Jump to content


What is the future of the Republican Party?

Scarlet

By Scarlet,
in Politics & Religion

Recommended Posts

Enhance Offensive Coordinator

Enhance

Posted
Posted

@Archy1221

 

1) Regarding LGTBQ+, why did you immediately go to Trump? I never mentioned him in that section. And it doesn't even look like you really read what I wrote, but instead immediately got defensive about Trump. Bizarre. I'm not going to go down a tangential rabbit hole that you dug. But if you want to talk about why a lot of people find Republicans' views on LGBTQ+ archaic and bigoted, I can do that.

2) Gun rights policy is where you believe it should be. I'm offering context where a lot of Moderates and Democrats stand, as well as other countries we consider to be our "peers." (FWIW... we kill with guns, commit suicide with guns, and shoot one another more often than just about any other country we like to consider our peers or that we're better than).

3) Birth control/abortions. If you don't want federal dollars to subsidize those, you're more than welcome to that opinion. But we both know that a lot of Republicans aren't voting against those things because of their views on federal funding but because of their religious views and what the Bible says.

 

That you don't care what other countries do or think about these issues is your prerogative, but being closed off from global politics is not an objectively good thing. Gauging ourselves against our peers can be a healthy and intelligent way of making policy decisions.

  • Plus1 2
Link to comment

knapplc Legend

knapplc

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

Trump was the most friendly Republican President or Presidential candidate towards gay/lesbian community

 

No.  :rolleyes:

 

 

trump opposed the Equality Act.

trump appointed anti-LGBTQ judges to every level of the judicial system, including but not limited to:  Gorsuch and Kavanaugh, and Kacsmaryk, Mateer, Bounds, Vitter & Menashi, to name only a few.

 

trump's administration submitted amicus briefs to the SC supporting discrimination against LGBTQ people in the workplace.

trump's administration banned transgender people from serving in the military DESPITE stiff opposition from military leadership.

trump rolled back President Obama's interpretations of the Civil Rights Act protecting transgender & non-binary workers, and stopped enforcing non-discrimination practices.

trump's Dept. of Labor issued a regulation allowing federal contractors to claim religious exemptions to fire LGBTQ workers because of sexual orientation or gender identity.

 

 

trump's HHS tried to remove protections for LGBTQ people from Section 1557 of Obamacare. 

trump's HHS also created an office whose sole purpose was to defend medical professionals who refuse to treat LGBTQ patients.

 

The list goes on & on. Check it out. 

 

 

 

  • Plus1 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment

Enhance Offensive Coordinator

Enhance

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

Because he was the last GOP President and candidate.  Most recent history

Republican views on the LGBTQ+ community and related policies pre-date his 2016 candidacy and ensuing presidency. Pretty bizarre to immediately get defensive about a person rather than the general policies and procedures the Republican party has endorsed (which is what my post was about), particularly when he and Republicans supported policies in the last four years that the LGTBQ+ community largely disagreed with them on.

 

Either way, I'll set the standard clear - I wasn't talking about Trump. So if you'd like to address the following:

 

20 minutes ago, Enhance said:

1) I you want to talk about why a lot of people find Republicans' views on LGBTQ+ archaic and bigoted, I can do that.

2) Gun rights policy is where you believe it should be. I'm offering context where a lot of Moderates and Democrats stand, as well as other countries we consider to be our "peers." (FWIW... we kill with guns, commit suicide with guns, and shoot one another more often than just about any other country we like to consider our peers or that we're better than).

3) Birth control/abortions. If you don't want federal dollars to subsidize those, you're more than welcome to that opinion. But we both know that a lot of Republicans aren't voting against those things because of their views on federal funding but because of their religious views and what the Bible says.

 

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
Archy1221 Offensive Coordinator

Archy1221

Posted
Posted
24 minutes ago, Enhance said:

And it doesn't even look like you really read what I wrote, but instead immediately got defensive about Trump. Bizarre

Not true.  Bizarre that you would go there but we will move on. 
 

 

33 minutes ago, Enhance said:

That you don't care what other countries do or think about these issues is your prerogative, but being closed off from global politics is not an objectively good thing. Gauging ourselves against our peers can be a healthy and intelligent way of making policy decisions.

Not caring what other countries think about what our policies as a nation having no bearing on being considered “closed off from global policies” and insinuating that they are one in the same isn’t fair or correct.  It’s possible to gauge ourselves against other countries while making policy, make said policy and then not be upset when other countries criticize the policy we put in place.  When the US puts policy in place that is best for US, then yes, I don’t care what other countries think Since most countries are dependent on the strength of the US  economy.   
 

second piece on your statement above...Why should we as a country move towards other countries policies instead of those countries move towards our policies?  

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
Archy1221 Offensive Coordinator

Archy1221

Posted
Posted
41 minutes ago, Enhance said:

(FWIW... we kill with guns, commit suicide with guns, and shoot one another more often than just about any other country we like to consider our peers or that we're better than).

I don’t know who would argue with your statement, but it comes with living in a free society.  I believe that 2/3rds of gun deaths are suicide.  
 

Now if you want to save lives via policy, why wouldn’t you advocate for outright banning tobacco products. Lives saved from COPD and lung cancer dwarf those saved by gun control.  Wouldn’t it make more sense, if saving lives is the goal, to make that more of a priority than guns? 

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
Archy1221 Offensive Coordinator

Archy1221

Posted
Posted
36 minutes ago, Enhance said:
43 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

 

Republican views on the LGBTQ+ community and related policies pre-date his 2016 candidacy and ensuing presidency. Pretty bizarre to immediately get defensive about a person rather than the general policies and procedures the Republican party has endorsed (which is what my post was about),

Voting for a Candidate that is for advancing treatment to gay/Lesbian causes shows growth in the electorate for those causes.  That’s why bringing up Trump makes sense.  But you are correct, it is pretty bizarre that you keep focusing on the personality vs the person’s previous public views on the subject, people he hired and economic policies that would benefit that group of people (which is what brining up Trump for me is about). 

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment

Enhance Offensive Coordinator

Enhance

Posted
Posted
Just now, Archy1221 said:

I don’t know who would argue with your statement, but it comes with living in a free society.  I believe that 2/3rds of gun deaths are suicide.  

Probably a philosophical difference. I believe in responsible gun ownership. I don't personally believe that "freedom" and "guns" go hand-in-hand. Most of our global peers that we like to compare ourselves to have decided that stronger gun regulations are better for their countries. They're democratic, "free" societies just like we are. Are they perfect? No. Should we care/be interested in how they do things? Yes.

 

Now if you want to save lives via policy, why wouldn’t you advocate for outright banning tobacco products. Lives saved from COPD and lung cancer dwarf those saved by gun control.  Wouldn’t it make more sense, if saving lives is the goal, to make that more of a priority than guns?

 

This is a pretty common tactic during second amendment debates i.e. let's complicate the discussion by introducing other human health risks, many of which are incomparable to guns. You could do this with any number of things.

 

Many of those things are worth discussions to have, but comparing them to guns is largely disingenuous. I can't rob a bank with a can of chew. I can't "lose" heart disease in the back of my car and have it end up being used in a violent crime.

  • Plus1 4
Link to comment
Enhance Offensive Coordinator

Enhance

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

But you are correct, it is pretty bizarre that you keep focusing on the personality vs the person’s previous public views on the subject, people he hired and economic policies that would benefit that group of people (which is what brining up Trump for me is about). 

A 30 second Google foray would not only show several policies that Trump and Republicans supported that most of the LGBTQ+ community disagreed with ( @knapplc already listed some of these examples ) but most polling also shows that the LGBTQ+ community is majority in opposition to Trump.

 

That you think Trump was the most friendly Republican president towards the LGBTQ+ community is not a perspective people in that community share. Who, might I ask, says that Trump was the most friendly Republican president? Is it Republicans? Or is it the overwhelming majority of the LGBTQ+ community?

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
Archy1221 Offensive Coordinator

Archy1221

Posted
Posted
36 minutes ago, Enhance said:

Probably a philosophical difference. I believe in responsible gun ownership. I don't personally believe that "freedom" and "guns" go hand-in-hand. Most of our global peers that we like to compare ourselves to have decided that stronger gun regulations are better for their countries. They're democratic, "free" societies just like we are. Are they perfect? No. Should we care/be interested in how they do things? Yes.

 

 

 

 

This is a pretty common tactic during second amendment debates i.e. let's complicate the discussion by introducing other human health risks, many of which are incomparable to guns. You could do this with any number of things.

 

Many of those things are worth discussions to have, but comparing them to guns is largely disingenuous. I can't rob a bank with a can of chew. I can't "lose" heart disease in the back of my car and have it end up being used in a violent crime.

Is the gun debate about saving lives or something else?

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
Archy1221 Offensive Coordinator

Archy1221

Posted
Posted
30 minutes ago, Enhance said:

That you think Trump was the most friendly Republican president towards the LGBTQ+ community is not a perspective people in that community share. Who, might I ask, says that Trump was the most friendly Republican president?

Edison Research exit polling in Nov 2020 show Trump got 27-29% of that vote.  That’s as high or higher than any GOP candidate in recent history (Bush going forward) got that I saw in the data!  

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
knapplc Legend

knapplc

Posted
Posted

W. Bush won 33% of the LGBTQ vote in 2000.

 

W. won 22% of the LGBTQ vote in 2004.

 

trump won 19% of the LGBTQ vote in 2020.

 

 

I stopped looking after seeing W. beat trump in both of his elections. 

 

The LGBTQ community despises trump. When even W. out-polls your boy, it's time to put that lie to bed. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

Visit the Sports Illustrated Husker site



×
×
  • Create New...