RupertKBD Posted Tuesday at 08:36 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 08:36 PM 21 minutes ago, Sabrefan1 said: Roll your eyes all you want but the Republicans will only put up with him to a point. If re-elected, he will be exposed to removal. The Democrats want him gone and every single one of them would vote against him. That would only leave the need for a handful of angry Republicans to join them. Then we would have to deal with a President Vance. Trump in a second term is in a weakened position. He can't afford to anger even half of his own party. All of that may be true, but why on earth would you risk it, when there is an alternative, who while not perfect, is also not a danger? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuckin_futz Posted Tuesday at 08:36 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 08:36 PM 1 minute ago, Sabrefan1 said: They tolerated him for 2 months post-election knowing that removing him would only hurt their party. They tried everything that they could to stop him from getting nominated this time around. How? By eagerly endorsing him the instant he declared his candidacy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabrefan1 Posted Tuesday at 08:37 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 08:37 PM 1 minute ago, DSVII said: My high level though on American civics is that the government is always tilted between the Jeffersonian (Decentralized power / governors) and Hamiltonian (Federalist and Centralizing / Executive power) philosophies. I feel we're seeing the foundation set for a hard swing towards the Federalist ideology to a degree I don't recall for a while. The SCOTUS for instance is firmly being activist on this one and overreaching past their mandate. A MAGA Congress and Senate I just don't trust to not interpret all the parts of the constitution in favor of the executive, as we just saw with the Immunity case on the SCOTUS part. You aren't totally wrong. The SCOTUS will change the US far more than a 2nd Trump term will. I'd like to explore this train of thought with you, but I'm falling behind on my replies and notifications. Raincheck? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DSVII Posted Tuesday at 08:37 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 08:37 PM Just now, Sabrefan1 said: You aren't totally wrong. The SCOTUS will change the US far more than a 2nd Trump term will. I'd like to explore this train of thought with you, but I'm falling behind on my replies and notifications. Raincheck? For sure, the Federalist papers is still on my reading list so you're probably more knowledgeable than me on this front. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabrefan1 Posted Tuesday at 08:40 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 08:40 PM Just now, nuckin_futz said: How? By eagerly endorsing him the instant he declared his candidacy? The Republicans endorsed DeDufus for the most part and after he fell, they endorsed Haley until she fell. They only endorsed Trump once he was the last one standing. Heck there are Republicans coming out saying that they won't vote for him even now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RupertKBD Posted Tuesday at 08:42 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 08:42 PM 20 minutes ago, Sabrefan1 said: Trump isn't loved by Republicans, he's tolerated. Unless he becomes a useful fool, and not just a regular fool, he can be in danger of removal. Change that to "feared" and you've got something. They had the perfect opportunity to be rid of him (the 2nd Impeachment) and they chickened out, because they were afraid of his base. Trump is in zero danger from Republicans, because they're all spineless cowards. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabrefan1 Posted Tuesday at 08:42 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 08:42 PM 2 minutes ago, DSVII said: For sure, the Federalist papers is still on my reading list so you're probably more knowledgeable than me on this front. When you do get a fair sense of them, either PM me or start a discussion here. I would enjoy a deep dive on the history and possible future of the US government. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabrefan1 Posted Tuesday at 08:45 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 08:45 PM Just now, RupertKBD said: Change that to "feared" and you've got something. They had the perfect opportunity to be rid of him (the 2nd Impeachment) and they chickened out, because they were afraid of his base. Trump is in zero danger from Republicans, because they're all spineless cowards. Sadly, I can't argue the spineless cowards point because I agree. I don't think they all fear his base, just the deep red ones. If Trump were to damage their party, I think they could cobble enough together to remove him. Remember that this is the party that the sad sack of crap named Paul Ryan, called "the family" when he was in office. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuckin_futz Posted Tuesday at 08:45 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 08:45 PM 3 minutes ago, Sabrefan1 said: The Republicans endorsed DeDufus for the most part and after he fell, they endorsed Haley until she fell. They only endorsed Trump once he was the last one standing. Heck there are Republicans coming out saying that they won't vote for him even now. Don't think so, most of them endorsed no one for fear of angering Trump and having him send his gang of violent weirdos their way. You do not honestly recall a plurality of Republican congress members endorsing someone other than Trump? I suspect your memory of events may be a tad faulty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satchmo Posted Tuesday at 08:46 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 08:46 PM Proof for our amphibian friend that politicians CAN change their views and backtrack while pursuing higher office. JD Vance got a former professor to delete a blog post Vance wrote in 2012 attacking GOP over anti-immigrant rhetoric A week after President Barack Obama won reelection in November 2012, JD Vance, then a law student at Yale, wrote a scathing rebuke of the Republican Party’s stance on migrants and minorities, criticizing it for being “openly hostile to non-whites” and for alienating “Blacks, Latinos, [and] the youth.” Four years later, as Vance considered a career in GOP politics, he asked a former college professor to delete the article. That professor, Brad Nelson, taught Vance at Ohio State University while Vance was an undergraduate student. After Vance graduated, Nelson asked him to contribute to a blog he ran for the non-partisan Center for World Conflict and Peace. Nelson told CNN that during the 2016 Republican primary he agreed to delete the article at Vance’s request, so that Vance might have an easier time getting a job in Republican politics. However, the article, titled “A Blueprint for the GOP,” remains viewable on the Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine. https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/17/politics/jd-vance-delete-2012-blog-post-attacking-gop-anti-immigrant-rhetoric/index.html 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabrefan1 Posted Tuesday at 08:48 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 08:48 PM Just now, nuckin_futz said: Don't think so, most of them endorsed no one for fear of angering Trump and having him send his gang of violent weirdos their way. You do not honestly recall a plurality of Republican congress members endorsing someone other than Trump? I suspect your memory of events may be a tad faulty. Possibly. What I remember is the party throwing it's weight behind DeDufus and then Haley. Then after Trump beat those 2, he removed the people in the RNC that opposed him and installed his DIL and other sycophants. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuckin_futz Posted Tuesday at 08:50 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 08:50 PM Just now, Sabrefan1 said: Possibly. What I remember is the party throwing it's weight behind DeDufus and then Haley. Then after Trump beat those 2, he removed the people in the RNC that opposed him and installed his DIL and other sycophants. Then after he beat them? He didn't even have to debate them he was practically anointed. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabrefan1 Posted Tuesday at 08:52 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 08:52 PM 16 minutes ago, nuckin_futz said: History says you're wrong. Cute and cheap reputation mining post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuckin_futz Posted Tuesday at 08:53 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 08:53 PM Just now, Sabrefan1 said: Cute and cheap reputation mining post. It's the truth. History repeats. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabrefan1 Posted Tuesday at 08:53 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 08:53 PM 2 minutes ago, nuckin_futz said: Then after he beat them? He didn't even have to debate them he was practically anointed. He was literally the last one standing. It came down to him and Harris in the end. The same thing with Harris. She was the last and only one standing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RupertKBD Posted Tuesday at 08:54 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 08:54 PM 5 minutes ago, Satchmo said: Proof for our amphibian friend that politicians CAN change their views and backtrack while pursuing higher office. JD Vance got a former professor to delete a blog post Vance wrote in 2012 attacking GOP over anti-immigrant rhetoric A week after President Barack Obama won reelection in November 2012, JD Vance, then a law student at Yale, wrote a scathing rebuke of the Republican Party’s stance on migrants and minorities, criticizing it for being “openly hostile to non-whites” and for alienating “Blacks, Latinos, [and] the youth.” Four years later, as Vance considered a career in GOP politics, he asked a former college professor to delete the article. That professor, Brad Nelson, taught Vance at Ohio State University while Vance was an undergraduate student. After Vance graduated, Nelson asked him to contribute to a blog he ran for the non-partisan Center for World Conflict and Peace. Nelson told CNN that during the 2016 Republican primary he agreed to delete the article at Vance’s request, so that Vance might have an easier time getting a job in Republican politics. However, the article, titled “A Blueprint for the GOP,” remains viewable on the Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine. https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/17/politics/jd-vance-delete-2012-blog-post-attacking-gop-anti-immigrant-rhetoric/index.html Great post, Satch....but the stickler in me really wants you to change that to "Reptilian friend" ..... 1 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabrefan1 Posted Tuesday at 08:55 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 08:55 PM Just now, nuckin_futz said: It's the truth. History repeats. It will go even worse for MAGA if they try something so stupid again. It won't just be one of them that gets shot in the head. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuckin_futz Posted Tuesday at 08:58 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 08:58 PM 1 minute ago, Sabrefan1 said: It will go even worse for MAGA if they try something so stupid again. It won't just be one of them that gets shot in the head. Do the Gravy Seals strike you as introspective people? The reason they failed is they weren't heavily armed. They're smart enough to figure that one out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DSVII Posted Tuesday at 08:59 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 08:59 PM The best candidate Russia and China could ask for. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabrefan1 Posted Tuesday at 09:02 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 09:02 PM 1 minute ago, nuckin_futz said: Do the Gravy Seals strike you as introspective people? The reason they failed is they weren't heavily armed. They're smart enough to figure that one out. I'm fairly empathetic, but I will not shed a tear if they are stupid enough to try again and suffer the consequences as a result. The National Guard will mow them down if they come heavily armed. Hopefully they are too cowardly to try something so self destructive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
24K Posted Tuesday at 09:03 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 09:03 PM 3 minutes ago, DSVII said: The best candidate Russia and China could ask for. What! This is like corruption in the open. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabrefan1 Posted Tuesday at 09:04 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 09:04 PM 2 minutes ago, DSVII said: The best candidate Russia and China could ask for. Oh Good God.... I once said he reminded me of Dan Quayle, but Dan Quayle may actually have a libel case against me now. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satchmo Posted Tuesday at 09:04 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 09:04 PM 7 minutes ago, RupertKBD said: Great post, Satch....but the stickler in me really wants you to change that to "Reptilian friend" ..... I've used that one before but I really don't like to repeat myself (unless forced to by someone who does nothing but repeat themselves). Thought amphibian would do this time. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuckin_futz Posted Tuesday at 09:05 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 09:05 PM 1 minute ago, Sabrefan1 said: I'm fairly empathetic, but I will not shed a tear if they are stupid enough to try again and suffer the consequences as a result. The National Guard will mow them down if they come heavily armed. Hopefully they are too cowardly to try something so self destructive. If they're dumb enough to show up again (and we both know they are) just turn water cannons on them. See how dedicated they are in freezing weather being soaking wet/frozen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuckin_futz Posted Tuesday at 09:05 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 09:05 PM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.