What is the future of the Republican Party?

Dr. Strangelove said:
Not at all, I'm simply proposing we give Red States what they want in a way that allows Blue States to stop subsidizing their poor choices
Click to expand...
Ok sure.  Then I guess the red and blue states with no military bases can fend for themselves when it comes to national security.  Every illegal border crosser can be sent to a blue state.  Blue states can go head with the wealth tax and let us know how it goes.  
 

Dr. Strangelove said:
If you don't want government involvement, end farm subsidizes.
Click to expand...
Many of would like that

Dr. Strangelove said:
If you want to deny climate change pay for your own natural disaster cleanup.
Click to expand...
LOL.  Tell me you don’t know how nature works without telling me you don’t know how nature works.  

 
Archy1221 said:
Ok sure.  Then I guess the red and blue states with no military bases can fend for themselves when it comes to national security.  Every illegal border crosser can be sent to a blue state.  Blue states can go head with the wealth tax and let us know how it goes.  
 

Many of would like that

LOL.  Tell me you don’t know how nature works without telling me you don’t know how nature works.  
Click to expand...
Eh, military bases can be rebuilt. And, because Red states are leeches of tax dollars, it's not like their taxes funded them in the first place.

We can set up a repayment plan - not just for those bases - but for all the infrastructure Red states use but have not paid for. We can come up with a number that Red states can pay back to free themselves from government overreach. Studies show that Red states receive $1.23 for every dollar they send, while Blue states get .95. We can have them pay back every dollar they've leeched with a modest interest rate, probably totally several trillion dollars. Being anti-socialist, I'm sure these are agreeable terms. It's high time Red states picked themselves up by the bootstraps and fend for themselves.

As far as the environment, states like Florida can enjoy much higher probabilities of getting hit by powerful hurricanes and Red states - with similar views on climate - can pay for it.  If they don't want to pass legislation to deal with climate change, let them deal with the consequences on their own. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Archy1221 said:
Ok sure.  Then I guess the red and blue states with no military bases can fend for themselves when it comes to national security.  Every illegal border crosser can be sent to a blue state.  Blue states can go head with the wealth tax and let us know how it goes.  
 

Many of would like that

LOL.  Tell me you don’t know how nature works without telling me you don’t know how nature works.  
Click to expand...
Climate freaks are insane.

The climate has 3 ways to go...

up

down

stay the same

Guess what...it is not going to stay the same.

 
teachercd said:
Climate freaks are insane.

The climate has 3 ways to go...

up

down

stay the same

Guess what...it is not going to stay the same.
Click to expand...
Yep

Dr. Strangelove said:
Eh, military bases can be rebuilt. And, because Red states are leeches of tax dollars, it's not like their taxes funded them in the first place.

We can set up a repayment plan - not just for those bases - but for all the infrastructure Red states use but have not paid for. We can come up with a number that Red states can pay back to free themselves from government overreach. Studies show that Red states receive $1.23 for every dollar they send, while Blue states get .95. We can have them pay back every dollar they've leeched with a modest interest rate, probably totally several trillion dollars. Being anti-socialist, I'm sure these are agreeable terms. It's high time Red states picked themselves up by the bootstraps and fend for themselves.

As far as the environment, states like Florida can enjoy much higher probabilities of getting hit by powerful hurricanes and Red states - with similar views on climate - can pay for it.  If they don't want to pass legislation to deal with climate change, let them deal with the consequences on their own. 
Click to expand...
:thumbs

 
Dr. Strangelove said:
Eh, military bases can be rebuilt. And, because Red states are leeches of tax dollars, it's not like their taxes funded them in the first place.

We can set up a repayment plan - not just for those bases - but for all the infrastructure Red states use but have not paid for. We can come up with a number that Red states can pay back to free themselves from government overreach. Studies show that Red states receive $1.23 for every dollar they send, while Blue states get .95. We can have them pay back every dollar they've leeched with a modest interest rate, probably totally several trillion dollars. Being anti-socialist, I'm sure these are agreeable terms. It's high time Red states picked themselves up by the bootstraps and fend for themselves.

As far as the environment, states like Florida can enjoy much higher probabilities of getting hit by powerful hurricanes and Red states - with similar views on climate - can pay for it.  If they don't want to pass legislation to deal with climate change, let them deal with the consequences on their own. 
Click to expand...
You think hurricanes happen because of voting?

Maybe we should shoot them with nukes!  Haha

 
Last edited by a moderator:
teachercd said:
You think hurricanes happen because of voting?
Click to expand...
Not at all. 

But hurricanes will happen more frequently and with more intensity because of climate change. Voters can choose to address this or they can ignore it. 

I'm simply proposing that the citizens of states like Florida simply pay for their choice. The voters have decided that climate change is not a big deal - as evidenced by their twice voting for a candidate who's stance on that issue is "its a hoax by China". If voters in those states don't want to elect officials to address this problem, I don't want my tax dollars to pay for their poor choices. 

We can call it "an end to federal Government handouts" or something like that. 

 
Dr. Strangelove said:
Not at all. 

But hurricanes will happen more frequently and with more intensity because of climate change. Voters can choose to address this or they can ignore it. 

I'm simply proposing that the citizens of states like Florida simply pay for their choice. The voters have decided that climate change is not a big deal - as evidenced by their twice voting for a candidate who's stance on that issue is "its a hoax by China". If voters in those states don't want to elect officials to address this problem, I don't want my tax dollars to pay for their poor choices. 

We can call it "an end to federal Government handouts" or something like that. 
Click to expand...
So you are in favor of my plan.

Where we, each person, gets to pick where our tax dollars go.  

Our taxes would look something like

Military

Education

Police

Fire (zero dollars)

Environment 

Social Security 

and so on.

Thank you!

I have been saying this idea is perfect and finally more people are seeing the light!

 
teachercd said:
So you are in favor of my plan.

Where we, each person, gets to pick where our tax dollars go.  

Our taxes would look something like

Military

Education

Police

Fire (zero dollars)

Environment 

Social Security 

and so on.

Thank you!

I have been saying this idea is perfect and finally more people are seeing the light!
Click to expand...
I'm simply advocating for giving Red states what they want. 

If they want to end handouts, let's end them.  Red states get 23 cents more than they pay, that's a handout we can end. But we should also make them pay for all the money they've been sucking from Blue states for the last few decades.

If they want to ignore climate change, let them. But don't expect FEMA to show up if you don't want to help address the problem.

If you want to attack schools as liberal brainwashing institutions, fine. But don't expect federal education funding if you want to ban textbooks.

We simply need to let them face the consequences of their beliefs, which blue state tax dollars have prevented them from dealing with. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dr. Strangelove said:
I'm simply advocating for giving Red states what they want. 

If they want to end handouts, let's end them.  Red states get 23 cents more than they pay, that's a handout we can end. But we should also make them pay for all the money they've been sucking from Blue states for the last few decades.

If they want to ignore climate change, let them. But don't expect FEMA to show up if you don't want to help address the problem.

If you want to attack schools as liberal brainwashing institutions, fine. But don't expect federal education funding if you want to ban textbooks.

We simply need to let them face the consequences of their beliefs, which blue state tax dollars have prevented them from dealing with. 
Click to expand...
So you are against my tax allotment idea?

 
Dr. Strangelove said:
Not at all, I'm simply proposing we give Red States what they want in a way that allows Blue States to stop subsidizing their poor choices.

If you don't want government involvement, end farm subsidizes. If you want to deny climate change pay for your own natural disaster cleanup. If you want to end the ACA, let the citizens of those states pay for the extreme price increases. 

No tyranny, just truly give them what they want. Red states operate the way they do because Blue states subsidize them. Let's end that practice. 
Click to expand...


giphy.gif


 
knapplc said:
Yes - from September 24, 2009 until February 4, 2010. During which time Obamacare was passed.

The Democrats, foolishly, were still trying to work across the aisle on legislation during those four months. Probably they'd still be doing it now, even knowing what they know about McConnell and the Republicans of the last decade, because they're mostly morons.

The insinuation that Democrats should have had a raft of legislation ready to shove through congress and onto Obama's desk is pretty fanciful.
Click to expand...


This is a lot more generous than I was going to be.

Obama understandably didn't want to rock the boat too much as the first black president and chose to spend far too long trying to be bipartisan and reach across the aisle (because Dems assume that's what the average voter wants) rather than assuming the worst of Republicans. Turns out they are a bunch of corrupt, petty, self-serving asshats. 

I'm of the mind we should just do away with the pretense of bipartisanship at the federal level. Kill the filibuster and let whoever holds a majority do whatever the want and let the other team overturn it every time they take control. At least that way Congress can actually accomplish things and voters can rather than LARPing empty platitudes and voters can decide whether they want to hold them accountable for their decisions and, by extension, what kind of country they actually want.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top