Republicans

[Rens]

It's lovely to be forgiving (in the church) but the apostle warns against putting a novice in high office (within the church) and against appointing a man who has not managed his family well (how many wives?) and who has no scandal attached to himself (that bus recording is a scandal as is the tax dodging). How did the Republicans not know of all the scandals before they chose Donald Trump as their Candidate? His public statements are recorded on TV and Audio media, surely they were examined in the vetting process before he was selected as candidate?

That's about church. I wouldn't want him nor Hillary as a church leader.

 

[psalms 91]

Healthcare is silly at the moment but Obamacare seems to have done little more than take a bad situation and make it worse.

From the figures I've personally seen it has done little more than pile requirements onto policies to make them "qualifying", cause the price to more than double in three years (with 40-50% increases projected for 2017) and then throw taxpayer money at it to bring the premiums down again. What's so great about a system that drives prices up and then throws public money at it to subsidize the prices for some? It's little more than diverting taxes into the pockets of insurance companies.

You are making my case for a complete government takeover of the system in order to control costs

 

[tango]

You are making my case for a complete government takeover of the system in order to control costs

If you really think that a government takeover will control costs you obviously haven't experienced government-run healthcare, UK style. The levels of managerial incompetence would blow your mind. The levels of waste are shocking.

 

[Josiah]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0oMbwWqceNw


Anyone who has ever been to the DMV has a good indication of what "government operated" looks like. If you want going to the doctor to be like going to the DMV, vote Democrat.




.

 

[tango]

If you really think that a government takeover will control costs you obviously haven't experienced government-run healthcare, UK style. The levels of managerial incompetence would blow your mind. The levels of waste are shocking.

At a managerial level an email that came into my possession highlighted some of the most spectacular bungling I'd seen in a while. In one single event a power failure caused the UPS to fail (the UPS being the thing that's not supposed to fail when the power dies) and in turn 75% of the "resilient" storage units failed. So they were really sorry but couldn't make any payments by the due date but hoped to be back on track within a fortnight.

At a local level a friend in his 20s wanted an appointment to see his doctor because he was worried about the chest pains he was having. Sorry, nothing available for two weeks.

Also at a local level, trying to get an appointment to see the doctor only to find that they don't book them ahead of time, you have to call on the day. Needless to say there's nothing available today, so call back first thing (8am tomorrow). At 8am the receptionist said she couldn't book an appointment until 9am, and at 9am the receptionist said she was really sorry but all the appointments were already booked. Then eventually you get an appointment only for the doctor to suggest a followup appointment in two weeks but, sorry, you can't book it for two weeks time, you have to call on the day.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Anyone who has ever been to the DMV has a good indication of what "government operated" looks like. If you want going to the doctor to be like going to the DMV, vote Democrat.

Government operated works well. In Australia the government operates main roads, most hospitals, elections, statistics, tax collection, social security, midicare, pensions, unemployment payments, schools, street lighting, the military, border control, immigration and naturalisation, the post office, mail delivery, police, quarantine services, ... and they all work rather well.

 

[Josiah]

Government operated works well. In Australia

PERHAPS in Australia, but the USA is not Australia, is it? I made no comment about Australia for one reason: I'm not Australian and I don't know that the Republican Party or the Democrat extends to Australia.

 

[tango]

Government operated works well. In Australia the government operates main roads, most hospitals, elections, statistics, tax collection, social security, midicare, pensions, unemployment payments, schools, street lighting, the military, border control, immigration and naturalisation, the post office, mail delivery, police, quarantine services, ... and they are work rather well.

Government operated only works well when the government is competent to do it. To say "it works" or "it doesn't work" as if it were a universal truth makes no sense. Some things really need to be left to central government (military being one obvious example) and some things may be better done locally.

 

[Highlander]

If people who vote republican are worried that H R Clinton is corrupt or incompetent then why didn't they choose a candidate who was not corrupt and who was competent instead of the error prone dishonest candidate that they did choose?

I have a question. Why would you waste good cyberspace by asking such an invalid, silly question? People are not worried that Hillary might be corrupt or incompetent. She IS corrupt AND incompetent. She is one of the most evil human beings ever to walk the soil of the United States of America.

A lot of stuff is coming down on the Clintons now. Fox News is reporting some extreme developments in the FBI investigations, and it could end Hillary's campaign just as the election draws near.

Fox is reporting that there is a 99% probability that up to FIVE enemy countries hacked into Hillary's illegal server -- according to the FBI.

FBI agents say there is a high probability that the new emails found on Weiner's laptop contain more classified documents, that an extreme pay to play -- compromising national security -- has taken place with the Clinton Crime Family Foundation.

Fox also says that FBI agents are working very hard toward an indictment on Hillary.

And, as an added bonus, this could very well go all the way up to the oval office.

And you talk about Trump -- who is NOT a career criminal like Hillary -- being corrupt?

Good question, but you applied it to the wrong candidate.

 

[Rens]

Government operated works well. In Australia the government operates main roads, most hospitals, elections, statistics, tax collection, social security, midicare, pensions, unemployment payments, schools, street lighting, the military, border control, immigration and naturalisation, the post office, mail delivery, police, quarantine services, ... and they all work rather well.

It used to be like that too here, but healthcare and mail delivery have become private to keep the costs down and railroads too, that's semi govt. I work for the province, govt, a lot of tasks are now done by private companies, cheaper and a lot of people had to go out, too expensive.

 

[Highlander]

It's lovely to be forgiving (in the church) but the apostle warns against putting a novice in high office (within the church) and against appointing a man who has not managed his family well (how many wives?) and who has no scandal attached to himself (that bus recording is a scandal as is the tax dodging). How did the Republicans not know of all the scandals before they chose Donald Trump as their Candidate? His public statements are recorded on TV and Audio media, surely they were examined in the vetting process before he was selected as candidate?

Highly entertaining post, even if 100% backward. Let me paraphrase you into a higher level of accuracy.....

It's lovely to be forgiving (in the church) but the apostle warns against putting a novice in high office (within the church) and against appointing a woman who has not managed her family well (how many female lovers?) and who has nothing but scandal attached to herself (that private server is a scandal as is the play for play). How did the Democrats not know of all the scandals before they chose Hillary Clinton as their candidate? Her public statements are recorded on TV and Audio media -- and through her emails, as were all of her other lies to the FBI, to the Benghazi families and to the public. Surely they were examined in the vetting process before she was selected as candidate? After all, this career criminal has been lying & cheating her way to the top for decades. She essentially has ALREADY been vetted, but yet the unwise DNC still schemed with her to steal the nomination.

No need to thank me, Coffee. I'm always pleased to present truth & accuracy, especially to those who are allergic to them.

 

[Rens]

Highly entertaining post, even if 100% backward. Let me paraphrase you into a higher level of accuracy.....

It's lovely to be forgiving (in the church) but the apostle warns against putting a novice in high office (within the church) and against appointing a woman who has not managed her family well (how many female lovers?) and who has nothing but scandal attached to herself (that private server is a scandal as is the play for play). How did the Democrats not know of all the scandals before they chose Hillary Clinton as their candidate? Her public statements are recorded on TV and Audio media -- and through her emails, as were all of her other lies to the FBI, to the Benghazi families and to the public. Surely they were examined in the vetting process before she was selected as candidate? After all, this career criminal has been lying & cheating her way to the top for decades. She essentially has ALREADY been vetted, but yet the unwise DNC still schemed with her to steal the nomination.

No need to thank me, Coffee. I'm always pleased to present truth & accuracy, especially to those who are allergic to them.

I think the difference is that the republicans say they're christian and it's a christian party. Well at least that's the idea I get.

 

[Rens]

Highly entertaining post, even if 100% backward. Let me paraphrase you into a higher level of accuracy.....

It's lovely to be forgiving (in the church) but the apostle warns against putting a novice in high office (within the church) and against appointing a woman who has not managed her family well (how many female lovers?) and who has nothing but scandal attached to herself (that private server is a scandal as is the play for play). How did the Democrats not know of all the scandals before they chose Hillary Clinton as their candidate? Her public statements are recorded on TV and Audio media -- and through her emails, as were all of her other lies to the FBI, to the Benghazi families and to the public. Surely they were examined in the vetting process before she was selected as candidate? After all, this career criminal has been lying & cheating her way to the top for decades. She essentially has ALREADY been vetted, but yet the unwise DNC still schemed with her to steal the nomination.

No need to thank me, Coffee. I'm always pleased to present truth & accuracy, especially to those who are allergic to them.

I think the difference is that the republicans say they're christian and it's a christian party. Well at least that's the idea I get.
We have christian parties. Two tiny real christian ones, the big one only in name, nothing christian about their policy. From a christian party you expect they have a real christian leader and christian norms.

 

[Josiah]

I think the difference is that the republicans say they're christian and it's a christian party. Well at least that's the idea I get.
We have christian parties. Two tiny real christian ones, the big one only in name, nothing christian about their policy. From a christian party you expect they have a real christian leader and christian norms.

In the US, political parties are coalitions.

In the USA, political issues align on one of two sides (thus, we are a two party nation). These coalitions are very loose and not always firm.... and they can be strange bedfellows. The whole point is the joining up to help each other ("you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours"). These are always in flex: interest groups rise and fall in power within the party (the "Religious Right" was powerful in the 90's, but they've fallen a lot). They can even switch parties (Civil rights was once a Republican interest, that changed in the mid to late 1960's..... Pro-life was once a Democrat issue but moved to the Republican party in the late 1970's).


Democrats: Big unions, big corporations, civil rights, LGBTG, enviromental/climate change folks, economic socialists, gun control folks, abortion rights, big government.
Republicans: Small business, "Religious Right," conservative/balanced budget/"Reagonomics", traditional family/marriage, gun rights, libertarianism, pro-life, small government.


Alliances, coalitions, special-interests...... agreeing to help each other.



- Josiah

 

[MoreCoffee]

I think the difference is that the republicans say they're christian and it's a christian party. Well at least that's the idea I get.
We have christian parties. Two tiny real christian ones, the big one only in name, nothing christian about their policy. From a christian party you expect they have a real christian leader and christian norms.

USA parties are

• Republican:
  Historically speaking, the Republican base initially consisted of northern white Protestants and African-Americans nationwide, with the first Presidential candidate, John C. Fremont, receiving almost no votes in the South. This trend continued into the 20th century, with 1944 Republican presidential candidate Thomas E. Dewey having only 10% of his popular votes in the South. After the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the core base shifted considerably, with the Southern United States becoming more reliably Republican in presidential politics, and the Northeastern United States becoming more reliably Democratic, especially since 1992. Every Northeastern state except for New Hampshire has voted Democratic six straight elections or more.
  
  The party's current base consists of groups such as white, married Protestants, rural and suburban citizens, and non-union workers without college degrees, with urban residents, ethnic minorities, the unmarried, and union workers having shifted to the Democratic Party. (source)​
• Democrat:
  Historically, the party has represented farmers, laborers, labor unions, and religious and ethnic minorities; it has opposed unregulated business and finance, and favored progressive income taxes. In foreign policy, internationalism (including interventionism) was a dominant theme from 1913 to the mid-1960s. In the 1930s, the party began advocating welfare spending programs targeted at the poor. The party had a fiscally conservative, pro-business wing, typified by Grover Cleveland and Al Smith, and a Southern conservative wing that shrank after President Lyndon B. Johnson supported the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The major influences for liberalism were labor unions (which peaked in the 1936–1952 era), and the African American wing, which has steadily grown since the 1960s. Since the 1970s, environmentalism has been a major new component.
  
  The Democratic Party, once dominant in the Southeastern United States, is now strongest in the Northeast (Mid-Atlantic and New England), Great Lakes region, and the West Coast (including Hawaii). The Democrats are also very strong in major cities (regardless of region).
  
  Social scientists Theodore Caplow et al. argue, "the Democratic party, nationally, moved from left-center toward the center in the 1940s and 1950s, then moved further toward the right-center in the 1970s and 1980s." (source)​

 

[Rens]

In the US, political parties are coalitions.

In the USA, political issues align on one of two sides (thus, we are a two party nation). These coalitions are very loose and not always firm.... and they can be strange bedfellows. The whole point is the joining up to help each other ("you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours"). These are always in flex: interest groups rise and fall in power within the party (the "Religious Right" was powerful in the 90's, but they've fallen a lot). They can even switch parties (Civil rights was once a Republican interest, that changed in the mid to late 1960's..... Pro-life was once a Democrat issue but moved to the Republican party in the late 1970's).


Democrats: Big unions, big corporations, civil rights, LGBTG, enviromental/climate change folks, economic socialists, gun control folks, abortion rights, big government.
Republicans: Small business, "Religious Right," conservative/balanced budget/"Reagonomics", traditional family/marriage, gun rights, libertarianism, pro-life, small government.


Alliances, coalitions, special-interests...... agreeing to help each other.



- Josiah

Oh, so you only have 2 choices. We have a lot of parties you can vote for and the one that gets the most votes then has to find 1, 2 or more others to form a coalition with. But then it's always a surprise who's gonna reign. If one gets a lot of votes that they don't like, we have one who looks like Trump, they just take a few other parties to form a coalition with.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Oh, so you only have 2 choices. We have a lot of parties you can vote for and the one that gets the most votes then has to find 1, 2 or more others to form a coalition with. But then it's always a surprise who's gonna reign. If one gets a lot of votes that they don't like, we have one who looks like Trump, they just take a few other parties to form a coalition with.

There are other parties but they can never win the presidency nor do they win seats in the Senate. I don't know but it may also be true that the other parties do not win seats in the house of representatives.

 

[Josiah]

In the US, political parties are coalitions.

In the USA, political issues align on one of two sides (thus, we are a two party nation). These coalitions are very loose and not always firm.... and they can be strange bedfellows. The whole point is the joining up to help each other ("you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours"). These are always in flex: interest groups rise and fall in power within the party (the "Religious Right" was powerful in the 90's, but they've fallen a lot). They can even switch parties (Civil rights was once a Republican interest, that changed in the mid to late 1960's..... Pro-life was once a Democrat issue but moved to the Republican party in the late 1970's).


Democrats: Big unions, big corporations, civil rights, LGBTG, enviromental/climate change folks, economic socialists, gun control folks, abortion rights, big government.
Republicans: Small business, "Religious Right," conservative/balanced budget/"Reagonomics", traditional family/marriage, gun rights, libertarianism, pro-life, small government.


Alliances, coalitions, special-interests...... agreeing to help each other.



- Josiah


.

Oh, so you only have 2 choices. We have a lot of parties you can vote for and the one that gets the most votes then has to find 1, 2 or more others to form a coalition with. But then it's always a surprise who's gonna reign. If one gets a lot of votes that they don't like, we have one who looks like Trump, they just take a few other parties to form a coalition with.

In the US, there have always been TWO primary parties - it's a strong part of AMERICAN politics. Yes, there have always been third parties and "outsiders" but very, very rarely have these been a factor. In fact, "outsider" CANDIATES have been a far bigger issue (Teddy Rosevelt, Parot Ross, etc.). Practice has told political interests that it's just not possible to get things acheived through third parties.... somehow, they need to find a place in one of the two big power broker parties. Meaningful special interests don't waste their time with third parties - it's a "no win" situation.

Even in this election year when perhaps NEVER in US history have voters been more unhappy with the two choices, even now - no Third Party is playing a role at all. Gary Johnson is polling around 9% and in no state is his polling enough to cause any concern for either primary candidate - he will not effect a single electorial vote. Ross Perot did years ago - but as an individual, not the third party.

I agree with you..... I'm still shocked and saddened by the primary process and the politics of this year that gave us these two candidates, especially Trump.



- Josiah



PS Yes, I know - all this can be very different in other countries, but this thread is about the USA since the Republican Party only exists and operates in the USA.




.

 

[Highlander]

USA parties are

• Republican:
  Historically speaking, the Republican base initially consisted of northern white Protestants and African-Americans nationwide, with the first Presidential candidate, John C. Fremont, receiving almost no votes in the South. This trend continued into the 20th century, with 1944 Republican presidential candidate Thomas E. Dewey having only 10% of his popular votes in the South. After the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the core base shifted considerably, with the Southern United States becoming more reliably Republican in presidential politics, and the Northeastern United States becoming more reliably Democratic, especially since 1992. Every Northeastern state except for New Hampshire has voted Democratic six straight elections or more.
  
  The party's current base consists of groups such as white, married Protestants, rural and suburban citizens, and non-union workers without college degrees, with urban residents, ethnic minorities, the unmarried, and union workers having shifted to the Democratic Party. (source)​
• Democrat:
  Historically, the party has represented farmers, laborers, labor unions, and religious and ethnic minorities; it has opposed unregulated business and finance, and favored progressive income taxes. In foreign policy, internationalism (including interventionism) was a dominant theme from 1913 to the mid-1960s. In the 1930s, the party began advocating welfare spending programs targeted at the poor. The party had a fiscally conservative, pro-business wing, typified by Grover Cleveland and Al Smith, and a Southern conservative wing that shrank after President Lyndon B. Johnson supported the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The major influences for liberalism were labor unions (which peaked in the 1936–1952 era), and the African American wing, which has steadily grown since the 1960s. Since the 1970s, environmentalism has been a major new component.
  
  The Democratic Party, once dominant in the Southeastern United States, is now strongest in the Northeast (Mid-Atlantic and New England), Great Lakes region, and the West Coast (including Hawaii). The Democrats are also very strong in major cities (regardless of region).
  
  Social scientists Theodore Caplow et al. argue, "the Democratic party, nationally, moved from left-center toward the center in the 1940s and 1950s, then moved further toward the right-center in the 1970s and 1980s." (source)​

You forgot to mention that the Democrat Party also "represented" the slaves as they once made tons of money by OWNING human beings.

You also forgot to mention that the Democrat Party fought the bloodiest civil war in human history in an effort to KEEP those slaves as their own property -- as they fought the Republican party (yes, you also forgot to mention that about the Repubs), which was formed -- in large part -- as an anti-slavery party bathed in the American principle that all men are created equal and should be free.

You also forgot to mention that the Democrat Party, in the post civil war years, created the KKK to terrorize and lynch the former slaves that they once owned as their personal property.

You also forgot to mention that the Democrat Party, in the century following their slave owning years, began giving away entitlements as a way of bringing black people back to the "plantations" of the voting booths: vote for us and we'll keep sending you your checks. In conjunction, the Democrats obliterated the formerly strong family units of black people.

You also forgot to mention that the Democrat Party, in its usual immoral fashion, began murdering millions of black babies as this sick political party -- almost a religion in its own right -- began to initiate its own "sacrament" of abortion.

To put it bluntly, the Democrat party is the most evil, blood stained, dishonest & murderous political entity in the entire course of human history.

So, if you care to add all of the above to your summary of the Democrat party, you will have achieved a 100% upgrade in accuracy. :=D:

 

[Highlander]

I think the difference is that the republicans say they're christian and it's a christian party. Well at least that's the idea I get.
We have christian parties. Two tiny real christian ones, the big one only in name, nothing christian about their policy. From a christian party you expect they have a real christian leader and christian norms.

The Republicans have an official party platform -- meaning that they back up what they say -- that abortion is the murder of an innocent human being. I do not believe you can get more Christian than this.

The Republicans also firmly defend the fact that the USA was created as "One Nation Under God," whereas the Democrats are trying to erase God from every facet of our nation.