Is the GOP a dead party?

If you didn't have an opportunity to follow the primary there was an entire #nevertrump movement and there still is you read national review, weekly standard and other assorted conservatives.

There were five democrats on this board who claimed to support Bernie yet there was almost zero, if any, discussions here between Bernie and Hillary supporters.

No comparison, and no valid analogy.

Clinton and Sanders were legitimate, qualified, articulate politicians with experience in the Senate, Secretary of State, and the House of Representatives.

The Democratic Party did not attempt to nominate a deranged, incurious, pussy grabbing, Reality TV star.

The Democrats would never nominate somebody like Trump, but hypothetically even if they did, you would have seen a lot of publically horrified liberals.
 
No comparison, and no valid analogy.

Clinton and Sanders were legitimate, qualified, articulate politicians with experience in the Senate, Secretary of State, and the House of Representatives.

The Democratic Party did not attempt to nominate a deranged, incurious, pussy grabbing, Reality TV star.

The Democrats would never nominate somebody like Trump, but hypothetically even if they did, you would have seen a lot of publically horrified liberals.

A socialist like sanders was qualified? Qualified for what? He's been in Congress for how long and the extent of his foreign policy was "I didn't vote for the Iraq War."

The fact he did as well as he did just showed how disliked Hillary was among democrats
 
A socialist like sanders was qualified? Qualified for what? He's been in Congress for how long and the extent of his foreign policy was "I didn't vote for the Iraq War."

The fact he did as well as he did just showed how disliked Hillary was among democrats

So your argument is that a seasoned US Senator with years of experience on critical committees, both as Chair and Ranking Member was no more qualified than a reality show host??? :0) Could that possibly be your argument???

What does Sanders being a socialist have to do with anything?
 
So your argument is that a seasoned politician with experience was no more qualifies than a reality show host???

What does Sanders being a socialist have to do with anything?

Did I say a word about Trump?

Socialism is a failed economic model. No socialist will be president of the u.s. That Bernie got as much support as he did shows how disliked Hillary was
 
A socialist like sanders was qualified? Qualified for what? He's been in Congress for how long and the extent of his foreign policy was "I didn't vote for the Iraq War."

The fact he did as well as he did just showed how disliked Hillary was among democrats

I really find it hard to believe that you would even attempt to draw equivalency between U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders, and deranged, pussy-grabbing Reality TV star Donald Drumpf.
 
Did I say a word about Trump?

Socialism is a failed economic model. No socialist will be president of the u.s. That Bernie got as much support as he did shows how disliked Hillary was

:0) No you didn't, Cypress did.

You responded by attacking Sanders qualifications .. never said a word about Trump's complete lack of any qualifications.

Your programming tells you that socialism is a failure .. while socialism in on center stage as healthcare that your side just can't figure out. Just too fucking hard .. for your side.

Socialism .. you mean as in it being the only thing keeping millions of American seniors ALIVE?

The socialism of Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and a variety of related services to the elderly .. which one day you will be. You mean that failed system? :0)

I can imagine you in the not too distant future .. talking shit about socialism .. as you're walking to the mailbox to get your Social Security check. :0)

Good luck with that.
 
I really find it hard to believe that you would even attempt to draw equivalency between U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders, and deranged, pussy-grabbing Reality TV star Donald Drumpf.

It's late at night so maybe I'm not reading correctly what I wrote but can you please show me where I said anything about Trump?
 
:0) No you didn't, Cypress did.

You responded by attacking Sanders qualifications .. never said a word about Trump's complete lack of any qualifications.

Your programming tells you that socialism is a failure .. while socialism in on center stage as healthcare that your side just can't figure out. Just too fucking hard .. for your side.

Socialism .. you mean as in it being the only thing keeping millions of American seniors ALIVE?

The socialism of Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and a variety of related services to the elderly .. which one day you will be. You mean that failed system? :0)

I can imagine you in the not too distant future .. talking shit about socialism .. as you're walking to the mailbox to get your Social Security check. :0)

Good luck with that.

I've made my feelings about Trump quite well known. I don't need to continually repeat them. Having elements of socialism is not the same as being a socialist society. Ad you yourself have said Bernie would have been destroyed in the general election because while his message my work well to people getting high in a hippie drum circle a socialist will not run this country.

And regarding S.S. the chances are high it won't be around when I retire so your senario won't exist
 
No comparison, and no valid analogy.

Clinton and Sanders were legitimate, qualified, articulate politicians with experience in the Senate, Secretary of State, and the House of Representatives.

And they stand for a bunch of stuff middle America is against and are against a bunch of stuff middle America is for. Thus they were rejected...for an idiot. A lot of people didn't vote "for" Trump but they voted against your "legitimate, qualified, articulate politicians with experience in the Senate, Secretary of State, and the House of Representatives" candidates.

The Democratic Party did not attempt to nominate a deranged, incurious, $&@#% grabbing, Reality TV star.

The Democrats would never nominate somebody like Trump, but hypothetically even if they did, you would have seen a lot of publically horrified liberals.

No, but democrats consistently nominate people who are identified by their most vocal constituents marching in the streets dressing like what Trump said he grabbed or by those with those trying to change those organs to outies or visa versa.

Seriously, I haven't voted "for" a candidate for president since George Bush the first time around.
 
Did I say a word about Trump?

Socialism is a failed economic model. No socialist will be president of the u.s. That Bernie got as much support as he did shows how disliked Hillary was

That's why he won Oklahoma. Why I voted for him.
 
I've made my feelings about Trump quite well known. I don't need to continually repeat them. Having elements of socialism is not the same as being a socialist society. Ad you yourself have said Bernie would have been destroyed in the general election because while his message my work well to people getting high in a hippie drum circle a socialist will not run this country.

And regarding S.S. the chances are high it won't be around when I retire so your senario won't exist

I never said anything like that about Sanders. In fact I clearly said that I don't consider him a real socialist .. as most socialists don't. I never said nor intimated that he couldn't run the country because he's a socialist.

The more you talk about socialism, the less you know about it. It's like you just got introduced to the concept yesterday. I'll try to help you again ..

Socialism is an economic system, NOT a political system. It does not have to govern everything. It blends easily within a variety of political systems, including ours.

I'm a democratic socialist .. the democratic side being the political system I support .. the socialist side is the economic system I support with a capitalist environment. Yes, socialism also blends easily within a capitalist environment.

You're looking for Fidel Castro .. but he ain't here .. nor does he have to be for socialism to thrive in a capitalist democracy.

AND, if SS isn't around when you need it .. well, you're A REPUBLICAN .. so if it isn't there, you've got yourself to blame.

If up to democrats, it will always be there.
 
And they stand for a bunch of stuff middle America is against and are against a bunch of stuff middle America is for. Thus they were rejected...for an idiot. A lot of people didn't vote "for" Trump but they voted against your "legitimate, qualified, articulate politicians with experience in the Senate, Secretary of State, and the House of Representatives" candidates.

:0) and how did that turn out?

Obviously ' a lot of people' should have been smarter.

No, but democrats consistently nominate people who are identified by their most vocal constituents marching in the streets dressing like what Trump said he grabbed or by those with those trying to change those organs to outies or visa versa.

Your side just elected a buffoonish clown with no experience nor qualifications whatsoever .. a clown who represents racists and white supremacists .. and your argument is what?

Seriously, I haven't voted "for" a candidate for president since George Bush the first time around.

Says a lot.
 
I never said anything like that about Sanders. In fact I clearly said that I don't consider him a real socialist .. as most socialists don't. I never said nor intimated that he couldn't run the country because he's a socialist.

The more you talk about socialism, the less you know about it. It's like you just got introduced to the concept yesterday. I'll try to help you again ..

Socialism is an economic system, NOT a political system. It does not have to govern everything. It blends easily within a variety of political systems, including ours.

I'm a democratic socialist .. the democratic side being the political system I support .. the socialist side is the economic system I support with a capitalist environment. Yes, socialism also blends easily within a capitalist environment.

You're looking for Fidel Castro .. but he ain't here .. nor does he have to be for socialism to thrive in a capitalist democracy.

AND, if SS isn't around when you need it .. well, you're A REPUBLICAN .. so if it isn't there, you've got yourself to blame.

If up to democrats, it will always be there.

S.S. is an unsustainable system at its current level and the numbers bear that out. The idea that we can just raise taxes to cover it, print money via the Fed and still achieve necessary economic growth is a false one.
 
:0) and how did that turn out?

Obviously ' a lot of people' should have been smarter.



Your side just elected a buffoonish clown with no experience nor qualifications whatsoever .. a clown who represents racists and white supremacists .. and your argument is what?



Says a lot.

His side? You mean LR being a Democrat? Well Trump is a democrat so...
 
His side? You mean LR being a Democrat? Well Trump is a democrat so...

He said he last voted for Bush, doesn't appear to think much of democrats .. yes, his side.

.. and hell no. Trump is a republican .. the ONLY people stupid enough to make that asshole president.

NOBODY would elect that stench BUT republicans.
 
His side? You mean LR being a Democrat? Well Trump is a democrat so...

I would love to vote for Dan Boren again. I have proudly voted for democrats all my life. I voted for four democrats last November...and one republican. Well, at least he was running as a republican.
 
And they stand for a bunch of stuff middle America is against and are against a bunch of stuff middle America is for. Thus they were rejected...for an idiot. A lot of people didn't vote "for" Trump but they voted against your "legitimate, qualified, articulate politicians with experience in the Senate, Secretary of State, and the House of Representatives" candidates.



No, but democrats consistently nominate people who are identified by their most vocal constituents marching in the streets dressing like what Trump said he grabbed or by those with those trying to change those organs to outies or visa versa.

Seriously, I haven't voted "for" a candidate for president since George Bush the first time around.

Sorry, I can't take you seriously if you thought a lecherous, pussy grabbing Reality TV star should be trusted with the office of the Presidency.

Not even sure what you are saying. There is far more on the line here than anyone's resentments against Hillary Clinton, or a single seat on the Supreme Court. The office of the Presidency, needs, requires, and demands having someone of competence, gravitas, intelligence, and capability. Everything your orange pussy grabbing Reality TV star is not.

If you voted for George Bush - undeniably one of the worst five presidents this country has ever had - and followed that vote up with a vote for a deranged Reality TV star, in my opinion your judgement on who should be a President is seriously impaired. Your resume contains votes for some of the absolute worst Presidents this country has ever seen.
 
Back
Top