Post a list of what the op wanted and they go apeshit. This thread was just a troll attempt to rally the already fake outraged lefties. I’m sorry I ruined your guys circle jerk.
To be fair you really didn’t really answer the question at all. The question is about what The Right stands for. Not asking for a list of Trump admin “accomplishments”... which is a very gratuitous list at best for which you did just copy and paste. Some aren’t really even their accomplishments. It’s more like selective spinning. So you really are just saying the Right believes in whatever my media bubbles tells me Trump is doing which sort of explains the cult like sycophancy and ideals that move like jello around Trump... not a governing philosophy. (So actually your response does explain what you believe in which is Trump). So let’s just tackle one belief at a time then- do you believe in the rule of law and that it applies to everyone at every level? Don’t tell me about some litigation accomplishment that Brietbart told you about... just answer the question about what you believe at a high level.
Republican party is the Trump party. Look at the Freedom Caucus. They started off with small government, small deficits, even Swamp draining. After Black man gone, they go 180 and helped pass a 1.5 trillion tax cut that the CBO says is unfeasable in the long term and returns more to the wealthy and corporations than the target demographic what most economists consider would be better served....Great idea to line the pockets of the rich who save the rebate and could live off its accrued interest. More business spending? Not as much as you think. So they washed out Amash, and now they're no better than Trump's sock puppet. It's strange. At one point I would've said Republicans have shifted further right to libertarianism, but with the Trump overreach and the approval rating he gets by his own party, it's like all they want are Tax Cuts, less foreigners, SCOTUS appointments from Con groups they never really vet but Con Authorities approved (church leaders, Fox News, crazy libertarian/Federalist wackos), more business friendly attitude(no regulation/oversight even with proof of corruption), subsidies for special groups (his Base), and special interest tax cuts until the government crumbles under its own weight. I don't think it's overt racism either. More like they've been fed that historically disadvantaged minorities are protected classes, and have been the better receiving end of the government (Obama phone!) than the real poor, hard working, stiff upper lip types who'd refuse on spit on g-man "handouts". Trump is their equalizer and they think the pittance from the tax cut is their share of the pie. Sad.
People generally attempt to restrict things that cause mass casualties. No one should live their life in fear of a random event like watching a movie, concert, attending school, etc... Nations have gone to war for lesser reasons in the name of public safety. But that’s another topic.... The issue I have with the abortion stance is that con politicians are quicker to punish abortions for the sake of the unborn yet do less when it comes to taking care of the children after they’re born. If we believe in the literal meaning of the legal age, at what point are people responsible for their own actions vs. the different roles both sides wants the government to play? It’s easier to say Orange Man good when all he hears is Orange Man bad from the deerangers. Debate mutha****a. You speak it?
The preservation and continuing of traditional white men values and privilege - suppressed feelings and disallowance of those values and privilege (victimhood) find it’s outlet finally. I think that’s what drive the cult like behavior and attachment to the current leader of the party. That cover most of your list above. Anti abortion is the second leg, but not as attached as many of those people are fine with cultural progression and do value morality.
First is spamming. Now its plagiarizing ... something that was a obvious copy and paste. Are we back in grade school?
It is both. First there was no need to cut and paste the info in like 5 replies/posts. Second when you use other people’s work you tend to link the material in the original post. Can you imagine if everyone posted like this on here taking up that much space and posts. So yes it is spamming.
Also to put in perspective it would be like if I cut and pasted a two or three page section of the book, I just finished reading Called Manufacturing Consent, to explain how Trump uses Fox News as his personal propaganda machine. It would be spamming and be lacking of original thought.
I applaud your effort. If I went through your list and point out where Repubs and Dems are in agreement (ie a bi-partisan consensus already exists), you could trim your list, right?
From an independent p-o-v, the Repubs stand for Tax cuts for the very rich Do the large corporation bidding Appointing Socially Conservative judges who advance their agenda that they can not get through legislatively Liberal tears
Great job providing some substantive remarks. I do have a couple of problems with it. Many of those are things you might call accomplishments rather than actual things conservatives stand for, some are bi-partisan, and when delving deeper we see that many of the 'accomplishments' aren't quite what they seem.
convenient sleight-of-hand / rhetoric by the under-informed a newly formed fetus is not the same as a child, a breathing / living being living outside a woman's body people who are incapable to putting forth a valid argument resort to using oxymoronic terms, such as "unborn child", to muddy up the issue
This is a messageboard bro. You post things, people reply, it's not going 'apeshit' or being 'outraged' it's replying to the post you made. It's funny how many times you and others assume people are outraged just by text, it's all you really hope for and aim for
There may be a dim light at the end of the tunnel for the few Repubs with a conscience... FACTOID 40 percent of Republican congressmen When President Trump took office in 2017 there were 241 Republicans in the House of Representatives. Now, nearly 40 percent of those politicians are either gone or plan to leave office. Most of those departures are due to a mix of electoral losses and retirements. But some Republicans, like Michigan’s Rep. Paul Mitchell, are openly fed up with Trump’s influence on the party, and want out. [The Washington Post]
Funny - how they claim to stand for Law and Order yet support a man who breaks the laws of this country daily in the Whitehouse. DD
Greed and self interests - they are the party of selifshness - fake to the core, with a lack of integrity or caring for anything other than their wallets. DD
You make a compelling and thought provoking argument. I agree with you that the issues brought up predate Trump but my point wasn’t that Trump brought these too the current Conservative movement but that he capitalized off of them. Regarding most of these issues thought Trump either has never shown much interest in them or opposed them before. That conservatives have held these as core beliefs yet now give their loyalty to a man who doesnt have any core beliefs other than what enriches himself does question where Republican principles. I understand that many support Trump because they see a transaction of getting conservative judges, tax cuts and less regulation but that is day trading on issues. If conservatives belief is about principles then consider the flip side of a presidential greatly expanding executive power at the cost of the other branches and whom is profiting off of the presidency. In regard to human agency you make a very good argument regarding how that relates to the issues brought up and I agree that upholding human agency is a defining principle. That said though how much fealty does modern conservatism have towards human agency when they are opposed to things such as gay marriage and legalization of things like mar1juana and prostitution. In many cases opposition of those has been based on religious morality which by definition isn’t human agency. Again this seems more about a definition of modern conservatism as being issue rather than principle oriented.
