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.
I don't get the love for Tulsi Gabbard. She is for gun control, for 100% renewable energy, and is against nuclear and coal. She is not opposed to the Green New Deal - only has some "concerns about vagueness". Planned Parenthood loves her.
Her big claim to fame is that she bashed Obama for refusing to use the term "radical Islam" and came out against the Iran nuclear deal payments. She is pretty darn liberal when you get down to it.
Why some conservatives like her, I have no clue. So Trump worked with her. Big deal, Trump works with everybody. I mean, I wouldn't want Kim Jong-Un either but Trump worked with him.
I don't get the love for Tulsi Gabbard. She is for gun control, for 100% renewable energy, and is against nuclear and coal. She is not opposed to the Green New Deal - only has some "concerns about vagueness". Planned Parenthood loves her.
Her big claim to fame is that she bashed Obama for refusing to use the term "radical Islam" and came out against the Iran nuclear deal payments. She is pretty darn liberal when you get down to it.
Why some conservatives like her, I have no clue. So Trump worked with her. Big deal, Trump works with everybody. I mean, I wouldn't want Kim Jong-Un either but Trump worked with him.
Liberalism, like conservatism, mean different things to different people. I don’t know a single democrat who would support Gabbard or consider her “liberal”. And I don’t think going forward we will ever see a candidate for the opposite party being palatable to anyone. The closest I can think of a Republican that I could support would be John Kasich, someone the majority of Republicans despise. And even he is a tad too conservative for me. Most of the issues Republicans are most concerned with don ‘t concern me one bit (illegal immigration, limited government, 2nd amendment, abortion). So, it’s not necessarily even opposing opinions on many issues that keep us apart but, the issues we are focused on are not even the same as the opposite party. The country will remained fractured going forward, there is no end in site.
No. I do not support the Democratic Party's platform. I had been a Democrat, but the party changed to the point that I find them all repulsive.
At least on this forum, some of the staunchest modern-Republican voices have been self-identified former Democrats. I instead find myself moving in the opposite direction, from the opposite origin. My preference is a more "Establishment" Republican party... lower taxes and less regulation, but also free-trade, pro-immigration, pragmatic and internationalist.
For the purpose of hypothetical discussion, let's set aside any questioning of the legitimacy of the recent Democrat presidential win.
It seems like a lot of people are virulently opposed to Joe Biden becoming president for a variety of reasons. My question is this: imagine if the Democrats had run a different candidate for prez, and she or he had won. Who, if anyone, can you imagine in that position that you WOULD be basically okay with?
For an example from the other side of the political spectrum, had McCain defeated Obama in 2008, I would have regretted Obama's loss, but I wouldn't have feared for the country. I think McCain would have been a competent president even if I disagree with him about a lot of things. Or, more recently, out of Trump's Republican competitors I wouldn't really have minded if Marco Rubio or Mitt Romney had gotten the nod back in 2016 - again, I don't share many of their stances, but I think they want what's best for the country and aren't screw-ups.
Consider those who ran or could realistically have run in the Democratic primary - which of them could you, perhaps with teeth gritted a bit, embraced as US president? Or do you consider any Democrat win a grave loss for the nation?
I voted against the Democratic party, not Biden or Harris. Biden is harmless and Harris is a DINO. The Democratic party's platform is racist, sexist, and hateful. So no, I don't care who they put up as a candidate, I'm not voting for a Democrat until they move much, much closer to center and stop the insanity.
Democrats I would have seriously considered voting for over Trump:
Tulsi Gabbard
Michael Bloomberg
Deval Patrick
Michael Bennett
John Delaney
Steve Bullock
Also (didn’t run)
Joe Manchin
Jim Webb
Steve Beshear
Quote:
Originally Posted by tnff
Out of that limited group, Tulsi Gabbard seemed the least bad. Problem is, the Democrats have no one left who supports the basic things most Conservatives believe in. These really aren't difficult and should be controversial, but something gets lost in the translation between what Conservatives say and what Liberals hear.
a. Limited government
b. Citizens first
c. Support for all Amendments, including the 2nd.
d. Punish criminals, not honest people while providing a way for someone to return to honest society
e. Sanctity of innocent life.
f. Government aid should be a temporary hand up, not a lifestyle. Care for those who can't care for themselves, but the able bodied need to work for what they get.
g. Understand that we live in a real world, where not everyone gets a trophy
h. Stop calling everyone who disagrees with you a racist/sexist/misogynist/homophobic/bigoted hater.
The last Democrat President I could consider voting for would be JFK, but I was only a tiny thing when he was President.
THIS!!!!!
__________________
When I post in bold red that is moderator action and, per the TOS, can only be discussed through Direct Message.
I voted against the Democratic party, not Biden or Harris. Biden is harmless and Harris is a DINO. The Democratic party's platform is racist, sexist, and hateful. So no, I don't care who they put up as a candidate, I'm not voting for a Democrat until they move much, much closer to center and stop the insanity.
I find it hopeful, in light of the "woefully divided America" narrative we're currently being fed, that most people can name at least one or two prominent members of the opposite party that they find reasonably agreeable.
Out of that limited group, Tulsi Gabbard seemed the least bad. Problem is, the Democrats have no one left who supports the basic things most Conservatives believe in. These really aren't difficult and should be controversial, but something gets lost in the translation between what Conservatives say and what Liberals hear.
a. Limited government
b. Citizens first
c. Support for all Amendments, including the 2nd.
d. Punish criminals, not honest people while providing a way for someone to return to honest society
e. Sanctity of innocent life.
f. Government aid should be a temporary hand up, not a lifestyle. Care for those who can't care for themselves, but the able bodied need to work for what they get.
g. Understand that we live in a real world, where not everyone gets a trophy
h. Stop calling everyone who disagrees with you a racist/sexist/misogynist/homophobic/bigoted hater
a)Do you find that the modern Republican party really promotes A, though? It seems to me that both Democrats and Republicans are in favor of a big and/or powerful federal government, just in different domains, which has led to ongoing expansion. It'd be nice to have a viable national libertarian party to help check that tendency.
b)What does this mean to you in practical terms?
c)Speaking as a flaming liberal, I'm in favor of this. (Unless the 2nd Amendment is modified, which it won't be anytime soon, I agree that significant restrictions on gun ownership are unconstitutional. What I WOULD like to see is everyone being held accountable for what happens with their guns. If someone fails to secure their weapon, or lends/sells a weapon without due diligence, and that weapon is used in the commission of the crime, they should be considered accessories, IMO.) I'd like to see 1, 6, 8, 15 and 24 in particular be more respected by government bodies and get more public support.
d)I think maybe the disconnect here is what should be considered a crime, rather than whether criminals should be prosecuted?
e)I don't think either party has an ideologically consistent stance in this area, really.
f)I don't think many Democrats would disagree with you. Different people might disagree about how much assistance is necessary, in what forms, and for whom.
g)How do you see this playing out in practical terms in national politics?
h)Sure, it'd be very helpful to check the name-calling, demonizing, and broad-brushing all around, I think.
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.
