Jump to content


What is the future of the Republican Party?


Recommended Posts


I guess I should add, we are probably playing a semantics game here.   The title of the thread to me means who will be the future leaders or what will be the future principals of the party.  She will not be a leader imo.  
 

if your version of the title means anyone who will be elected as a Republican is the future of the party, then I guess you are right too.  I don’t see her getting voted out anytime soon based on being in a completely safe district. 

  • Plus1 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
2 hours ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

Like I said, a complete lost cause. The issues the country faces are complex, and Republicans continuously display a complete lack of understanding these problems or even acknowledging their existence. 

 

Is inflation a uniquely American problem? No. In fact it's less of an issue here than in other advanced economies. But hey, I'm sure you're giving the Biden Administration credit for that record low unemployment.

 

Are rising healthcare costs the result of demographic shifts of a rapidly aging baby Boomer generation, something demographers have known and warned about for decades? No, if you ask a Republican brain, it's the result of Obamacare. Why let a nuanced understanding of the world inform your views when you can let Fox News dictate those views for you? 

 

Is this the first time in history the stock market is down? No. But hey, I'm sure Republicans genuinely care about the American people and wouldn't in any way jeopardize those 401k accounts by using political theater over the debt ceiling (again!).

 

It goes on and on. But hey, Conservatives have complained about education corrupting the youth since the 1950s so at least you're consistent on that one. 

 

PS - investigate Biden for mishandling documents. He should face punishment according to the law and regulations regarding them. There isn't a cult of personality around him. 

Yep….they are good at regurgitating party talking points and his post proved that swimmingly. 

  • Plus1 3
Link to comment

2 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

Oh, OK.  Thanks for the heads up.  :laughpound
 

Comparing inflation rates across other countries would require the poster to actually look up the main drivers of inflation in each specific country to understand they are not the same.  Maybe I should use the boards favorite, Nuance????   
 

Great job Joe for keeping unemployment a tick below the Trump admin.  
 

I am absolutely, positively, quite certain that Obama promised over $2,000 a year in premium cost savings for a family.  Is this a new phenomenon you speak of or did Obama not know about this thing called aging?

 

Any idea why the debt ceiling is going to hit months and months before it was projected to hit?   Those pesky interest rates that no one thought of are really hammering the debt bubble both parties have created.   Fun fact for you to research….check out how much of the yearly budget goes to debt service alone.   Then come back on here and tell me debt doesn’t matter. 
 

Source? 

Inflation is up worldwide because it's a worldwide problem. You seem to want it the best of both worlds: inflation is high in other countries because of unique circumstances surrounding their economies but American inflation is the result of Biden Administration policies. 

 

Secondly, healthcare costs may be $2000 lower than their projected increase otherwise would've been. Healthcare costs, because of demographics, are impossible to make lower. We can slow the increase of prices via a single payer system, which your party is of course against. If Obama said the real costs would be lower, he was lying.

 

Thirdly, I'm aware of the debt ceiling and how much servicing the debt costs. If Republicans were serious about lowering the debt, they would've done so when they had control of Congress. They aren't serious about the debt and instead passed tax cuts for the wealthy exacerbating the problem even further. The Inflation Reduction Act did actually raise more than it will spend - Republicans of course did not vote for it, and will inevitably gut it when they control Congress later this decade.

 

Lastly, to give you an idea of the how far back the anti-intellectual movement of Conservatism goes, take a look at this magazine cover from the 1950s or read The Paranoid Style in American Politics which discusses the paranoia of education, media, and how conspiracy theories have taken over Conservatism written in 1964.

 

2 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

Ummm, AZ NM CA NV and CO didn’t actually vote for Trump in 2020:facepalm:

This will blow your mind - but what I said was that I don't want tax money to help states that deny the problem, which excludes CA, NM, etc. The citizens of those states seem to understand the problem and vote in ways that help fix it. T

 

If the citizens of states like Utah or Arizona wanted to deal with the problem, they shouldn't have voted for Republicans for most of the last 40 years. Great for Arizona for sort of turning the corner in 2018, but it's a bit late for me to care if rivers dry up on them. They had 50 years to figure it out.

2 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

I don’t think this will work out the way you think it would:lol:

It would lead to the complete collapse of their agricultural economies. You proved my point - Republicans are like domesticated house cats. They think they're independent but in reality their livelihood depends on forces they don't understand and seemly cannot comprehend. 

  • Plus1 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Fire 1
  • TBH 2
Link to comment
20 minutes ago, Dr. Strangelove said:
3 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

Inflation is up worldwide because it's a worldwide problem. You seem to want it the best of both worlds: inflation is high in other countries because of unique circumstances surrounding their economies but American inflation is the result of Biden Administration policies. 

Inflation does have unique main drivers for countries based on some unique issues., surprised you don’t realize this.   
 

22 minutes ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

econdly, healthcare costs may be $2000 lower than their projected increase otherwise would've been.

This is an argument you are really gonna go with?  Without any relevant data to back it up?
 

24 minutes ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

 

Thirdly, I'm aware of the debt ceiling and how much servicing the debt costs. If Republicans were serious about lowering the debt, they would've done so when they had control of Congress. They aren't serious about the debt

So you understand it’s a gigantic line item on our budget yet poke fun about a debt ceiling fight:thumbs    I do agree with you about Many Republicans and their empty words about debt increase.  
 

26 minutes ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

 

Lastly, to give you an idea of the how far back the anti-intellectual movement of Conservatism goes, take a look at this magazine cover from the 1950s or read The Paranoid Style in American Politics which discusses the paranoia of education, media, and how conspiracy theories have taken over Conservatism written in 1964.

Sorry for the confusion, I meant a link to what you claimed in your earlier post.  Thx.
 

28 minutes ago, Dr. Strangelove said:
3 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

 

This will blow your mind - but what I said was that I don't want tax money to help states that deny the problem, which excludes CA, NM, etc

It’s actually not what you said,  

 

 

If the citizens of Utah or the Southwest were concerned about the environmental collapse happening around them - like the Great Salt Lake drying up  or the water crisis in the Southwest - they wouldn't have voted for a President who's climate change policy was "its a hoax by China". 

30 minutes ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

It would lead to the complete collapse of their agricultural economies. You proved my point - Republicans are like domesticated house cats. They think they're independent but in reality their livelihood depends on forces they don't understand and seemly cannot comprehend. 

I’ll repeat….it won’t work out the way you think it would. 

  • Fire 1
Link to comment

3 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

I guess I should add, we are probably playing a semantics game here.   The title of the thread to me means who will be the future leaders or what will be the future principals of the party.  She will not be a leader imo.  

 

This is like saying you don't think Trev Alberts is likely to hire Matt Rhule. 

  • Plus1 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

Visit the Sports Illustrated Husker site



×
×
  • Create New...