What is the future of the Republican Party?

[Scarlet]

10 minutes ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

I think the problem is that your third party vote makes the two equivalent and is why Biden is likely to lose if No Labels becomes a thing.

 

"Sure, Trump is a lying authoritarian who's undermined American Democracy, he's hypnotized a base of morons who don't live in reality and is an extremely dangerous person to have in charge.

 

But Joe Biden is old and the vibes are bad. You know, the Inflation Reduction Act to actually address climate change and cap insulin prices was cool, as well as bipartisan bills addressing Infrastructure, microchips, gun control, and a spending agreement is exactly the kind of moderate policy the median voter yearns for, but the guy is a dinosaur."

 

You do see how "protesting" both equates them and is the same rationalization a voter in Wisconsin/Arizona/Georgia would do, yes?

 

Now that we've apparently entered the f#&% Around stage in the 2024 election cycle, it's becoming clear that the only thing that can save democracy from some of the American electorate's lack of forethought is cholesterol and she sure is taking her time doing her thing.   

[suh_fan93]

 

[Scarlet]

What a party 

 

 

 

[BigRedBuster]

2 hours ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

I think the problem is that your third party vote makes the two equivalent and is why Biden is likely to lose if No Labels becomes a thing.

 

"Sure, Trump is a lying authoritarian who's undermined American Democracy, he's hypnotized a base of morons who don't live in reality and is an extremely dangerous person to have in charge.

 

But Joe Biden is old and the vibes are bad. You know, the Inflation Reduction Act to actually address climate change and cap insulin prices was cool, as well as bipartisan bills addressing Infrastructure, microchips, gun control, and a spending agreement is exactly the kind of moderate policy the median voter yearns for, but the guy is a dinosaur."

 

You do see how "protesting" both equates them and is the same rationalization a voter in Wisconsin/Arizona/Georgia would do, yes?

Just like @TGHusker, my vote doesn’t mean anything in western Nebraska. 
 

So, if Dems want my vote, nominate someone that isn’t  ancient. 
 

I get it, you’re a Dem and want everyone to vote Dem. Some people don’t feel the same way. 

[Dr. Strangelove]

25 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

Just like @TGHusker, my vote doesn’t mean anything in western Nebraska. 
 

So, if Dems want my vote, nominate someone that isn’t  ancient. 
 

I get it, you’re a Dem and want everyone to vote Dem. Some people don’t feel the same way. 

I don't want people to vote Dem, I want them to reject authoritarian elements that seek to undermine the country.

 

What I don't get is the false equivalency between the two: one guy is actively dangerous and is publicly talking about ways to broadly expand executive power and the other guy is... old. Therefore you're frustrated and won't vote for either. These two aren't equivalent but your vote is signaling as much. Ask Jill Stein voters how that worked.

 

What I'm thing to warn you about is the idea of "my vote doesn't matter" is a rationalization every frustrated voter is going to say no matter what state they're in. By rejecting that idea we can hopefully force the GOP to reorient themselves away from the populism that is choking them. 

[BigRedBuster]

26 minutes ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

I don't want people to vote Dem, I want them to reject authoritarian elements that seek to undermine the country.

 

What I don't get is the false equivalency between the two: one guy is actively dangerous and is publicly talking about ways to broadly expand executive power and the other guy is... old. Therefore you're frustrated and won't vote for either. These two aren't equivalent but your vote is signaling as much. Ask Jill Stein voters how that worked.

 

What I'm thing to warn you about is the idea of "my vote doesn't matter" is a rationalization every frustrated voter is going to say no matter what state they're in. By rejecting that idea we can hopefully force the GOP to reorient themselves away from the populism that is choking them. 

Nobody is equating them. Trump is a disaster. Nobody is as bad as him. 
 

You’re not understanding exactly how much my vote really doesn’t matter. 

[Lorewarn]

2 hours ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

I don't want people to vote Dem, I want them to reject authoritarian elements that seek to undermine the country.

 

What I don't get is the false equivalency between the two: one guy is actively dangerous and is publicly talking about ways to broadly expand executive power and the other guy is... old. Therefore you're frustrated and won't vote for either. These two aren't equivalent but your vote is signaling as much. Ask Jill Stein voters how that worked.

 

 

You're creating the false equivalency, not the people you're responding to.

 

The stranglehold that the two main parties have on American politics, and their uninspiring candidates, are not the fault or responsibility of the voting citizens. If someone is telling me to choose to vote between Ted Bundy and George Santos, and my vote doesn't matter, I'm not voting for either and it's not because I'm treating them equally - they just both pass the threshold of people I'm not willing to vote for.

[teachercd]

6 minutes ago, Lorewarn said:

 

 

You're creating the false equivalency, not the people you're responding to.

 

The stranglehold that the two main parties have on American politics, and their uninspiring candidates, are not the fault or responsibility of the voting citizens. If someone is telling me to choose to vote between Ted Bundy and George Santos, and my vote doesn't matter, I'm not voting for either and it's not because I'm treating them equally - they just both pass the threshold of people I'm not willing to vote for.

Yep!

 

False equivalency is what people use when they don't like that they just got beat up.

[Dr. Strangelove]

3 hours ago, Lorewarn said:

 

 

You're creating the false equivalency, not the people you're responding to.

 

The stranglehold that the two main parties have on American politics, and their uninspiring candidates, are not the fault or responsibility of the voting citizens. If someone is telling me to choose to vote between Ted Bundy and George Santos, and my vote doesn't matter, I'm not voting for either and it's not because I'm treating them equally - they just both pass the threshold of people I'm not willing to vote for.

It absolutely is a false equivalency and I'd say your standards as a voter are intentionally being setup in a way to make you frustrated with politics. If Trump doesn't pass your test as a voter for the multitude of obvious reasons, that's fine, but to them cite the other candidates issue being his age to make him equally unworthy of your vote, well I don't know what to tell you. 

 

The bolded is absolutely false - the voting public is wholeheartedly responsible for how political parties operate. Biden won his nomination against younger, more progressive candidates- I did not vote for him- via an established process established by voters.

[Lorewarn]

25 minutes ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

It absolutely is a false equivalency and I'd say your standards as a voter are intentionally being setup in a way to make you frustrated with politics. If Trump doesn't pass your test as a voter for the multitude of obvious reasons, that's fine, but to them cite the other candidates issue being his age to make him equally unworthy of your vote, well I don't know what to tell you. 

 

The bolded is absolutely false - the voting public is wholeheartedly responsible for how political parties operate. Biden won his nomination against younger, more progressive candidates- I did not vote for him- via an established process established by voters.

 

 

The bolded here is where you are manufacturing the equivalency. Everyone has a certain threshold for voting for a candidate - call it a mile marker, or even better a speed limit. If one candidate speeds by the milemarker at 200mph and continues going past the horizon, and another candidate is just one mile past the marker going 10 over, a cop pulling both over and citing them tickets is not tantamount to the cop saying they are equal offenders. It's only saying they both did, in fact, go past the limit to differing degrees.

 

When it comes to someone voting, their own criteria for whether or not they will or can vote for someone is frankly none of your damn business and very much within their rights, and does not at all mean that they are declaring everyone they don't vote for equally unworthy. A better phrase would be all unworthy to varying degrees.

 

 

 

29 minutes ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

The bolded is absolutely false - the voting public is wholeheartedly responsible for how political parties operate. Biden won his nomination against younger, more progressive candidates- I did not vote for him- via an established process established by voters.

 

Fair enough, but if you're right about this, then your tactics of guilt tripping people into picking the bland boring sandwich instead of the steaming pile of s#!t are the actions that lead to us having no viable, healthy and nutritious alternatives.

 

[BigRedBuster]

A cult is strange to watch from the outside looking in. 
 

 

[BigRedBuster]

 

[Moiraine]

1 hour ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

 

 

Do the people who will vote for this f#&% think he's only going to rule the others with an iron fist?

[teachercd]

5 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

A cult is strange to watch from the outside looking in. 
 

 

It seems more like an abusive relationship.  It is sad.

[suh_fan93]