misunderstood you, as well. Also, I promise I am trying to find a way to explain my next point as clearly as I can without sounding hostile or anything. I'm not able to find the words, so if you pick up any tone, please accept my word that it is not intended. It is very frustrating, though, to see so many discussions on these serious issues get distracted by arguing over civil discourse, etc. I am coming at this from the perspective of a millennial (technically, and only just barely), but it is genuinely frightening seeing the dire warnings coming out from scientists about the very real threat of climate change being ignored by our country. The sitting president has open contempt for climate change and has constantly repealed regulations that protect the environment. Insects are dying off at massive levels, so many signs we need to change. Children ripped from their parents arms at our border while trying to seek asylum. Like, from my perspective, the survival of the world and the soul of our nation are literally at stake. What are my children (still young) going to inherit? All this is going on, and it is so indescribably frustrating to hear "Well, you had kind of a tone in your last comment, so I am going to ignore everything you just said." Like, oh, I'm sorry it's sometimes hard to be perfectly calm all the time while people who will be long dead before it boils over are screwing up the planet to make a buck. I am not saying that is what you are personally doing, but it feels that way very often in these types of things. I feel like the time to prioritize civility above all and do moderate business as usual has long since passed, and insisting on this is dangerously misunderstanding the stakes, and Trump and McConnell aren't the ones who are going to have to live with the consequences of what they do. Sorry for the essay, and no hostility intended. I do not intend to offend anyone here, but I am very worried for the world my kids are going to grow up into, and it's really frightening seeing how many people do not seem to see it. |
|
|
|
Post by impulse on Feb 12, 2019 14:29:42 GMT -5
I am always a bit bemused when commentators castigate the Democrats for being "far-left" and using the term "progressive" as if it were just a notch above mother-f***er on the vulgarity scale. It may be redundant to mention any of this, but let's recall just a bit of what progressives of both parties have fought to give everyone in this country, from antitrust legislation to standards regulating the production and sake of food and rugs to civil rights legislation, voting rights, protection of workers' rights, the environmental protection movement, national parks, public works, equitable tax laws, the interstate highway system, consumer protection, Medicare, Social Security and unemployment insurance. None of these is considered socialistic any more, though when the first hints of Progressivism appeared in the late 1890s (when America sure was great), they were seen as signs of the Apocalypse, the descent of the republic into socialism, and further reason to expand the principle of social Darwinism into every aspect of American life. Thank the extremists for much of what we take for granted as our birthright here. The cry that "both sides" are in thrall to their extreme wings strikes me as self-deluding. The extreme right is hardly the equivalent of what those who call for moderation seem to think is the extreme left, which seems to be the likes of Sanders, AOC, and Elizabeth Warren. Contrast them with the Freedom Caucus crowd like Jim Jordan, Kevin McCarthy, Louie Gohmert, and their ilk. Are the left-wingers in the Democratic party calling for exclusion as a guiding principle of civic and cultural life in America? That is the calling card and the rallying cry of the GOP now. Whom do you see as "moderates" in the House and Senate: McConnell? The late unlamented Paul Ryan? Romney? Steve Scalise? Mick Mulvaney? How far to their left would/will they move on issues like health care, religious rights, LGBTQ rights, the problems of privatization, voting rights, public education, clean energy, climate change, and the proper role of government in the life of the commonwealth? Even Steve Schmidt, a conservative commentator whose eloquence I have been moved by more than once, and an outspoken foe of Trumpism, has already run to support Howard Schultz, another celebrity businessman who thinks that because he brought overpriced designer coffee to the masses, will now lead us all, the benighted, to the Promised Land. This si not moeration, this is regressivism. Ragging about the usual straw men -- the nanny state, crushing regulations, political correctness -- is a lazy way to avoid dealing with knotty, complex problems. That kind of challenge should be the lifeblood of governing and politics. Good luck getting the GOP to do more than sneer as a public response to anything they don't want to deal with. At what point does the onus for movement from their entrenched position shift to those who seem dead-set on dragging the country back to the Gilded Age? When do we at last admit that we have problems deeply embedded in our culture that we can only paper over for so long? Confusing liberalism and progressivism with totalitarianism and equating the left with the right are at beat avoidance techniques. It's like the guy whose doctor tells him that his PSA score is steadily inching up and instead of opting for a biopsy finds refuge in the doctor's saying, "Well,we can also just keep an eye on it." Remember how St. Paul felt about lukewarm Christians... I wish I could like your post more than once. Very well-articulated and eloquent. |
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Feb 12, 2019 14:44:37 GMT -5
Thank you, impulse; the feeling's mutual. Have to keep fighting the good fight. |
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Feb 12, 2019 15:49:18 GMT -5
Charles Pierce always says it better than I ever could. Re the perception that "the left" is extreme socialistic Bolshevism and so far from the mainstream that it's already in the Abyss of Insanity: "In case it's eluded these lost and wandering conservative knights errant (Steve Schmidt, Erick Erickson, et al.), the 'rational center' — indeed, the center itself — has been moving under their feet this whole time. Senator Professor Warren's wealth tax is polling in the 70s, and it's polling in the high 50s among declared Republicans. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's 70 percent top marginal rate also is very popular. So, naturally, the response has to be to support a wealthy buffoon who wants us to call billionaires "people of means." If that's the 'rational center,' let's all buy oversized shoes and red rubber noses." www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a26288100/never-trump-conservatives-donald-trump-republican-party/ |
|
The Captain
CCF Mod Squad
Posts: 4,916
Member is Online
|
Post by The Captain on Feb 12, 2019 16:24:25 GMT -5
md62 - piece of friendly advice, but walk away, because you cannot win. You're not likely to get an honest debate, because some posters (not all, mind you, but most) already have their minds made up about what is right and wrong; their position is right, and your position is wrong, regardless of how valid your argument may be. You will be dog-piled and told how everything even remotely conservative is bad and evil, and how everything liberal/progressive is virtuous and good. They're fighting "the good fight", and because they've framed it as a moral battle and have already claimed the high ground, it's an absolute losing proposition for you. Rather than frustrate yourself and possibly write something that you're going to regret, just leave the thread alone for a while (if not forever). I've done it myself a few times over the years, and it's definitely saved some friendships and probably kept me from being banned, either temporarily or permanently. To my friends on the "left" side of the discussion, I apologize if I've offended any of you with my writing above. Others have commented in the past that this isn't a healthy environment for open and honest discussion, but rather an echo chamber for the "left", and while maybe I've put on blinders and ignored that because I sit in a more neutral position, this seems to be moving to be almost hostile to even moderates. I just don't want to see this thread devolve into some of the disgusting nastiness that it has in the past, because it had a negative effect on the entire community, and I see the best way to make a persuasive argument to him is to be as honest with him as possible about the realities of this thread and how it operates as I see it (and my perspective is only my opinion and may not be wholly accurate). Again, I'm sorry if I've offended anyone, and if you have taken offense to what I've written, please PM me so we can work this out person-to-person rather than in the thread in a public way. Thanks, Richard
|
|
|
|
Post by Pharozonk on Feb 12, 2019 16:46:01 GMT -5
Sad to see you leave the discussion, Richard. Your input is always valuable in any discussions in this thread.
Let's make sure to keep it civil here folks from here on out. We don't want to turn this into a place where people don't feel comfortable sharing their views out of fear of being dogpiled.
|
|
|
|
Post by impulse on Feb 12, 2019 16:54:50 GMT -5
You're not likely to get an honest debate, because some posters (not all, mind you, but most) already have their minds made up about what is right and wrong; their position is right, and your position is wrong, regardless of how valid your argument may be. You will be dog-piled and told how everything even remotely conservative is bad and evil, and how everything liberal/progressive is virtuous and good. It is interesting how when we disagree with you, our minds are made up and we are just spewing vitriol and hate, but when you disagree with us you're having an honest debate in good faith and making valid arguments.  I'm curious how you think your post is not doing exactly what you are accusing left leaning posters here of doing? Did you read the recent posts by Prince Hal and myself? I don't mean that to be insulting. I just cannot understand how you could have and then responded with this? I know this thread has gotten quite ugly in the past, but unless someone is going out of their way to feel persecuted, it's been pretty darn civil I would say considering how heated politics can get. I will agree that no one is likely to change their political opinions based on an internet thread, but I for one find the discussion interesting, but every time there is the slightest bit of passion or friction, half the folks here pick up their ball and go home. Everyone likes to talk about how terrible it is to live in society where political correctness has run amok, but I feel like I have to tiptoe on eggshells just to have a conversation here sometimes. No wonder it's a bit of an echo chamber. Richard, I think your heart was in the right place, but I think your post is one-sided and unfair. Literally everything you said could very easily be applied to a lot of conservative voices these days, too, but I don't think that sentiment is anywhere near as prevalent here as elsewhere. Maybe I'm just used to more blunt people elsewhere, but everything seems pretty pleasant here, LOL. Personally, I think it is good to have an actual conservative representation in government. While I am more progressive, it is good to have a balance of ideas because any ideology left to its own devices can go off the rails. |
|
Roquefort Raider
CCF Mod Squad
Modus omnibus in rebus
Posts: 17,419
Member is Online
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Feb 12, 2019 17:07:08 GMT -5
(...) To my friends on the "left" side of the discussion, I apologize if I've offended any of you with my writing above. You never do, Cap; you're always polite, respectful, and use sound and cogent arguments. I, for one, always appreciate what you have to say. If all conservatives and progressives had the same general open-minded approach to politics, there would be no problem on Capitol Hill. |
|
The Captain
CCF Mod Squad
Posts: 4,916
Member is Online
|
Post by The Captain on Feb 12, 2019 17:15:08 GMT -5
You're not likely to get an honest debate, because some posters (not all, mind you, but most) already have their minds made up about what is right and wrong; their position is right, and your position is wrong, regardless of how valid your argument may be. You will be dog-piled and told how everything even remotely conservative is bad and evil, and how everything liberal/progressive is virtuous and good. It is interesting how when we disagree with you, our minds are made up and we are just spewing vitriol and hate, but when you disagree with us you're having an honest debate in good faith and making valid arguments. I'm curious how you think your post is not doing exactly what you are accusing left leaning posters here of doing? Did you read the recent posts by Prince Hal and myself? I don't mean that to be insulting. I just cannot understand how you could have and then responded with this? I know this thread has gotten quite ugly in the past, but unless someone is going out of their way to feel persecuted, it's been pretty darn civil I would say considering how heated politics can get. I will agree that no one is likely to change their political opinions based on an internet thread, but I for one find the discussion interesting, but every time there is the slightest bit of passion or friction, half the folks here pick up their ball and go home. Everyone likes to talk about how terrible it is to live in society where political correctness has run amok, but I feel like I have to tiptoe on eggshells just to have a conversation here sometimes. No wonder it's a bit of an echo chamber. Richard, I think your heart was in the right place, but I think your post is one-sided and unfair. Literally everything you said could very easily be applied to a lot of conservative voices these days, too, but I don't think that sentiment is anywhere near as prevalent here as elsewhere. Maybe I'm just used to more blunt people elsewhere, but everything seems pretty pleasant here, LOL. Personally, I think it is good to have an actual conservative representation in government. While I am more progressive, it is good to have a balance of ideas because any ideology left to its own devices can go off the rails. I started to write a response, but I deleted it and will just say that you and I view how this thread runs very differently, and I will leave it at that in the public forum. I'll take any discussion you want to have into a PM, but I'm not doing it here. |
|
I did not state conservative cannot be principled, but I do feel the current elected officials in the Republican party are largely and demonstrably morally bankrupt. Time and time again, they choose self-serving greed, party-over-country, they obstruct, they break or change the rules, they play dirty, they by their votes and records do not care about me or my family, many of in bed with Russian money by way of NRA. It's astounding the open corruption these days, and I will call these folks scumbags all day long. I never said or implied it is not possible for conservatives to be principled. These guys just aren't that.
I'm curious how you think your post is not doing exactly what you are accusing left leaning posters here of doing? Did you read the recent posts by Prince Hal and myself? I don't mean that to be insulting. I just cannot understand how you could have and then responded with this? 
