• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Should there be consequences for PACs that don't stand up for free speech?

So if I'm a member of the Republican party by virtue of signing up for it and I have very liberal ideas and decide to run for office which party's primary is my name on the ballot for?
 
jhmd2000 said:
Being an actual Republican. Having Republican policies, a voting record, etc. Things like that.
Click to expand...

I thought we liked that Donald Trump didn't have a voting record. I mean, Obama had one, and where did that get us? Trump was too busy running a company which gave him the precise experience he needed to lead the country because they are the exact same thing.
 
jhmd2000 said:
Your point---that the present day Republican House and Senate has fallen in line behind the President---conflates a scarcity of options and pragmatism for an ideological endorsement. Do you not think they would have preferred any of the other alternatives from the primary?

There has to be a response or an adaptation. From your point of view, wouldn't you prefer that to blind endorsement of Trumpism?
Click to expand...

Your inveterate trolling really precludes any reasonable discourse. It's frustrating, but you know that. That said, helpful posts like this (if you scratch the first and much of the second paragraphs from your post, as I have here) are helpful.

It's hard to argue there was a scarcity of options when as many here have pointed out there were no fewer than sixteen options in the primary. And if you read carefully, I mentioned "pragmatism" myself earlier. But Congressional Republicans' falling into line is exactly an ideological endorsement when they back Trump's policies. I respect the "traditional Republicans" like McCain who are standing up against Trump now. But they should have done it earlier. And more traditional Republicans should join them.

Why don't they have the "luxury of saying 'NotmyPresident"?? Isn't that a response and an adaptation?
 
wakephan09 said:
Your inveterate trolling really precludes any reasonable discourse. It's frustrating, but you know that. That said, helpful posts like this (if you scratch the first and much of the second paragraphs from your post, as I have here) are helpful.

It's hard to argue there was a scarcity of options when as many here have pointed out there were no fewer than sixteen options in the primary. And if you read carefully, I mentioned "pragmatism" myself earlier. But Congressional Republicans' falling into line is exactly an ideological endorsement when they back Trump's policies. I respect the "traditional Republicans" like McCain who are standing up against Trump now. But they should have done it earlier. And more traditional Republicans should join them.

Why don't they have the "luxury of saying 'NotmyPresident"?? Isn't that a response and an adaptation?
Click to expand...

Because they have actual power and with it, responsibility. "NotmyPresident" is not a policy. A policy would be an issues-based alternative to the ACA, or sensible immigration reforms. Or responding to the unmet needs of that game-changing demographic that gave rise Trump in the first place. That's what I am hoping for.
 
jhmd2000 said:
Being an actual Republican. Having Republican policies, a voting record, etc. Things like that.
Click to expand...

We're seriously still having this discussion?

Republican policies today are different than they were in the time of Lincoln. But they were both Republicans. Same with Trump's policies being different than the neocon ones.
 
Donald Trump may or may not be a Republican. It's pretty indisputable that he was chosen by Republicans to be the leader of the Republican Party though.
 
wakephan09 said:
Your inveterate trolling really precludes any reasonable discourse. It's frustrating, but you know that. That said, helpful posts like this (if you scratch the first and much of the second paragraphs from your post, as I have here) are helpful.

It's hard to argue there was a scarcity of options when as many here have pointed out there were no fewer than sixteen options in the primary. And if you read carefully, I mentioned "pragmatism" myself earlier. But Congressional Republicans' falling into line is exactly an ideological endorsement when they back Trump's policies. I respect the "traditional Republicans" like McCain who are standing up against Trump now. But they should have done it earlier. And more traditional Republicans should join them.

Why don't they have the "luxury of saying 'NotmyPresident"?? Isn't that a response and an adaptation?
Click to expand...

Please don't fall for the transparent McCain shtick. That "Maverick" votes with the Republican's 96% of the time.
 
Deacfreak07 said:
Donald Trump may or may not be a Republican. It's pretty indisputable that he was chosen by Republicans to be the leader of the Republican Party though.
Click to expand...

No he's definitely a Republican. He's a member of the party. That's literally the only qualification.
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
No he's definitely a Republican. He's a member of the party. That's literally the only qualification.
Click to expand...

He was also, you know, elected by a majority of Republicans to be the leader of the Republican Party. If jhmd were around, he would tell this jhmd fella to accept the results of this election.
 
Deacfreak07 said:
He was also, you know, elected by a majority of Republicans to be the leader of the Republican Party. If jhmd were around, he would tell this jhmd fella to accept the results of this election.
Click to expand...

What's his approval rating among Republican? 86%? Definitely not a Republican. #notmyrepublican
 
Pretty clear that JHMD wants to enjoy all the spoils and schadenfreude of a Trump administration without joining the rest of his party in adopting the corrupt authoritarian idiocy of the Trump administation.
 
I'd say it's about time the people took back the Republican party from coastal elites like JHMD. I'm sorry that Trump didn't pass your purity test JHMD, but the American people have decided who and what is Republican.
 
Last edited:
In all seriousness, who is the head of of the Republican Party, is it the RNC Chair or the POTUS? That's a semantics question because obvious Obama was the public face of the Democratic Party when he was POTUS, not DWS.
 
And also the former head of the RNC is now the Republican president's Chief of Staff
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
I'd say it's about time the people took back the Republican party from coastal elites like JHMD. I'm sorry that Trump didn't pass your purity test JHMD, but the American people have decided who and what is Republican.
Click to expand...

You may want to check your facts. I've heard quite a yarn about the popular vote. Or Russians. Maybe it's a popular vote for Russians. The excuse making business is all so confusing.
 
jhmd2000 said:
You may want to check your facts. I've heard quite a yarn about the popular vote. Or Russians. Maybe it's a popular vote for Russians. The excuse making business is all so confusing.
Click to expand...
Which of course has nothing to do with the fact that the current head of the Republican party is president Donald Trump. Embrace the L.

Sent from my SM-S903VL using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top