Eating Their Own

[Ibanez]

He didn't hold back, did he? Honest question - Is there a future for non MAGA politicians in the current GOP? Will MAGA eventually become their own party? Does it remain a faction like the Tea Party. And this isn't a dig at you, so please don't take it that way - but do you even call yourself a Republican after Trump?

I consider myself more of a conservative, America 1st, populist than a Republican.

Gotcha. I'm more fiscal conservatives and social liberal.

Let's not spend money for no reason and leave me the fuck alone (and in turn, i'll leave you alone.)

Oh...and i've evolved on this - pro-life. Life is life - let's not kill babies or prisoners.

[kalm]

I consider myself more of a social conservative, America 1st, populist than a Republican.

I added social in there for you. Populism and fiscal conservatism don't align very well.

I’m a populist liberal.

[BDKJMU]

I consider myself more of a conservative, America 1st, populist than a Republican.

Gotcha. I'm more fiscal conservatives and social liberal.

Let's not spend money for no reason and leave me the fuck alone (and in turn, i'll leave you alone.)

Oh...and i've evolved on this - pro-life. Life is life - let's not kill babies or prisoners.

-I agree as long as it doesn't force me to take an action, or recognize something. I shouldn't be punished for an inaction. Mostly should be left up to the states.
-Agree, but get rid of Roe V Wade, & leave it up to the states...
-I'll go with not killing prisoners only if the alternative is not normal life in prison, but hard labor in lieu of the death penalty..Should be left up to the states.

Basically unless it is specifically mentioned in the Constitution, like 1A and 2A, leave it up to the states. I realize hard labor in lieu of the death penalty could run afoul of 8A/prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment.

[BDKJMU]

I consider myself more of a social conservative, America 1st, populist than a Republican.

I added social in there for you. Populism and fiscal conservatism don't align very well.

They can align, though.

[UNI88]

I added social in there for you. Populism and fiscal conservatism don't align very well.

They can align, though.

If you supported the Trump tax cuts you're a FCNO (or more affectionately a FuCkNO).

[BDKJMU]

They can align, though.

If you supported the Trump tax cuts you're a FCNO (or more affectionately a FuCkNO).

Tax cuts don't mean less revenue if growth is spurred, (as was the case 2017-2019), and govt tax revenue has increased every year under Trump, even with the China virus.
https://www.thebalance.com/current-u-s- ... ue-3305762
The government has a spending problem, not a revenue problem, and that's my biggest criticism of Trump (2017-2019, 2020 partially gets a pass due to the virus).

[BDKJMU]

registered Republicans.

87% view Trump favorably.
12% view Trump unfavorably.
36% view McConnell favorably.
51% view McConnell unfavorably.
The poll was conducted after the end of Trump’s second impeachment trial, but before he issued a statement ripping the Senate GOP leader

https://www.newsmax.com/politics/poll-r ... d/1010430/
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/rqqxdo2ujy/ ... Report.pdf

[UNI88]

If you supported the Trump tax cuts you're a FCNO (or more affectionately a FuCkNO).

Tax cuts don't mean less revenue if growth is spurred, (as was the case 2017-2019), and govt tax revenue has increased every year under Trump, even with the China virus.
https://www.thebalance.com/current-u-s- ... ue-3305762
The government has a spending problem, not a revenue problem, and that's my biggest criticism of Trump (2017-2019, 2020 partially gets a pass due to the virus).

So has the size of the deficit which is concerning to a true fiscal conservative.

[BDKJMU]

Tax cuts don't mean less revenue if growth is spurred, (as was the case 2017-2019), and govt tax revenue has increased every year under Trump, even with the China virus.
https://www.thebalance.com/current-u-s- ... ue-3305762
The government has a spending problem, not a revenue problem, and that's my biggest criticism of Trump (2017-2019, 2020 partially gets a pass due to the virus).

So has the size of the deficit which is concerning to a true fiscal conservative.

Hence the too much govt spending..

[BDKJMU]

I consider myself more of a cultural conservative, America 1st, populist than a Republican.

I added social in there for you. Populism and fiscal conservatism don't align very well.

And I’ll tale that social out, and add in cultural. There’s a difference.

[UNI88]

[UNI88]

This would be a costly mistake for progressives

The progressive organization No Excuses PAC is seeking to find primary opponents for Democratic senators Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, both of whom are up for reelection in 2024, Politico reported. Some progressives are frustrated with the unwillingness of Manchin and Sinema, among the most conservative Democrats in the Senate, to abolish the filibuster, which would make easier the passage of President Joe Biden's legislative agenda.

The notion of replacing them with Democrats who will more actively support progressive ideas may be appealing at first, but it is a colossally stupid idea that would be a gift to the Republicans. The reason for this is simple; both Manchin and Sinema would be extremely difficult to defeat in a primary, but any candidate who beat them from the left in a primary would almost certainly lose in a general election to the Republican.

[Winterborn]

This would be a costly mistake for progressives

The progressive organization No Excuses PAC is seeking to find primary opponents for Democratic senators Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, both of whom are up for reelection in 2024, Politico reported. Some progressives are frustrated with the unwillingness of Manchin and Sinema, among the most conservative Democrats in the Senate, to abolish the filibuster, which would make easier the passage of President Joe Biden's legislative agenda.

The notion of replacing them with Democrats who will more actively support progressive ideas may be appealing at first, but it is a colossally stupid idea that would be a gift to the Republicans. The reason for this is simple; both Manchin and Sinema would be extremely difficult to defeat in a primary, but any candidate who beat them from the left in a primary would almost certainly lose in a general election to the Republican.

Which means they will try to do it.

[Winterborn]

Gotcha. I'm more fiscal conservatives and social liberal.

Let's not spend money for no reason and leave me the fuck alone (and in turn, i'll leave you alone.)

Oh...and i've evolved on this - pro-life. Life is life - let's not kill babies or prisoners.

There are certain crimes (against kids or mass murder) that I am perfectly fine with a trial and then hanged if found guilty. This is one area I have not developed a grey area and am much more black and white.

[kalm]

This would be a costly mistake for progressives

The progressive organization No Excuses PAC is seeking to find primary opponents for Democratic senators Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, both of whom are up for reelection in 2024, Politico reported. Some progressives are frustrated with the unwillingness of Manchin and Sinema, among the most conservative Democrats in the Senate, to abolish the filibuster, which would make easier the passage of President Joe Biden's legislative agenda.

The notion of replacing them with Democrats who will more actively support progressive ideas may be appealing at first, but it is a colossally stupid idea that would be a gift to the Republicans. The reason for this is simple; both Manchin and Sinema would be extremely difficult to defeat in a primary, but any candidate who beat them from the left in a primary would almost certainly lose in a general election to the Republican.

It may be strategically stupid for the Democratic establishment but on issues like the minimum wage, they are both non-populist.

[UNI88]

This would be a costly mistake for progressives

It may be strategically stupid for the Democratic establishment but on issues like the minimum wage, they are both non-populist.

Huh? How do the Democrats pass a progressive agenda if they lose either or both of those seats? Trying to primary them shows that they're prioritizing ideological purity over actual results. Kind of like MAGAts with Justin Amash and others. They're two sides of the same coin.

[SDHornet]

It may be strategically stupid for the Democratic establishment but on issues like the minimum wage, they are both non-populist.

Huh? How do the Democrats pass a progressive agenda if they lose either or both of those seats? Trying to primary them shows that they're prioritizing ideological purity over actual results. Kind of like MAGAts with Justin Amash and others. They're two sides of the same coin.

Funny thing is Sinema and Manchin will vote with D's on about 90% of the time. Primarying them doesn't look like a good use of campaign dollars.

[houndawg]

Huh? How do the Democrats pass a progressive agenda if they lose either or both of those seats? Trying to primary them shows that they're prioritizing ideological purity over actual results. Kind of like MAGAts with Justin Amash and others. They're two sides of the same coin.

Funny thing is Sinema and Manchin will vote with D's on about 90% of the time. Primarying them doesn't look like a good use of campaign dollars.

Manchin will switch parties before his term is up

[kalm]

It may be strategically stupid for the Democratic establishment but on issues like the minimum wage, they are both non-populist.

Huh? How do the Democrats pass a progressive agenda if they lose either or both of those seats? Trying to primary them shows that they're prioritizing ideological purity over actual results. Kind of like MAGAts with Justin Amash and others. They're two sides of the same coin.

What about my post is confusing to you? You DONT think it’s strategically stupid? Fighting against $15 IS populist?

Amash took a stand on principle. Like you and I, he recognizes the bullshit of political theater.

What you refer to as a purity movement in this case, is controlled by establishment Dems and supported by a majority of Americans. Christ...Florida passed an incremental $15 raise similar to what’s being proposed nationally.

[UNI88]

Huh? How do the Democrats pass a progressive agenda if they lose either or both of those seats? Trying to primary them shows that they're prioritizing ideological purity over actual results. Kind of like MAGAts with Justin Amash and others. They're two sides of the same coin.

What about my post is confusing to you? You DONT think it’s strategically stupid? Fighting against $15 IS populist?

Amash took a stand on principle. Like you and I, he recognizes the bullshit of political theater.

What you refer to as a purity movement in this case, is controlled by establishment Dems and supported by a majority of Americans. Christ...Florida passed an incremental $15 raise similar to what’s being proposed nationally.

You're the one that brought populism into the argument and I'm not sure how it has anything to do with whether attempting to primary Manchin would be colossally stupid or not. I tend to support reason and thought over populism. Populism gave us Trump. Do you want another Trump? Or will the next Trump be ok because they will be a progressive populist?

It is strategically stupid. But the only way the purity movement is controlled by establishment Dems is if AOChe and her allies are establishment Dems. They're the ones considering primarying Manchin because they see him as a roadblock to their agenda. They're right he is. But he has a much better chance than a more progressive candidate of beating a Rep in the general election. Do they want Manchin supporting some of their agenda or a Rep supporting almost none of it?

[kalm]

What about my post is confusing to you? You DONT think it’s strategically stupid? Fighting against $15 IS populist?

Amash took a stand on principle. Like you and I, he recognizes the bullshit of political theater.

What you refer to as a purity movement in this case, is controlled by establishment Dems and supported by a majority of Americans. Christ...Florida passed an incremental $15 raise similar to what’s being proposed nationally.

You're the one that brought populism into the argument and I'm not sure how it has anything to do with whether attempting to primary Manchin would be colossally stupid or not. I tend to support reason and thought over populism. Populism gave us Trump. Do you want another Trump? Or will the next Trump be ok because they will be a progressive populist?

It is strategically stupid. But the only way the purity movement is controlled by establishment Dems is if AOChe and her allies are establishment Dems. They're the ones considering primarying Manchin because they see him as a roadblock to their agenda. They're right he is. But he has a much better chance than a more progressive candidate of beating a Rep in the general election. Do they want Manchin supporting some of their agenda or a Rep supporting almost none of it?

Populism is an abused term. I know it’s difficult but if you strip away the partisan meanings it’s just a term to describe popular sentiments of the hoi poloi. There are large groups of economically and politically disenchranchised voters on both sides that share some common ground...probably more common ground than is recognized. The cynic in me says that’s intentional. Manchin and Sinema are driven to maintain the established wealth and power dynamic.

Change is hard. So is democracy...er I mean populism.

[kalm]

You're the one that brought populism into the argument and I'm not sure how it has anything to do with whether attempting to primary Manchin would be colossally stupid or not. I tend to support reason and thought over populism. Populism gave us Trump. Do you want another Trump? Or will the next Trump be ok because they will be a progressive populist?

It is strategically stupid. But the only way the purity movement is controlled by establishment Dems is if AOChe and her allies are establishment Dems. They're the ones considering primarying Manchin because they see him as a roadblock to their agenda. They're right he is. But he has a much better chance than a more progressive candidate of beating a Rep in the general election. Do they want Manchin supporting some of their agenda or a Rep supporting almost none of it?

Populism is an abused term. I know it’s difficult but if you strip away the partisan meanings it’s just a term to describe popular sentiments of the hoi poloi. There are large groups of economically and politically disenchranchised voters on both sides that share some common ground...probably more common ground than is recognized. The cynic in me says that’s intentional. Manchin and Sinema are driven to maintain the established wealth and power dynamic.

Change is hard. So is democracy...er I mean populism.

I annoyed even myself with this post.

[AZGrizFan]

Populism is an abused term. I know it’s difficult but if you strip away the partisan meanings it’s just a term to describe popular sentiments of the hoi poloi. There are large groups of economically and politically disenchranchised voters on both sides that share some common ground...probably more common ground than is recognized. The cynic in me says that’s intentional. Manchin and Sinema are driven to maintain the established wealth and power dynamic.

Change is hard. So is democracy...er I mean populism.

I annoyed even myself with this post.

i would think so.

[UNI88]

Populism is an abused term. I know it’s difficult but if you strip away the partisan meanings it’s just a term to describe popular sentiments of the hoi poloi. There are large groups of economically and politically disenchranchised voters on both sides that share some common ground...probably more common ground than is recognized. The cynic in me says that’s intentional. Manchin and Sinema are driven to maintain the established wealth and power dynamic.

Change is hard. So is democracy...er I mean populism.

I annoyed even myself with this post.

Good. Are you done mansplaining to me what populism is?

Are Manchin and Sinema "driven to maintain the established wealth and power dynamic" or are they representing the voters of their state whose interests and priorities might be very different from those of the voters that AOChe represents in New York City?

Are you deflecting from the reality that primarying Manchin or Sinema will in all likelihood restrict the ability to implement progressive ideas. Do pseudo-progressives want to implement their ideas or are they content to talk about how great they are and lament their inability to make them happen because the rest of the country isn't evolved enough? Agitating is easy, working within the frameworks of our Republic to pass legislation can be hard and takes thought and effort.

[kalm]

I annoyed even myself with this post.

Good. Are you done mansplaining to me what populism is?

Are Manchin and Sinema "driven to maintain the established wealth and power dynamic" or are they representing the voters of their state whose interests and priorities might be very different from those of the voters that AOChe represents in New York City?

Are you deflecting from the reality that primarying Manchin or Sinema will in all likelihood restrict the ability to implement progressive ideas. Do pseudo-progressives want to implement their ideas or are they content to talk about how great they are and lament their inability to make them happen because the rest of the country isn't evolved enough? Agitating is easy, working within the frameworks of our Republic to pass legislation can be hard and takes thought and effort.

What’s polling like for increasing the minimum wage? Were they elected only as awesome independent individuals or did they get support from the party who is pushing for the increase? Where does their campaign funding come from or do you actually believe these are simply principled stands in the best interest of their constituents?

I already acknowledged the short term danger of a primary fight. That’s a party’s problem. A non-partisan view should be what’s in the best long term interests for the people. Similar to renewable energy and socialized medicine, fighting against a liveable wage is fighting the inevitable. It’s simply how long before we get there.

FTR, I think there’s merit to tying the wage to cost of living and means testing. The ultimate problem lies with too many people relying on minimum wage jobs to support a family. When they can’t, the tax payers still pick up the bill.