2024 GOP Primary

Mr. Deez said:
Even she has limits to her idiocy. But apparently Keith doesn't. Seriously, how the hell does this guy not have a stroke every 10 minutes? He has been in a nonstop freakout since about 2003.

Click to expand...


LOL. Getting rid of the judicial branch sure makes it more democratic. Also funny to call out nine people who have been judges and attorneys for decades as reading inept.
 
The 14th amendment says that congress determines if an insurrection occurs.

We have 2 legal precedents from the SCOTUS that says that the insurrection clause isn't self-executing.

You really can't get much more clear than that.

What did the liberals think was going to happen in a real court?
 
Well, it is clear that Kagan and her clan on the court are Trump acolytes just like the gang of five.
No clear thinking person or perdaughter could side with the Orange Monster on anything
 
Haley’s campaign is dead in the water and the fact that she is close in a state with a population smaller than Arkansas’ is of no import whatsoever.
The press likes to cover campaigns as if they are horse races. This one is close in a race where the purse is $8 and change In all the others one horse is running like a thoroughbred and all the others like lame possums

this is no horse race
 
It's not the GOP, but it's somewhat relevant. Texas Rep. Shawn Thierry (D-Houston) is a staunch liberal and obnoxiously so, but she rejects the new religion of cutting up children in the name of gender ideology. So her career is likely over.

 
Last edited:
Wow Demx in Houston district 145 are for mutilating children?
Wonder if each campaign material highlighted each's stand on the issue?
 
Horn6721 said:
Wow Demx in Houston district 145 are for mutilating children?
Wonder if each campaign material highlighted each's stand on the issue?
Click to expand...

Of course, they call it "gender-affirming care," but we know that consists of counseling them to believe their delusions, pumping them full of unnatural hormones, and ultimately cutting up their bodies.
 
Yes Mr D
Even the sickos FOR "Gender affirming care" know it means mutilating children but they don't care. The agenda is more important although I don't understand their agenda.
 
Interesting that the Repubs here in Texas put "propositions " on primary ballot and Demx didn't.
They weren't true propositions but more like poll questions. Repubs asking voters directly opinions on issues.
I think I like it. Seems a very efficent way to get actual opinions on issues from actual verified voters instead of traditional polling.
Will be interesting to see what they do with results.
 
Horn6721 said:
Yes Mr D
Even the sickos FOR "Gender affirming care" know it means mutilating children but they don't care. The agenda is more important although I don't understand their agenda.
Click to expand...
Think of it as game theory. If you are in a card game--poker, bridge, whatever--and you don't like your cards, you are okay with starting over and re-dealing. Or, from the jury trial world, if lawyers think they are losing, they will try to cause a mistrial, so as to start over with a new jury.

When liberalism approaches radicalism, the base mindset is that things are "so bad" that "anything" would be better, especially if they get to control the change. They see all of society, all of the centuries of progress (especially in the west) in feeding, clothing, housing people--not just that but prosperity--and in providing laws, constitutions, social mores, freedoms, opportunities, etc., and they think that on balance, any change would be an improvement. They focus on the glass half empty 100% of the time. Social injustice, income inequality, privilege of families successful from previous generations, wars, failures of the healthcare system, etc. By focusing on the negative all the time, they come to believe truly that "anything" could be better.

I remember a saying in my family whenever someone would say, "it can't get any worse," the response would be "yes, it could be that plus a poke in the eye with a sharp stick."

Many liberals actually want to make improvements to what already exists, but usually they are weak-minded people without a comprehensive worldview. They just attach to any proposed idea of improvement without a full consideration of the costs of the change. The worldview they do have is mostly atheistic, so their hope for any positive in the world usually looks to government or media as the path. The problem is that the radical liberals who do have a comprehensive worldview believe--or act like they believe--that the first necessary step to get to the new better world is to burn down and destroy everything that exists now in society. Basically, a Marxist mindset. (Now, whenever and wherever Marx was, maybe the society actually needed to be destroyed as the first step, I don't know, but I definitely don't think it applies to 2024 USA.) So, being the only liberals with a comprehensive worldview (a terrible one, in my opinion), the burn-it-down Marxists have a great influence over the let's-just-make-things-better bleeding hearts on the left.

So, on an issue like gender destruction, the bleeding hearts are persuaded by the "let's just make it better for the poor gender dysphoric kids who are being bullied," but the evil wizards are leading them with a goal of destroying Christianity, families, and other social structures that they feel are in the way, long term, to implementing a better social(ist) structure.
 
VYFan said:
Think of it as game theory. If you are in a card game--poker, bridge, whatever--and you don't like your cards, you are okay with starting over and re-dealing. Or, from the jury trial world, if lawyers think they are losing, they will try to cause a mistrial, so as to start over with a new jury.

When liberalism approaches radicalism, the base mindset is that things are "so bad" that "anything" would be better, especially if they get to control the change. They see all of society, all of the centuries of progress (especially in the west) in feeding, clothing, housing people--not just that but prosperity--and in providing laws, constitutions, social mores, freedoms, opportunities, etc., and they think that on balance, any change would be an improvement. They focus on the glass half empty 100% of the time. Social injustice, income inequality, privilege of families successful from previous generations, wars, failures of the healthcare system, etc. By focusing on the negative all the time, they come to believe truly that "anything" could be better.

I remember a saying in my family whenever someone would say, "it can't get any worse," the response would be "yes, it could be that plus a poke in the eye with a sharp stick."

Many liberals actually want to make improvements to what already exists, but usually they are weak-minded people without a comprehensive worldview. They just attach to any proposed idea of improvement without a full consideration of the costs of the change. The worldview they do have is mostly atheistic, so their hope for any positive in the world usually looks to government or media as the path. The problem is that the radical liberals who do have a comprehensive worldview believe--or act like they believe--that the first necessary step to get to the new better world is to burn down and destroy everything that exists now in society. Basically, a Marxist mindset. (Now, whenever and wherever Marx was, maybe the society actually needed to be destroyed as the first step, I don't know, but I definitely don't think it applies to 2024 USA.) So, being the only liberals with a comprehensive worldview (a terrible one, in my opinion), the burn-it-down Marxists have a great influence over the let's-just-make-things-better bleeding hearts on the left.

So, on an issue like gender destruction, the bleeding hearts are persuaded by the "let's just make it better for the poor gender dysphoric kids who are being bullied," but the evil wizards are leading them with a goal of destroying Christianity, families, and other social structures that they feel are in the way, long term, to implementing a better social(ist) structure.
Click to expand...

I think there's a lot of truth to this, but I also think there's a unity of contempt at play. I think a lot of well-meaning liberals are deferential to the hard left crazies with bad intentions, because they harbor hostility for those who oppose the hard left crazies. It's what explains why they'll promote gender ideology in the morning and then fetishize Islamic fundamentalism in the afternoon, even though the latter wants all of them stoned to death or decapitated.
 
Horn6721 said:
Interesting that the Repubs here in Texas put "propositions " on primary ballot and Demx didn't.
They weren't true propositions but more like poll questions. Repubs asking voters directly opinions on issues.
I think I like it. Seems a very efficent way to get actual opinions on issues from actual verified voters instead of traditional polling.
Will be interesting to see what they do with results.
Click to expand...

I like it if it convinces Republican politicians to do what the people want. If it was meant to appease then it was worthless.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

Back
Top