Pence
- Thread starter davidallen
- Start date
Sounds like far fetched utopianism to me.
Better to just install a dictator to keep the loonies in check. They don't know what's good for then anyway.
The Democrats aren't the party in power though. If the economic crashes, the party in power will get the electoral blame (especially if the head of that party is seen as incompetent and a bumbling fool).
No, far-fetched utopianism is the idea that political parties aren't going to seek electoral success within a representative democracy. That political parties should somehow become more like each other instead of presenting a viable electoral option to the people.
btw, we could easily have a discussion as to whether or we not we currently get viable electoral options presented to us.
So much froth, just because some one said that political parties exist for the purpose of politics.
Youve made no point other than support my assertion that yours is the dictatorial party while the repubs seem to have a bigger, more diverse tent.
Are you aware of that?
Sure I have. You apparently are just having a hard time keeping up with the conversation.
Would Trump have won the GOP nomination if he had maintained his pro-choice position? Or would Cruz have been the nominee?
Zing. @alphapoke, some one is stealing all your best lines.
Even though a few Repubs would have to vote along side Dems to actually force the impeachment, its not the Repubs talking impeachment. Not even McCain, who is really a War-mongering, pro-life Democrat, is the definition of establishment and I believe truly hates Trump after the 'not a hero' BS, is willing to say impeach". Impeachment will be associated with the Dems. And it will cause the market to fall. And thus any smart Republican (are there many left?) will immediately run on the platform that Dem's obstructionism is what is causing the economic consequences. There will always be partisan lines (why I explicitly stated the non-SJW Dems), but fighting Trump and being blamed for a market crash doesn't strike me as the way to win back the 'working-class' voter who has a decent job and a small 401k. The Dems also won't be able to run against Trump's record of not achieving his campaign promises or in improving the lives of the 'rust belt' because the Repubs will be able to clearly show that it was the Dems who obstructed those reforms or actions (rather than simply letting Trump fail on his own).
The new DNC chair said you can't be pro-life and a Democrat. One of the other candidates for the DNC chair said it's her job to shut other white people down. That doesn't sound like open and diverse arena of thought to me. I'll never register as a Republican, but they seem to have less rules to be a member these days.
Yes he would. Next.
How did your goosestepping party manage to keep Bernie from the top of the ticket?
Also, when is a small government, climate skeptic going to be nominated to anything on the dem side?
You apparently weren't born this morning, unlike comrade GL.
Yeah GL, tell me, when is the next time the Dems are going to nominate a Republican.
And a number of Democrats disagreed with him.
But again, I don't disagree that the Democrats are heavily pro-choice. Just as Republicans are heavily pro-life. That was what I was noting to begin with.
The market won't fall unless Republicans start talking about impeachment. Market won't react to the minority party fantasizing.
I think our chief disagreement is on how many non partisan voters there are.
I can tell you blaming the other party for obstruction is not a recipe for success.
In fact, between his superhuman focus on the pulse of voters, what drives them, what might cause them to vote a certain way, and your impeccable understanding of the binomial distribution, I fail to see why you can't expect to win both houses next cycle...or at least put them both in 50/50 play.
Probably when the Republicans nominates that openly pro-choice Republican for President.
You give your intellectual dishonesty away like its candy on Halloween.
Brad you are killing me with the zingers, ease up on me a little. I am going to call Tom Perez and see if we can start grooming Rubio or maybe even Fiorina for 2020, just to prove how open Democrats are once and for all.
Am I the only one who has no clue what is going on in this thread?
Brad you give your intellectual dishonesty away like the Republican nomination to pro-choice liberals.
He's the leader of the party and he believes himself to be a representative of Democrats. There were only a few that spoke out publicly against his statement, primarily Pelosi and Sanders.
Look around you. The party that claims to embrace diversity is doing everything but that lately.
Agreed. Not my best work, but sometimes you have to fight word salad with word salad.
Fair enough.
We are talking about predicting the future and we both know how fallible that process is. I'd be curious, what percentage of voters do you consider 'non-partisan'? I peg it about 12-15%. And I base that on the movement percentages needed to shift states like Pennsylvania and Michigan to the Republican camp. Also in the last election, Ohio went 8 points Red which if my memory servers was a 5 or 6 point shift from '12. The challenge with this is that the shifts fail to account for the absolute worst possible candidates (on both sides) running which may have decreased people's adherence to the 'party' vote and thus skew my estimates higher than reality.
GL has no idea how to stay on a topic to its conclusion.
Yeah, its a beating.
And Pilt, for some unknown reason, thinks that teaming up with GL is a good idea.
I need to know if Pence is becoming POTUS. I have a ton of pot stocks I need to dump if so. Thanks!!
