this is one of those rare instances where ark is right and is not to blame.
The GOP quit on its constituents. Only two presidents have entered office with their party in control of Congress only to have their party lose control of Congress at the first mid-term election. Bill Clinton and The Big O.
Libs and their MSM dogs would like us to believe that it was the GOP racist constituency that took the House, then the Senate from the Dems cause they couldn't stand a black man in charge. A real thinker knows that isn't true, but the narrative lives.
The constituency, clearly, but the GOP in control of Congress to stop The Big O's policies. Had someone tell me that it was only because the state GOP won their state elections and gerrymandered to diffuse the minorty vote...as if the Senate isnt a statewide race. That might explain some individual House races, but not all. And those districts had (in many cases been gerrymandered in the Dems favor in previous years). If someone can't see that, well, they are beyond help.
In any event, the GOP took control of Congress. When the newly elected tried to step up and do the jobs they were sent to do, their own party "leaders" did not support them. The GOP constituency has, finally, revolted. I think you could say that they partially did so at The Big O's second election by not showing up for Romney. The GOP put up a slate that didn't even win their home states!
IMO, it is less about the particular person of Trump than the GOP constituency's big FU to the establishment GOP that wouldn't listen. Finally get rid of Boehner only to put Ryan (one of the aforementioned losers) in power. And, IIRC only with the promise that they wouldn't then replace him.
The establishment GOP lost touch with their constituency and the guiding principals of what it means to be conservative. They think growing government by 5% instead of 10% is a success. They lost themselves. Trump is the result of their downfall, not the cause.
The problem is that over the last 25 years, for some reason, the Republican platform DID decide to get into my private affairs. Maybe it was Reagan's War on Drugs. Maybe it was the 1994 "Contract with America". Maybe it was a primary system that rewarded pandering to the Christian Coalition (part of 1996, 2000, 2008, 2012 and 2016 primaries) that forced the party to take stances that absolutely fail the Jeffersonian litmus test above.
I agree the libertarian view on social issues - be against things morally, but don't regulate morality with laws - is the platform Republicans need to adopt. And I sort of feel Trump is the first Republican to make it through the primaries that isn't a "holier than thou" preacher of morals.
Again, voting Trump does not mean I think Trump is a good person. None of them are good people. All are corrupted in some fashion. From Kasich to Cruz to McCain to Rubio to Clinton to Sanders to Bush to Obama.
I do not think ANY will completely destroy the Constitutional balance of the branches of government. America will survive a Trump or Clinton presidency despite the horrible rhetoric from BOTH sides right now.
It really does just come down to whether you think continued European Socialism tendencies are good for our Country or do you think we need to put the breaks on bigger government, bigger federal bureaucracy, globalization of power groups, immigration, our current Middle East policy and our current Europe/Russia policy.
I'm voting for to slow down the way we are headed. Plain and simple really. And I'm not going to fall for the scare tactics that Trump is such a demagogue that he is somehow going to be powerful enough to tear down the Constitution, alienate us from the rest of the world and start World War III in the process. And every time I hear the "Sky is Falling" rhetoric from the media or powerful people, I am left to question "Why are these powerful people so afraid of a Trump presidency? What are they trying to protect, really?".... And most of the time the answer is their own cushy jobs, unseen power and lots and lots of money.
This I will never understand. Everybody says this, and it is just taken as fact. I think it is a crock of ****.
Let's take the latest issue, one I have a big problem with, which is the bathroom thing. Probably for years people who had questions were going to bathrooms that they were born to go to and nobody gave it a second thought. I know I mind my own business when I am in a public bathroom. All of the sudden, we need to have all these bathrooms. I don't know any conservative who was bothering anyone about that. THEY brought it up and made an issue of it. I know I didn't give two ***** what they were doing until, again, they made an issue of it. How is that getting into private affairs? To me that is more like making it an issue, when people object, then saying get out of my private affairs. They invited us there by making it an issue. The left does this all the time and too damn many of us fall for it.
Wrong
As for your associate about Christian extremists, that was two guys nowhere near the hundreds of thousands of Jihadis.
Let's take the latest issue, one I have a big problem with, which is the bathroom thing. Probably for years people who had questions were going to bathrooms that they were born to go to and nobody gave it a second thought. I know I mind my own business when I am in a public bathroom. All of the sudden, we need to have all these bathrooms. I don't know any conservative who was bothering anyone about that. THEY brought it up and made an issue of it. I know I didn't give two ***** what they were doing until, again, they made an issue of it. How is that getting into private affairs? To me that is more like making it an issue, when people object, then saying get out of my private affairs. They invited us there by making it an issue. The left does this all the time and too damn many of us fall for it.
The simplest answer to why Republicans struggle to capture the White House is we just don't have good enough candidates.
The first time the word "Gay" was every used at a Republican Convention was in 1992. Something about the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy in the Army. The Republican platform has always been the "morality" party. From drugs to sex to rock-and-roll. You can argue about it all you want and not understand it, but when it comes to drugs, sex and rock-and-roll, the Republicans are much more puritanical in their message. Abstinence over contraception. Just say "no". Parental warnings on records (still passed by a Republican congress). New ratings for movies (PG-13 and NC-17) that focus more on sex than violence (a mistake in my opinion). Gay marriage. Most of the south still has sodomy laws.
All those things are "legislating morality" and almost every case the Republican platform is on the conservative/puritanical side of the coin even when for the most part who's having sex (and how), who's smoking pot, who's married and not married, doesn't effect people ONE IOTA in their daily lives.
One of the worst things Republicans have adopted is the platform that actions that are outside social "norms" and might make someone feel uncomfortable (but in all other ways non-damaging) are to be pushed out of sight and out of mind. Boys kissing? Ugh... make sure we make laws that I don't have to see it or it stays hidden. Drugs? All bad despite the hypocrisy in our society using tobacco, caffeine and prescription medication.
They might not say that's their platform up on stage, but we all know that's the Republican platform.
The Democrats are building a pretty significant voting coalition moving forward. The GOP needs to actively start promoting better ideas for the country as a whole and pull back from this pandering to 1/3 of the voter base. They have gotten by barely because usually some more people come aboard because of social views or ideology but the party is in serious trouble if they can't figure out a way to be more dynamic. I thought a few of the candidates that were in the primary were competent but the voters apparently disagreed. They wanted someone who will "take it to the Dems" or "tell it like is" and "build a wall" and all this other stupid bullshit. None of that is feasible or realistic. It may sound exciting to angry riled up voters but rationally speaking a lot of that are not even things that can happen in theory. Voters need to deal with their role in this too. It's hard to beat an opponent who's platform is that much more inclusive. I don't agree with the Democratic party on many things but at least they're trying to actively make the country more inclusive to American people regardless of your background, orientation, religion, race, ect. A candidate who literally says that he is going to try keep all Muslims out and that 9/11 wouldn't have happened if he were President because he would have banned Muslims from entering the country. Yeah that's not how it works. You can't condemn a whole group of people because you think a few of them might be dangerous. I have also heard him say nothing about domestic terrorism from American citizens not tied to the middle east. That's not a non existent problem. There's a lot of work to be done.
Wrong.
It became an issue when NC made it a law that people had to use the bathroom of their birth gender. Can you explain how enforcing this law wouldn't get into people's private affairs... or private parts?
I am very conservative, yet, I don't care who is having sex where and all that, until it is thrown in my face. Then I am going to react. Basically, you don't want people to have moral codes? I am not allowed to express when it is thrown in my face that I don't like it?
Is throwing in your face something more than just not hiding it? Is throwing in your face something more than the pda common and accepted between heterosexual couples in public?
Well, another liberal who can't read. I pretty much explained what throwing it in my face has been, specifically in relation to the bathroom situation.
I mean, c'mon. It is not crazy to expect it to be perfectly natural for a 43 year old man to identify as a woman today and use a bathroom that a 7 year old little girl may use, but I am crazy for objecting to that.
Bullshit. It was an issue well before that. If it wasn't, why would NC feel a need to address it?
So then what did you mean by:
"Probably for years people who had questions were going to bathrooms that they were born to go to and nobody gave it a second thought. I know I mind my own business when I am in a public bathroom."
Born female. What would you do if he was in the bathroom with your daughter?
IEverybody has limits, ****, even Hitler had a limit. All the other crap he ushered in, but he would not use poison gas.
So what is it? What is going to be the next acceptable thing? Adults having sex with children, maybe? Marrying your pet goat? Hey, the bar is set. We shouldn't be in people's private lives. Live and let live. Then why have any laws at all?
Um, what is hydrogen cyanide?
You sound exactly like Rick Santorum from a decade ago, those things didn't happen.