Poll Says 1/3 of Republicans Ready to Bolt Party

[SicEmBaylor]

http://www.grumpypolitico.com/2015/08/09/support-or-leave-the-republican-party/

Everyone should be firm enough in their convictions and honest enough with themselves to take their vote elsewhere if the choice is unacceptable.

[SoonerorLater]

http://www.grumpypolitico.com/2015/08/09/support-or-leave-the-republican-party/

Everyone should be firm enough in their convictions and honest enough with themselves to take their vote elsewhere if the choice is unacceptable.

Unfortunately for a lot of us that's a recipe for unwanted social change since conservatives are in hand-to-hand political combat with the 'Big Tent' party

[Curly Bill]

I'm starting to see things more and more SicEm's way. If the pubs nominate someone along the lines of Bush or Christie, there's an excellent chance I'll vote 3rd party.

[okie52]

I have no problem bolting from a party that bolted from me.

[Soonerjeepman]

I'll vote for whoever is closest to what I believe, be it 3rd party, Rep or Dem.

I will add unless the 3rd party can pull in Dem's (which I doubt, because they will be fiscally conservative and somewhat socially conservative which won't work for the Dem) this is the dem's dream come true. Split the GOP so they don't have to battle them.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

I will add unless the 3rd party can pull in Dem's (which I doubt, because they will be fiscally conservative and somewhat socially conservative which won't work for the Dem) this is the dem's dream come true. Split the GOP so they don't have to battle them.This is reality. 3rd party voting is a recipe for yet another democrat win, and even more guaranteed authoritarian socialism. No, I don't expect Sicem nor any libertarians to ever accept that, nor apparently to really even care.

[Serenity Now]

This is reality. 3rd party voting is a recipe for yet another democrat win, and even more guaranteed authoritarian socialism. No, I don't expect Sicem nor any libertarians to ever accept that, nor apparently to really even care.

My vote for Perot in 1996 was similar, just the other direction.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

My vote for Perot in 1996 was similar, just the other direction.Nobody has asserted 100% of the democrats will vote democrat in the general...but, pretty close to it.

Nice try, though.:sneakiness:

[TAFBSooner]

My vote for Perot in 1996 was similar, just the other direction.

I never voted directly* for a Clinton.

*My Perot vote in 1992 helped BillC, and was pretty much irrelevant in 1996. It wasn't for liberal purity, though. Mostly for Perot's stand on NAFTA and (IIRC) in general trying to get away from two-party politics.

[hawaii 5-0]

I have and will continue to cross Party lines to vote for the candidate who represents my beliefs.

If I don't like either, I'll vote for the lesser of the two evils.

If it's 3rd party, so be it.

5-0

[Serenity Now]

Nobody has asserted 100% of the democrats will vote democrat in the general...but, pretty close to it.

Nice try, though.:sneakiness:

Dude, I'm just saying that third party candidates appeal to both sides. I wasn't painting with as broad brush as you typically like to implement. That said, I think if Nader had not have run under the Green Party in 2000 that your good buddy Al Gore would have won. Anarchy!!!

[Serenity Now]

Dude, I'm just saying that third party candidates appeal to both sides. I wasn't painting with as broad brush as you typically like to implement. That said, I think if Nader had not have run under the Green Party in 2000 that your good buddy Al Gore would have won. Anarchy!!!

Bush won Florida by under 600 votes. Nader got 97,488 votes. Typically, those folks were Dems. You should totally show Trump.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Nader was/is a Leftist and did hurt algore. That was the only time I've seen in my life where a 3rd party candidate was perceived as leftist or more leftist than the democrat.

[SicEmBaylor]

If the Republican nominee is so bad that a third of the entire GOP base votes 3rd party then how good of a President would that ******* actually be? Why on Earth do you think that individual would be preferable, in any way, to the alternatives?

Let me assure you: If enough conservatives refuse to support the Republican nominee that it hands the election to the Democrat then it doesn't matter a hill of beans whether the Republicans win the White House or not. Any Republican that bad deserves to lose. Just like in business, a company that puts out a terrible product that the public rejects is going to go out of business. It isn't the public's fault -- it's the product's fault.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

True that W did a bunch of things that went along with the democrats, especially in his second term. A true test of whether there's any hope left in the republican party(A. you KNOW FOR SURE there isn't in the democrat party, and B. with the repubs controlling the presidency, with even a RINO who does SOME things right, and the House and Senate, we can put pressure on the government to behave properly. If the repubs still behave almost as anti-American as the democrats, THEN it's the end and time for all hell to break loose.

Katy bar the door, as they used to say, gird your loins, 3rd party, riots, blockades, strikes, stockpiling and fences etc.

[SicEmBaylor]

True that W did a bunch of things that went along with the democrats, especially in his second term. A true test of whether there's any hope left in the republican party(A. you KNOW FOR SURE there isn't in the democrat party, and B. with the repubs controlling the presidency, with even a RINO who does SOME things right, and the House and Senate, we can put pressure on the government to behave properly. If the repubs still behave almost as anti-American as the democrats, THEN it's the end and time for all hell to break loose.

Katy bar the door, as they used to say, gird your loins, 3rd party, riots, blockades, strikes, stockpiling and fences etc.

We've had this discussion before. What you call "going along with Democrats" were the cornerstones of Bush's entire agenda. They were the most important legislative proposals in either of Bush's two terms, and it had absolutely nothing to do with the Democrats. In fact, nothing worth note even happened after the Democrats took Congress.

No Child Left Behind -- Bush policy.
Medicare Prescription Drug Entitlement Expansion -- Bush policy.
His cluster**** of a foreign policy -- Bush policy.
Faith Based Initiative -- Bush policy.
The creation of an entirely new cabinet-level agency (DHS) -- Bush policy.
The expansion of government surveillance and disregard for the Bill of Rights -- Bush policy.
Campaign Finance Reform -- Bush policy.
Liberal nation-building policies -- Bush policy.

No. No, there was nothing conservative about President Bush's administration. He was a disaster for this country, a disaster for what it means to be a conservative, and a disaster for the Republican Party.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

3rd party with a perceived conservative is a recipe for disaster, a sign the citizenry is ready to riot and break down the economy completely. I know it. You know it. Everybody SHOULD know it.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

... nothing worth note even happened after the Democrats took Congress.


insured the final touches of the forced mortgages to unqualified people, causing financial collapse, got ready to enact Obamacare, and when Bear won in '08, slammed the coffin shut with the passing of Obamacare.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

You are a fool if you think voting third party will bring any chance of bringing peaceful change.

[BoulderSooner79]

You are a fool if you think voting third party will bring any chance of bringing peaceful change.

You seem to be implying that Republicans are uncivilized barbarians that will take to the streets with weapons if the elections don't go their way. Sort of an extreme example of poor sportsmanship. Are you sure you're not projecting? All the Republicans I know are quite law abiding and will just work toward the next election.

[Serenity Now]

True that W did a bunch of things that went along with the democrats, especially in his second term. A true test of whether there's any hope left in the republican party(A. you KNOW FOR SURE there isn't in the democrat party, and B. with the repubs controlling the presidency, with even a RINO who does SOME things right, and the House and Senate, we can put pressure on the government to behave properly. If the repubs still behave almost as anti-American as the democrats, THEN it's the end and time for all hell to break loose.

Katy bar the door, as they used to say, gird your loins, 3rd party, riots, blockades, strikes, stockpiling and fences etc.

You left out "human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together, mass hysteria"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmzuRXLzqKk&spfreload=10

[Serenity Now]

You seem to be implying that Republicans are uncivilized barbarians that will take to the streets with weapons if the elections don't go their way. Sort of an extreme example of poor sportsmanship. Are you sure you're not projecting? All the Republicans I know are quite law abiding and will just work toward the next election.

I thought that as well. Kind of like when they burn couches in the midwest?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipsPgNEmAXI

That really escalated quickly.

Movie quote night in the Serenity household.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Sicem's itchy for a new civil war.

[Tear Down This Wall]

I've only voted in two of the past five presidential elections, sitting out 2000, 2008, and 2012. After holding my nose and voting for Dole in 1996, I was done.

The ONLY reason I voted in 2004 was because the press was so negative about Bush that I wanted him to win. I didn't vote in 2000 because I thought the parties couldn't get any stupider: Bush and Gore?

Then came 2008 - McCain and Obama. Awful. Then came 2012 - Robotney and Obama almost as bad a 2008.

The 2016 field looks horrible on both sides. The Democrat will win no matter who that nominee is because Virginia, Ohio, and Florida have enough minority voters now to tip the electoral college pretty easily to the Jackas*s Party from here to eternity.

The Republican field is an embarrassing array of people who don't know they are embarrassing. The Democrats will nominate either the criminal Hillary Clinton or the communist from Vermont.

The Libertarians will, of course, run some sh*thead who won't be able to be understood by anyone except those with degrees in finance. And, the Green Party will throw up their own half-baked Stooge as well.

Thank you, Forefathers, for the Electoral College. I hope you are all rotting in hell as our country heads in that direction in a hand basket.

(Query: What the hell is a "hand basket" anyway?)

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-dpdrXQHWH0k/VYS2jD0Q7SI/AAAAAAAAAJA/iMhc0AroRtk/s1600/hell-in-a-handbasket.jpg

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

You seem to be implying that Republicans are uncivilized barbarians that will take to the streets with weapons if the elections don't go their way. Sort of an extreme example of poor sportsmanship. Are you sure you're not projecting? All the Republicans I know are quite law abiding and will just work toward the next election.The country is in process of going to hell in a hand basket. The question is how much more abuse can America take before the silent majority is totally fed up. We have been law abiding, patient and full of restraint. Peaceful change is needed before everything becomes unraveled.

[Tear Down This Wall]

The country is in process of going to hell in a hand basket. The question is how much more abuse can America take before the silent majority is totally fed up. We have been law abiding, patient and full of restraint. Peaceful change is needed before everything becomes unraveled.

That's not what happens. What happens is like what you see in Mexico - the police give up on fighting crime, and the prosecutors give up on prosecuting crime. Eventually, they become part of the criminal syndicates that then take over.

People don't rebel in the streets; they try to lay low and not be noticed. Although my wife is from Mexico, I haven't been down there since 2008. She used to visits her mom every year; but, she hasn't been down there in three years now.

A couple of years ago, the police in a smaller town stopped my wife and her family and questioned them for about half an hour about our daughter who is very light-skinned. Because my daughter spoke Spanish so fluently for a child, the police eventually believed that she was, indeed, my wife's daughter, and let her go.

It's freaking scary down there. And, it will someday be the same here. There are too many stupid and poor now. And, it's not that they are stupid and poor, but that they are stupid, poor, and jealous.

We used to have stupid, poor, or both, and they'd try to work themselves up. Now, it doesn't happen that way. The stupid stay stupid and blame the education system. The poor stay poor and blame the rich. Leftists politicians fan the flames.

Republicans say nothing because they "look bad" if they tell the educators to shut up and educate, and if they tell the poor to shut up and work.

The only wildcard, potentially, are the immigrants who are rapidly bypassing Americans. They will give less of a sh*t than guilt-ridden white liberals when sh*t starts hitting the fan because they've worked their as*ses off for what they have and haven't "oppressed" anyone. It will be interesting to see how they react, if at all.

My guess is, they just do what the rich do back in their home countries - bribe the politicians and police in order to keep what they have going.

[Serenity Now]

My guess is, they just do what the Kochs do here - bribe the politicians and brainwash the populace in order to keep what they have going.
FIFY.

Kind of kidding. You have a unique perspective that I appreciate.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

TDTW, of course you could be right about how things will go, but I believe we are possibly different here, in that there are MANY people here who are fed up, scared of our direction and situation. If democrats win again and continue as expected, to go down the authoritarian socialist/fascist road that they prefer, there well could be some political, grassroots objection and(maybe even) organized response.

[Serenity Now]

TDTW, of course you could be right about how thinks will go, but I believe we are possibly different here, in that there are MANY people here who are fed up, scared of our direction and situation. If democrats win again and continue as expected, to go down the authoritarian socialist/fascist road that they prefer, there well could be some political, grassroots objection and(maybe even) organized response.
Tim McVeigh would call that response hogwash.

[SicEmBaylor]

Tim McVeigh would call that response hogwash.

A good friend of mine was getting his PhD at Tech and we were talking about this very subject one day. We realized how many fears and complaints we shared with McVeigh minus the deeper paranoia and, of course, the unjustifiable violence of killing innocent men and women.

But do we share some commonality when it comes to distrust of the government? Absolutely. McVeigh wasn't necessarily wrong with all of his fears and complaints -- he was absolutely wrong for being a sick twisted psychopath who killed innocent people and tried to start some sort of conflict.

[Tear Down This Wall]

A good friend of mine was getting his PhD at Tech and we were talking about this very subject one day. We realized how many fears and complaints we shared with McVeigh minus the deeper paranoia and, of course, the unjustifiable violence of killing innocent men and women.

But do we share some commonality when it comes to distrust of the government? Absolutely. McVeigh wasn't necessarily wrong with all of his fears and complaints -- he was absolutely wrong for being a sick twisted psychopath who killed innocent people and tried to start some sort of conflict.

It's just that when the communists take over fully, there is no dissent. And, this is the first time in history that the commies will be led by faggots - so, it'll be doubly bad for normal people here.

What we'll end up having is a former Eastern Bloc/Mexico deal - races cobbled together that don't like each other with corrupt politicians and police looking the other way while crime syndicates kidnap and kill anyone they perceive to be in the way of their operations.

Sick.

Thanks a lot, Bin Laden.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Who you calling faggot? Bear? NTTAWWT! My, you paint the rosy(palms) picture!

[rock on sooner]

TDTW, one story about the "hand basket" issue is that when the bad person
had their head chopped off, the head was caught in a hand basket, hence the
bad person, going to hell, had a hand basket as their vehicle.

[Serenity Now]

And, this is the first time in history that the commies will be led by faggots...Please illuminate this little gem.

[badger]

Like sports teams, you can only tolerate so much as fans. If you team sucks at winning or are full of terrible people off-field, have an owner you don't want to funnel money to, or coaches that are so darn dislike-able... you eventually either stop being a fan or find a new team altogether.

[champions77]

By the time the Messiah leaves office, we will be at 20 TRILLON in the national debt. We spent 434 BILLION last year alone to service that debt. There are many that say when we reach 24 TRILLION, all hell will break loose. We can be there in what 4-6 years?

So how do you cut back on entitlements when those folks are trained to believe that they are in fact "entitled" to all of those government goodies? The government goes to great lengths to get people on some type of assistance, abled bodied or not, it doesn't matter. Like to know how much they spend on radio, TV and print media informing the masses of all of the goodies they can receive, they just have to ask. A great majority of those that become dependent will become democrats, as the Dems are very efficient in reminding them of all they've done for them. They should be given the blame for creating the class of dependency they have. Unfortunately Rhinos are also culpable. And just try and make a program more efficient, which may very well be of greater benefit for those truly needy, and here comes "Granny being wheeled over the cliff". Vote for the GOP and they will take away your benefits. Joe Biden says vote for a Republican and "they'll put you back in chains".

With all of my discontentment with today's GOP, I know starting a new Party will hand the General election to the Dems. So what have we really accomplished?


It is all very sad indeed to see where we have "progressed" to over the years. Are we doomed? I would say we are. Absent a meltdown of our whole financial system/economy, how can the steps necessary to save us ever be enacted? This is by design what the Democrats want, a welfare, nanny state, and a majority now of the GOP are basically democrats, at least as to fiscal matters. So maybe the question is? How can we not be doomed in view of everything we see going on today?

[Tear Down This Wall]

Please illuminate this little gem.

Don't ask me; ask the "conservative" Supreme Court.

[Serenity Now]

Don't ask me; ask the "conservative" Supreme Court.
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/14-556_3204.pdf

I don't think I read "faggots" in their ruling. I searched it and everything. Maybe you should drop some more slurs while you're at it.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

:satellite:

[yermom]

That's not what happens. What happens is like what you see in Mexico - the police give up on fighting crime, and the prosecutors give up on prosecuting crime. Eventually, they become part of the criminal syndicates that then take over.

People don't rebel in the streets; they try to lay low and not be noticed. Although my wife is from Mexico, I haven't been down there since 2008. She used to visits her mom every year; but, she hasn't been down there in three years now.

A couple of years ago, the police in a smaller town stopped my wife and her family and questioned them for about half an hour about our daughter who is very light-skinned. Because my daughter spoke Spanish so fluently for a child, the police eventually believed that she was, indeed, my wife's daughter, and let her go.

It's freaking scary down there. And, it will someday be the same here. There are too many stupid and poor now. And, it's not that they are stupid and poor, but that they are stupid, poor, and jealous.

We used to have stupid, poor, or both, and they'd try to work themselves up. Now, it doesn't happen that way. The stupid stay stupid and blame the education system. The poor stay poor and blame the rich. Leftists politicians fan the flames.

Republicans say nothing because they "look bad" if they tell the educators to shut up and educate, and if they tell the poor to shut up and work.

The only wildcard, potentially, are the immigrants who are rapidly bypassing Americans. They will give less of a sh*t than guilt-ridden white liberals when sh*t starts hitting the fan because they've worked their as*ses off for what they have and haven't "oppressed" anyone. It will be interesting to see how they react, if at all.

My guess is, they just do what the rich do back in their home countries - bribe the politicians and police in order to keep what they have going.

Income inequality is a lot to blame in this scenario. When most of the people with jobs are actually working poor that still need government assistance to survive, you aren't going to be able to just sit and be rich while everyone else starves for long.

The best thing for stability is upward mobility with jobs and education. That's worth spending money on.

Better than trillion dollar pork jets anyway

[Tear Down This Wall]

Income inequality is a lot to blame in this scenario. When most of the people with jobs are actually working poor that still need government assistance to survive, you aren't going to be able to just sit and be rich while everyone else starves for long.

The best thing for stability is upward mobility with jobs and education. That's worth spending money on.

Better than trillion dollar pork jets anyway

Really? Someone explain this to Mexico. The Castro brothers never starved in Cuba either.

Our ruling class is the same - we're just not calling it socialism/communism yet. Our middle class still has a decade or so to be whittled down by government programs "helping" the poor and middle class close the "income inequality" gap.

[Tear Down This Wall]

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/14-556_3204.pdf

I don't think I read "faggots" in their ruling. I searched it and everything. Maybe you should drop some more slurs while you're at it.

It's a legal document. The legal term for faggot is "same-sex." This isn't a legal document; it's a sports-oriented message board with some side forums for entertainment.

[TAFBSooner]

(Query: What the hell is a "hand basket" anyway?)

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-dpdrXQHWH0k/VYS2jD0Q7SI/AAAAAAAAAJA/iMhc0AroRtk/s1600/hell-in-a-handbasket.jpg

The name of the wagon that Teddy Roosevelt used to get from his Montana ranch to the capitol city.

[TAFBSooner]

Income inequality is a lot to blame in this scenario. When most of the people with jobs are actually working poor that still need government assistance to survive, you aren't going to be able to just sit and be rich while everyone else starves for long.

The best thing for stability is upward mobility with jobs and education. That's worth spending money on.

Better than trillion dollar pork jets anyway

Aww, you're just jealous!

[Serenity Now]

Income inequality is a lot to blame in this scenario. When most of the people with jobs are actually working poor that still need government assistance to survive, you aren't going to be able to just sit and be rich while everyone else starves for long.

The best thing for stability is upward mobility with jobs and education. That's worth spending money on.

Better than trillion dollar pork jets anyway

The difference between the top and the middle is so much more stark now than it was 50 years ago. That's our problem.

[champions77]

The decrease in "upward mobility" you address can be laid at the feet of 1) dependency created by social programs, 2) Labor Unions chasing off jobs to countries with cheaper labor, 3) Over regulation and high taxes on businesses, 4) poor schools/education and 5) illegal immigration, further limiting workers into entry level jobs which would at least get you in the game. Hard to move upward if you are not working.
All of these serve to hinder opportunities and disincentivize those in climbing the socio-economic ladder.
I'm afraid the Dems answer to this is to increase taxes on the wealthy. Isn't that their answer to most anything?

[yermom]

The decrease in "upward mobility" you address can be laid at the feet of

1) dependency created by social programs

2) Labor Unions chasing off jobs to countries with cheaper labor,

3) Over regulation and high taxes on businesses,

4) poor schools/education

5) illegal immigration, further limiting workers into entry level jobs which would at least get you in the game. Hard to move upward if you are not working.

All of these serve to hinder opportunities And disincentives those in climbing the socio-economic ladder.
I'm afraid the Dems answer to this is to increase taxes on the wealthy. Isn't that their answer to most anything?

1) like i said, people don't starve quietly. if you want to have anything, the poor people in the country should at least be fed.

2) i sure do hate overtime, and 40 hour work weeks. our government letting corporations exploit poor countries and their lax labor/business laws isn't good for anyone

3) i see more regulation stomping out competition and innovation. the lobbyists favor the large companies from #2. this is more about money talking than anything. there should be tighter controls in a lot of areas.

4) i don't know about other states so much, but the conservatives sure love to gut education in this state. i'm sure lowering taxes was a great idea. oil prices never go down, right?

5) if an illegal that can barely speak English, if at all can take your job, then you need better skills. again, it's the companies hiring them that make this possible.

you really think poor people just choose to be lazy and not get ahead? everything is set up where if you are poor, you basically stay poor unless something extraordinary happens

i don't think taxes even necessarily need to be raised, but i do think loopholes should close, and companies should pay their fair share. you should get tax breaks for keeping jobs here and/or penalties for moving them out though. that's what should be disincentivized.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

The decrease in "upward mobility" you address can be laid at the feet of 1) dependency created by social programs, 2) Labor Unions chasing off jobs to countries with cheaper labor, 3) Over regulation and high taxes on businesses, 4) poor schools/education and 5) illegal immigration, further limiting workers into entry level jobs which would at least get you in the game. Hard to move upward if you are not working.
All of these serve to hinder opportunities And disincentives those in climbing the socio-economic ladder.
I'm afraid the Dems answer to this is to increase taxes on the wealthy. Isn't that their answer to most anything?None of the Soonerfans Libs will pay attention and learn from this analysis, even though it's right on.

[yermom]

None of the Soonerfans Libs will pay attention and learn from this analysis, even though it's right on.

You are preaching cognitive dissonance now?

This guy sums up a lot of what I see here:
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/08/09/opinion/sunday/capitalists-arise-we-need-to-deal-with-income-inequality.html?referrer=

Odds are you won't read it or understand it, but whatever

[Serenity Now]

The decrease in "upward mobility" you address can be laid at the feet of 1) dependency created by social programs, 2) Labor Unions chasing off jobs to countries with cheaper labor, 3) Over regulation and high taxes on businesses, 4) poor schools/education and 5) illegal immigration, further limiting workers into entry level jobs which would at least get you in the game. Hard to move upward if you are not working.
All of these serve to hinder opportunities And disincentives those in climbing the socio-economic ladder.
I'm afraid the Dems answer to this is to increase taxes on the wealthy. Isn't that their answer to most anything?

How does any of this deal with middle class? I think of Oklahoma. The multiple Wrangler manufacturing plants that closed and moved to Mexico didn't close down due to unions. Hell, CEO compensation probably has as much to do with this stuff as anything. A CEO in some companies makes like 400 times more than the regular worker. In other countries it's not near as high.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CAcQjRxqFQoTCK3cgfKDpscCFYhIkgodkk4Bcg&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theatlantic.com%2Fbusiness%2F archive%2F2013%2F04%2Fwhats-behind-the-huge-and-growing-ceo-worker-pay-gap%2F275435%2F&ei=hInMVbKzL4SXygTltIPwCQ&bvm=bv.99804247,d.aWw&psig=AFQjCNEw4Lxzn7AzbHaf-cVAq1Yei4DOIw&ust=1439554321746276

[okie52]

How does any of this deal with middle class? I think of Oklahoma. The multiple Wrangler manufacturing plants that closed and moved to Mexico didn't close down due to unions. Hell, CEO compensation probably has as much to do with this stuff as anything. A CEO in some companies makes like 400 times more than the regular worker. In other countries it's not near as high.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CAcQjRxqFQoTCK3cgfKDpscCFYhIkgodkk4Bcg&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theatlantic.com%2Fbusiness%2F archive%2F2013%2F04%2Fwhats-behind-the-huge-and-growing-ceo-worker-pay-gap%2F275435%2F&ei=hInMVbKzL4SXygTltIPwCQ&bvm=bv.99804247,d.aWw&psig=AFQjCNEw4Lxzn7AzbHaf-cVAq1Yei4DOIw&ust=1439554321746276

Did the CEO take a pay cut when the company moved to Mexico?

[TAFBSooner]

Did the CEO take a pay cut when the company moved to Mexico?

He probably got a raise for cutting costs. Short term thinking. His raise that next quarter trumped decent jobs for Americans from the date of the move until, well, forever.

I don't want to tax all of his income or wealth, I want to incentivize him to keep jobs here and keep them at a livable wage. His company paid some of those greater profits to his industrial organization's dues, which paid lobbyists which paid Congresscritters to grease the movement of jobs out of the country.

I'm not jealous, because I sure don't want his afterlife or karma. But I am angry.

[champions77]

1) like i said, people don't starve quietly. if you want to have anything, the poor people in the country should at least be fed.

2) i sure do hate overtime, and 40 hour work weeks. our government letting corporations exploit poor countries and their lax labor/business laws isn't good for anyone

3) i see more regulation stomping out competition and innovation. the lobbyists favor the large companies from #2. this is more about money talking than anything. there should be tighter controls in a lot of areas.

4) i don't know about other states so much, but the conservatives sure love to gut education in this state. i'm sure lowering taxes was a great idea. oil prices never go down, right?

5) if an illegal that can barely speak English, if at all can take your job, then you need better skills. again, it's the companies hiring them that make this possible.

you really think poor people just choose to be lazy and not get ahead? everything is set up where if you are poor, you basically stay poor unless something extraordinary happens

i don't think taxes even necessarily need to be raised, but i do think loopholes should close, and companies should pay their fair share. you should get tax breaks for keeping jobs here and/or penalties for moving them out though. that's what should be disincentivized.

Your #4 Republicans see the ridiculous amount of funds spent on education and the poor results that are achieved. Ever since the labor unions took over education, brought in PC and all the psychobabble programs, reducing standards.....have we seen the education in this country go south. Nice Job. And what is pathetic is the resistance to change how the kids are educated, resistance to vouchers and school choice, charter schools. For most liberal politicians, turning out dumb kids is ok.

#5, fine the employers for hiring them. They would self deport.

And yes, people choose to be lazy. That is maybe the most clueless statement that you have ever typed. Your party has made it an art form to create dependency in this country. And you think you are helping people? I believe it is an organized, orchestrated effort by liberals to dumb down and keep down millions of Americans, and then pat themselves on the back for helping them, while reminding them to vote. They show their true colors when they oppose vouchers and charter schools....they are owned by the Unions, and their campaign contributions...over the poor kids. Do you deny this?

I have stated on here before, people ask me when was it that started this country on a downward spiral, and I always tell them when LBJ rolled out his Great Society welfare programs, and it began giving out benefits to those in the "poor" class of citizens, housing, food stamps, welfare payments, without out anything in return, no work program, no community service, no effort whatsoever required on the recipient, and no time limitation as to when the benefits would run out, that was the beginning of the end. That was a wholesale attack on the very virtues that made this country great, personal responsibility and self reliance and hard work. All orchestrated by liberals. And as to the future, you see a higher and higher percentage of those receiving benefits, so where is this going, when will this trend stop? When we are bankrupted? Then what? This lazy, angry, "entitled" group of people going to do something to survive? You bet they are, they're coming to your house, and take what they want, just like they did to those stores in Ferguson.

Now tell me Mr. Liberal, are you optimistic about the future? Do you see the path we are on as working out if we stay on it, or are you objective enough to see that continuing on this path...we are doomed?

[Tear Down This Wall]

1) like i said, people don't starve quietly. if you want to have anything, the poor people in the country should at least be fed.



They do starve quietly in any given number of socialist/communist countries. You see any armed uprisings against the governments of Cuba, Mexico, or Venezuela? North Korea?

[FaninAma]

The difference between the top and the middle is so much more stark now than it was 50 years ago. That's our problem.

Guess what other entity has grown oh so much larger in that same time frame. Funny how that works.

[champions77]

Guess what other entity has grown oh so much larger in that same time frame. Funny how that works.

+1 True, so very true.

Funny how the left used to be the ones with the "open" minds and were all for diversity, tolerance and welcomed other opinions. At least that's what they preached. Now they won't even let a conservative make a speech at some of these "bastions" of academia. I guess Chavez, Castro and Stalin were the same way. The left, especially the hard left has a problem with free speech, well I guess they have a problem with anything free as long as it has DOMS on the end.

[Soonerjeepman]

you really think poor people just choose to be lazy and not get ahead? everything is set up where if you are poor, you basically stay poor unless something extraordinary happens

.

Yes and no. As someone who works with the poor....it's a mind-set. You don't see MOST illegals sitting around on their butts do you? #1 minimum wage jobs were NOT meant to be a career. #2 Since factory work (you could sustain a living - not dream vacations, lavish toys, etc...but a living) has changed "innovation" robots vs man, then priorities need to change...EDUCATION. It's there...guess what, folks don't want to work at it.

I work my butt off, but guess what? I can't afford a boat, lake house, vacation get-a-ways...I have 2 kids in college. My cars are no newer than 2001. Am I grateful and blessed yes, but I also don't over extend.

There is a dangerous mind-set going on. #1 I DESERVE the same as others, #2 the gov owes me and should assist in the equality crap.

[TAFBSooner]

They do starve quietly in any given number of socialist/communist countries. You see any armed uprisings against the governments of Cuba, Mexico, or Venezuela? North Korea?

Cubans are a little bit above starving.
Mexico and Venezuela do have uprisings, although not necessarily by the peasants. Also Mexico is a ringer in a list of socialist/communist countries.
North Koreans do indeed starve quietly, annually. Ugh.

[TAFBSooner]

You are preaching cognitive dissonance now?

This guy sums up a lot of what I see here:
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/08/09/opinion/sunday/capitalists-arise-we-need-to-deal-with-income-inequality.html?referrer=

Odds are you won't read it or understand it, but whatever

Crickets.

Too bad, because this guy should be a hero to conservatives. Not only a wealthy businessman, but the rags-to-riches variety. And he's worried about society falling apart just like some of the conservatives on here are.

[Serenity Now]

Crickets.

Too bad, because this guy should be a hero to conservatives. Not only a wealthy businessman, but the rags-to-riches variety. And he's worried about society falling apart just like some of the conservatives on here are.

Chirp!

[SicEmBaylor]

My answer to the question of whether or not I will support Bush/Christie/Huck/Carson/Rubio/Graham/Perry/Kasich should they win the nomination:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-K7fCQlUhj0

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

At the present time:
Walker
Cruz
Trump
Carson
Fiorina
Rand

[yermom]

What is wrong with Kasich?

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Squishy on immigration. He's waffled around. Been in govt. a long time. Why do you wonder about him?

[SicEmBaylor]

I was a fan of Kasich when he was in the House. However, he was a different guy back then -- I was a different guy back then -- it was a very confusing time for all of us.

[yermom]

The MSM seems to like him today.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

The MSM seems to like him today.I think MSM believes he would fail to motivate some of the more conservatives to vote, like what happened with Romney '12... especially after the MSM tears him a new as*hole after getting a republican nomination.

[Serenity Now]

I've got a friend that wants him to get the nomination because he could get Ohio, a big swing state.

Rush: you act like there's some secret media group that gets together once a week to get the marching orders.

[SicEmBaylor]

I've got a friend that wants him to get the nomination because he could get Ohio, a big swing state.

Rush: you act like there's some secret media group that gets together once a week to get the marching orders.

Here's the problem with that line of reasoning: Even if Kasich were to deliver Ohio, even Ohio isn't enough by itself. This is an election where the grassroots is hungry and clamoring for a 'principles' guy, and Kasich is a moderate policy wonk. Nobody wants another moderate policy wonk. He may deliver Ohio, but if he can't deliver the conservative base then it's all for naught.

[yermom]

which grassroots? the hardcore Rs aren't going to vote D anyway.

i haven't seen much that is too offensive from him so far, the worst being wanting to send troops to fight ISIS

of course, if the primaries are going to continue to be a competition of who can out wingnut the other guys, i'm not sure how they can expect to get any swing voters

the line that put him in the headlines today was about not needing his Bible to make decisions.

[SicEmBaylor]

which grassroots? the hardcore Rs aren't going to vote D anyway.

i haven't seen much that is too offensive from him so far, the worst being wanting to send troops to fight ISIS

of course, if the primaries are going to continue to be a competition of who can out wingnut the other guys, i'm not sure how they can expect to get any swing voters

It's not an issue of the grassroots voting Democrat -- it's an issue of the grassroots showing up to vote at all. You also have to keep in mind that it's the grassroots that is responsible for a campaign's GOTV effort state-by-state at the micro level. They're the ones driving the vans to pick up voters, the ones standing on the corner waving signs, the ones passing out literature, the ones knocking on doors in critical precincts and neighborhoods. All of that work requires a real dedication to the cause, and if those grassroots don't feel enthused by the candidate or the campaign then they're less likely to show up in the numbers or the hours required for a campaign to win critical states.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Here's the problem with that line of reasoning: Even if Kasich were to deliver Ohio, even Ohio isn't enough by itself. This is an election where the grassroots is hungry and clamoring for a 'principles' guy, and Kasich is a moderate policy wonk. Nobody wants another moderate policy wonk. He may deliver Ohio, but if he can't deliver the conservative base then it's all for naught.This is EXACTAMUNDO the crux of the matter.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

This is EXACTAMUNDO the crux of the matter.

It's not complicated, but it's kinda cute in a phked up sort of way how the board's leftists act like they don't understand it.

[yermom]

It's not complicated, but it's kinda cute in a phked up sort of way how the board's leftists act like they don't understand it.

haha!

[yermom]

Aww, you're just jealous!

pork jets, FTL!

http://defensetech.org/2015/08/12/analyst-russian-mig-29-and-su-27-top-american-f-35/

[Serenity Now]

It's not complicated, but it's kinda cute in a phked up sort of way how the board's leftists act like they don't understand it.

Then the GOP is screwed. You will not win an election with those that far to the right. It's kind of cute in a phked up way how you can't seem to grasp that, Reince.

[olevetonahill]

Im Not Bolting from any Party. However I will vote for JEB before Ill throw my vote away and give the election to Hilliary.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Im Not Bolting from any Party. However I will vote for JEB before Ill throw my vote away and give the election to Hilliary.Full agreement. Apparently in '12, Romney wasn't conservative enough for an estimated 4 million republicans to vote for, in order to keep Bear from being reelected. The Left and their MSM hopes to achieve a similar result in 2016

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Quote Originally Posted by RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!
It's not complicated, but it's kinda cute in a phked up sort of way how the board's leftists act like they don't understand it.(that the more conservative R candidate will get more votes than a RINO)

Then the GOP is screwed. You will not win an election with those that far to the right...Really, you should just not post, at least regarding political topics.

[champions77]

Then the GOP is screwed. You will not win an election with those that far to the right. It's kind of cute in a phked up way how you can't seem to grasp that, Reince.

"You will not win an election with those that far to the right". Humm, you mean like Bob Dole? Or John McCain? Or maybe Mitt Romney? Please tell me what "far to the right" means exactly?

Is it those that would require the Federal Government to live within their means? That spending that results in Trillion dollar deficits each year is a problem? Or those radicals that believe that having millions of unknowns coming across our border puts our citizens at risk and is not good for our Country? Or maybe those that see America becoming a welfare state, and where in the past a President that would run for re-election with 50 Million Americans on food stamps was 100% certain to be defeated because of a failed economic policy? Or maybe those radicals that believe that the US Military should be strong enough to protect the US from those adversaries that would do us harm if given the opportunity? And that a strong military does serve as a deterrent to our enemies? Or those right wind radicals that see mismanaged government programs, knowing that they are fraught with fraud, waste and abuse, to the tune of BILLIONS of dollars, and actually want to do something about it? Or is it those that have a problem with their tax dollars funding abortions? Or those right wing radicals that see a Healthcare Plan that is probably the most ill conceived Government legislation enacted in our History? Where it took lies and misinformation to pass it through Congress? Or is it those radicals that believe that the US Constitution should be defended, all of it, at all costs?

If you are looking for radicals look no further than your own party Sir. Because where the GOP still has moderates in their party, your Party on the other hand has been taken over by far left extremists radicals that would like nothing more than to turn this country into a socialist country. US Constitution is under attack by most every Democratic Party official, elected or otherwise. And you call out some in the GOP as too far to the right?

[Serenity Now]

Quote Originally Posted by RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!
It's not complicated, but it's kinda cute in a phked up sort of way how the board's leftists act like they don't understand it.(that the more conservative R candidate will get more votes than a RINO)
Really, you should just not post, at least regarding political topics.

Except that your opinion is incorrect. 30 years ago a moderate could run as far right as they needed to get the nomination and then run back to the middle to win the moderate "swing" voters. With 24/7 news and with a campaign season as long as it is, a conservative has to suck up to the fringe right to win the nomination and then they're stuck there a year later trying to defend what is already on the record.

Here's an example: http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/09/politics/gop-disarray/


To win the Republican primary, Romney had to adopt conservative stances on sensitive social issues -- such as opposing gay marriage, abortion and a pathway to legal status for many young undocumented immigrants -- which alienated increasingly significant demographics of the American electorate, analysts noted.

The former governor of moderate Massachusetts tried to move back to the political center in the final month of the campaign, but questions persisted about Republican stances on social issues.
-----

Jenny Beth Martin, co-founder of Tea Party Patriots, pinned the election loss on "a weak, moderate candidate, hand-picked by the Beltway elites and country club establishment wing of the Republican Party."

Her claim elicited a vulgarity from retiring Rep. Steve LaTourette, a moderate Republican who told CNN on Thursday: "There's a one-word phrase we use in Ohio for that: crap."

LaTourette says the hyper-partisan environment in Washington politics prompted him not to run for a 10th term this year. He attributed his party's election failure on far-right viewpoints on social issues, saying the GOP needs to "get out of peoples' lives, get out of their bedrooms."

"We sent (women) running back to the Democratic Party because they think we're nutty," LaTourette said of comments about rape by Mourdock of Indiana and Rep. Todd Akin of Missouri, conservatives who both lost Senate races Tuesday in states won by Romney.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Reagan won with 49 states. He was the last perceived conservatives the R's had as a candidate. Bush senior won because the electorate hoped he would be a lot like Reagan....ie stop with the nonsense.

[Serenity Now]

"You will not win an election with those that far to the right". Humm, you mean like Bob Dole? Or John McCain? Or maybe Mitt Romney? Please tell me what "far to the right" means exactly?

Is it those that would require the Federal Government to live within their means? That spending that results in Trillion dollar deficits each year is a problem? Or those radicals that believe that having millions of unknowns coming across our border puts our citizens at risk and is not good for our Country? Or maybe those that see America becoming a welfare state, and where in the past a President that would run for re-election with 50 Million Americans on food stamps was 100% certain to be defeated because of a failed economic policy? Or maybe those radicals that believe that the US Military should be strong enough to protect the US from those adversaries that would do us harm if given the opportunity? And that a strong military does serve as a deterrent to our enemies? Or those right wind radicals that see mismanaged government programs, knowing that they are fraught with fraud, waste and abuse, to the tune of BILLIONS of dollars, and actually want to do something about it? Or is it those that have a problem with their tax dollars funding abortions? Or those right wing radicals that see a Healthcare Plan that is probably the most ill conceived Government legislation enacted in our History? Where it took lies and misinformation to pass it through Congress? Or is it those radicals that believe that the US Constitution should be defended, all of it, at all costs?

If you are looking for radicals look no further than your own party Sir. Because where the GOP still has moderates in their party, your Party on the other hand has been taken over by far left extremists radicals that would like nothing more than to turn this country into a socialist country. US Constitution is under attack by most every Democratic Party official, elected or otherwise. And you call out some in the GOP as too far to the right?

Both parties have moved from the center. I think it's obvious to reasonable people that said movement is stronger to the right.

Just your first sentence. The ONLY person I've EVER seen in D.C. modeling that was Tom Coburn. I didn't always agree with him but I at least respected him. He was a pariah to the right because of that stance. You act like the left is advocating a weak military. I think the concensus is that we don't have to have a miltary as large as the next 6 military's below ours. Look at the $1.5 trillion F-35. Crazy. The "shock and awe" of the last decade has done more to create terrorism than it has to stop it. At some point, the definition of insanity is trying the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

[Serenity Now]

Reagan won with 49 states. He was the last perceived conservatives the R's had as a candidate. Bush senior won because the electorate hoped he would be a lot like Reagan....ie stop with the nonsense.

Reagan also was for gun control. Reagan did not agree with the right wing in Israel. Reagan supported Iran AFTER they took our hostages. Reagan supported amnesty. Reagan would be relegated to the kiddie debate in the modern GOP. Do I really have to do that again?

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

You continue to post in the last place you should be posting...OF COURSE I/we all expected that.

[Serenity Now]

You continue to post in the last place you should be posting...OF COURSE I/we all expected that.

I don't like circle jerks. Where should I be posting that is not a place where everyone agrees and does virtual high fives?

You don't like to hear things about St. Ronnie that you don't agree with? Does it make you question your beliefs?

I read things from you guys that make me question why I think a certain way. When I filter through the often dickish way that it's presented, a few posters have good insights that do me much more good than some lefty group.

[Serenity Now]

You continue to post in the last place you should be posting...OF COURSE I/we all expected that.

My -2,500,000 points indicate that as well. :)

H/T Curly Bill

[Serenity Now]

Reagan won with 49 states. He was the last perceived conservatives the R's had as a candidate. Bush senior won because the electorate hoped he would be a lot like Reagan....ie stop with the nonsense.

The nonsense that Clinton brought? I never voted for Clinton but he is arguably the last President that was a good one financially. Clinton had to work with a divided Congress. Personally, I think our government works best when the legislative and executive powers are split. They have to compromise.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/holb_c13441820150817120100.jpg

[champions77]

Reagan also was for gun control. Reagan did not agree with the right wing in Israel. Reagan supported Iran AFTER they took our hostages. Reagan supported amnesty. Reagan would be relegated to the kiddie debate in the modern GOP. Do I really have to do that again?

Gosh if Reagan was such a moderate/liberal, why do you and your ilk despise/hate him so? Listen to his words. He was a conservative through and through and ten times the leader that this socialist nut we have today is. He engaged his opponents, didn't sit back and bad mouth and demonize them. He got things done, without lying and deceit like BHO.

Movement is stronger to the right? You credibility is taking some major hits today Serenity. So you have a Presidential candidate that is gaining more and more traction, and he's an avowed SOCIALIST, and you still believe the right has moved more to the right? When's the last time you heard the media mention the "Tea Party"? Weeks? Months?
You know I don't know where you get your misinformation, whether it be Salon or the Huffington Post, but after seeing this Administration appoint card carrying socialist and Communist, and then have a socialist curmudgeon like Bernie Sanders actually receive good support, it somehow makes you feel more "mainstream" to cast the GOP as being controlled by far right radicals? You are foolish if you really believe this nonsense.

[Serenity Now]

Gosh if Reagan was such a moderate/liberal, why do you and your ilk despise/hate him so? Listen to his words. He was a conservative through and through and ten times the leader that this socialist nut we have today is. He engaged his opponents, didn't sit back and bad mouth and demonize them. He got things done, without lying and deceit like BHO.

I don't dislike Reagan. He did some very good things. I just think he'd be at the kiddie debates on Foxnews in 2015. Gun control/Israel/Amnesty/Iran. Mic drop.

[Curly Bill]

My -2,500,000 points indicate that as well. :)

H/T Curly Bill

Thank ya, thank ya very much!

[Curly Bill]

Im Not Bolting from any Party. However I will vote for JEB before Ill throw my vote away and give the election to Hilliary.

Not me. If Jeb or Christie are the nominee I'll set home on election day before I hold my nose and force myself to vote for one of those toads.

[hawaii 5-0]

Arms to Iran for hostages.

The Repubs gotta miss those golden days.

5-0

[olevetonahill]

Not me. If Jeb or Christie are the nominee I'll set home on election day before I hold my nose and force myself to vote for one of those toads.

I'd rather hold my nose and vote fer anyone, than have to hold my nose for at least 4 years with the Bitch in there.

[champions77]

I'd rather hold my nose and vote fer anyone, than have to hold my nose for at least 4 years with the Bitch in there.

Hillary is under fire from the Socialist Party, I mean Democratic Party, evidently because she's not far enough to the left. It certainly not because they have a problem with her lack of scruples or integrity. So it is not a foregone conclusion that she will be the nominee, especially since Obama's Justice Department is actively pursuing her and this Server/email cover-up. Apparently ole Hillary is not far enough to the Left for the Messiah either.

Love to listen in on a phone conversation between Bill and Barack, or Hillary and Barack.

[REDREX]

Say what you want about the Reps running for President---------What the Dems are putting up is a complete joke

[champions77]

Say what you want about the Reps running for President---------What the Dems are putting up is a complete joke

What you have a problem with the two front runners? Just because one is a crook and one is a Socialist? You're being way too judgmental man!!

The really sad thing is that there would be millions line up and vote for either one.

[REDREX]

What you have a problem with the two front runners? Just because one is a crook and one is a Socialist? You're being way too judgmental man!!

The really sad thing is that there would be millions line up and vote for either one.----You think the Dems have bought enough votes to win even if they put up those losers?

[champions77]

----You think the Dems have bought enough votes to win even if they put up those losers?

Yes, I sure do. With the main stream media carrying the water of whomever the Dems nominate, it influences millions of people who cannot think on their own. And how much damage will the 17 Repubs inflict on each other between now and next summer?

Long way to go, so anything is possible. I never thought that BHO would get re-elected with the sorry state of the economy, the foreign policy blunders, and the arrogance and lies that had surfaced after four years, but.... Just goes to show you what a smooth talking, convincing liar, backed by an adoring, look the other way media can do. Very powerful.

[REDREX]

Class warfare the Dem trademark-----How do they expect to pay all the debt not to mention all the unfunded liabilities?

[okie52]

I was a fan of Kasich when he was in the House. However, he was a different guy back then -- I was a different guy back then -- it was a very confusing time for all of us.

Kasich turned into a complete marshmallow.

[FaninAma]

3rd party with a perceived conservative is a recipe for disaster, a sign the citizenry is ready to riot and break down the economy completely. I know it. You know it. Everybody SHOULD know it.
I don't care if it hurts the Republican Party especially the establishment faction. If all of the GOP voters had gone to the polls like good little robots and voted for the establishment candidates for POTUS I guarantee you we wouldn't have had the conservative waves of 2010 and 2014. We probably don't get a Ted Cruz or Rand Paul or Joni Ernst or either of the new Senators in South and North Carolina. And a lot of the current Republican governors would probably not hold office had a GOP moderate, establishment squish like GWB been elected POTUS in 2008 0r 2012.

[champions77]

#101




REDREX





REDREX is online now Sooner All-Big XII-2-1+1-1+1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Location:74137Posts:1,627vCash:500




Re: Poll Says 1/3 of Republicans Ready to Bolt Party



Class warfare the Dem trademark-----How do they expect to pay all the debt not to mention all the unfunded liabilities?





Their insatiable appetite to spend money, buy votes, perpetuate themselves in office, clearly outweighs any future concerns as to the inevitable debt crisis that is sure to confront the US down the road. And the folks they wage their class warfare against and demonize, are the very ones that finance most of their social welfare programs, heck of a deal, for them.

The Democrat lies that have been told for generations, like the wealthy don't pay taxes, has been refuted time and time again. The phony war on the 1%, blaming them for everything but the holocaust, is another one of their lies. In reality, the TOP 1% pay in excess 35% of all federal income taxes. But you would never know it hearing Dems like ole Bernie and the liar Hillary talk. Another lie is that if you could just make those wealthy sobs pay their "fair" share, then we would not have a deficit problem. If you confiscated every cent from the top 1%, you could run the Federal Government for less than six months.
Lie, lie, lie. It's something you have to do when facts and reality are not on your side.

Are there not any Statesmen left in Washington DC? Ones that would sacrifice a possible re-election bid, to do what was right?

[olevetonahill]

I don't care if it hurts the Republican Party especially the establishment faction. If all of the GOP voters had gone to the polls like good little robots and voted for the establishment candidates for POTUS I guarantee you we wouldn't have had the conservative waves of 2010 and 2014. We probably don't get a Ted Cruz or Rand Paul or Joni Ernst or either of the new Senators in South and North Carolina. And a lot of the current Republican governors would probably not hold office had a GOP moderate, establishment squish like GWB been elected POTUS in 2008 0r 2012.

But we may have been spared Obammy. Think of that.

[FaninAma]

But we may have been spared Obammy. Think of that.

No Obama v. another GWB and no young gun Conservatives. Tough call.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Quote Originally Posted by olevetonahill
Im Not Bolting from any Party. However I will vote for JEB before Ill throw my vote away and give the election to Hilliary.
Not me. If Jeb or Christie are the nominee I'll set home on election day before I hold my nose and force myself to vote for one of those toads.Curly, I didn't figure you to be a breath holder. faninAma and Sicem, yes, but not you.

[olevetonahill]

No Obama v. another GWB and no young gun Conservatives. Tough call.

It dont really matter in MHO, they all gonna do what the Big money that got em elected tells em to do
Personally as screwed up as we are right now I think Id like to see Trump in there.
If nothing else we get a lot of Laughs out of the Libs and such squealing

[Curly Bill]

Quote Originally Posted by olevetonahill
Im Not Bolting from any Party. However I will vote for JEB before Ill throw my vote away and give the election to Hilliary.Curly, I didn't figure you to be a breath holder. faninAma and Sicem, yes, but not you.

I've not been that to this point, but I've now reached that point. Tired of sending these moderate republicans, or moderate conservatives, or whatever we want to call them to DC, and regardless of what they're called they are essentially democrat-lites.

[olevetonahill]

I've not been that to this point, but I've now reached that point. Tired of sending these moderate republicans, or moderate conservatives, or whatever we want to call them to DC, and regardless of what they're called they are essentially democrat-lites.

I just cant seem to throw my vote away. Or in essence give a Lib the job by abstaining LOL

By the way . How you quoted Me an Ole Rush it seems we Both sayin that, I dint Call ya No names Ya Dumas LOL