Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Let me ask you this. What republican do you think should be next in the white house.
Unlike liberals and Democrats, I don't have a pre-selected candidate already "chosen." I reserve my choice after hearing those vying for the position speak to their platform. Conversely, Democrats and liberals could care less that Hillary Clinton is an ethically corrupt carpetbagger with nary an accomplishment that even remotely makes her a good candidate for President. You folks are already slobbering over her and you can't even explain why.
That's the difference between me, a logical, thoughtful and deliberative conservative, and liberals who are short on logic thoughtfulness and long on emotion and knee jerk history-making.
The logic of a Republican: "Since the House will be Republican-controlled, put a Republican President in the White House after Obama". Absolutely pathetic.
Forget the fact that were Republicans NOT controlling the House, President Obama's policies would take effect and have a far greater positive impact than they do now. Forget the fact that Bush demonstrated that Republicans don't know how to run an economy so it benefits all, not just the rich. Forget the fact that Republicans blow up the deficit, warmonger, spend in ways that benefit the rich only. Republican policies simply don't work. Putting a Republican in the White House, doesn't mean that Republican policies sudenly work.
Even with a Republican-controlled House, the country does better with a Dem President than with a Republican President. Republican control of any branch of government drags the country down. The Republican-controlled House will be short-lived, beginning with the 2016 elections.
No, it does not mean that.
We each in our respective districts and States vote for Representatives & Senators.
Collectively it means nothing.
You can't put it all down to gerrymandering, which both parties strive for.
Exactly. The poster has nary an understanding of packing and cracking. "More democratic votes" nationwide does NOT mean that American's wanted a Democratic candidates to win. It merely means that, within a district, there are more Democrat-voting constituents. Districts are not macro. And that's the whole point of having a district, and thus gerrymandering!
The logic of a Republican: "Since the House will be Republican-controlled, put a Republican President in the White House after Obama". Absolutely pathetic.
Forget the fact that were Republicans NOT controlling the House, President Obama's policies would take effect and have a far greater positive impact than they do now. Forget the fact that Bush demonstrated that Republicans don't know how to run an economy so it benefits all, not just the rich. Forget the fact that Republicans blow up the deficit, warmonger, spend in ways that benefit the rich only. Republican policies simply don't work. Putting a Republican in the White House, doesn't mean that Republican policies sudenly work.
Even with a Republican-controlled House, the country does better with a Dem President than with a Republican President. Republican control of any branch of government drags the country down. The Republican-controlled House will be short-lived, beginning with the 2016 elections.
Actually, that's not the logic at all in the OP. But, I won't waste my time spelling the logic out for you. You're too blinded by your ideology to actually comprehend it.
Every time I read one of these threads I am always amazed at the obtuseness of those who accuse the Republicans of obstructionism.
Why is it that Democrats (at all levels) always seem to believe that Republicans should just go along with any of the proposals brought forth by the Democratic leadership?
I don't see Democrats do that when a Republican legislature/executive is dominant.
There's a reason for the phrase "loyal opposition".
Is the OP trying to say we should just go ahead and elect a Republican president because the House will be Republican controlled? No thank you.
That is all the more reason to make sure a Democrat is in the White House. The veto pen will keep the most egregious Tea Party crap from infecting the country.
Every time I read one of these threads I am always amazed at the obtuseness of those who accuse the Republicans of obstructionism.
Why is it that Democrats (at all levels) always seem to believe that Republicans should just go along with any of the proposals brought forth by the Democratic leadership?
I don't see Democrats do that when a Republican legislature/executive is dominant.
There's a reason for the phrase "loyal opposition".
Compromise requires some give and some take. It would apper the Republicans of the last several years do not play in that ballpark.
I would think we all need some resolution of the illegal immigration problem. Both sides appeared to hit some reasonable accommodation in the Senate but ran into a brick wall in the house. The house basically refused anything that involved anything more than increased enforcement.
Similarly ACA was not going away but could have been improved in a number of areas with some inter party cooperation. But that was impossible to the House Republicans.
So, while the Democrats are certainly not free of guilt it would appear that much of the potential progress is blocked by the right wing of the Republicans in the house.
Compromise requires some give and some take. It would apper the Republicans of the last several years do not play in that ballpark.
I would think we all need some resolution of the illegal immigration problem. Both sides appeared to hit some reasonable accommodation in the Senate but ran into a brick wall in the house. The house basically refused anything that involved anything more than increased enforcement.
Similarly ACA was not going away but could have been improved in a number of areas with some inter party cooperation. But that was impossible to the House Republicans.
So, while the Democrats are certainly not free of guilt it would appear that much of the potential progress is blocked by the right wing of the Republicans in the house.
The skeletons are more powerful than her coattails.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Hillary > any Republican
Absolutely pathetic.
