anna.
colors your eyes with what's not there
I agree with you, which is why I was curious what his examples would be.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Republican candidates?
- Thread starter Riders
- Start date
I agree with you, which is why I was curious what his examples would be.
Yes, the Nation posted more than one article. It posted two on the same subject that contradict each other. Yes, the Nation is a far left magazine and you cited it. Yes, you totally ignored that the same magazine you cited to justify keeping Trump off the ballot for supposed insurrection says to do the opposite.
Callisto
Hellenismos, BTW
This may be a shock to you but there is this thing in journalism called unbiased reporting which means, unless they're a partisan outlet, they will report multiple angles in order to inform the general public on the different views of an issue. So yeah, they will let people know there are those trying to ignore or deny what the Constitution states. I know, I know, it must be a bit scary to find other outlets do this when one is accustomed to the one-sided bubble of right-wing yellow journalism.
Alien826
No religious beliefs
This is being discussed on TV as well. I caught a discussion on either CNN or MSNBC (can't remember, I watch both) that tried to answer the question "What would happen if Trump was elected President and was also in prison?". One suggested answer was to let him out to serve his term as President then put him back in prison when that was over! And that's ignoring the attempts he would make to pardon himself, a ridiculous notion in itself.
Obviously all this is speculation but supports your position about the legal situation.
I am British by birth and have lived in the USA for some time, so I see things from something of an outsider's viewpoint. To me this is the stuff of farce. There are plenty of examples from round the world where criminals have gained political power against the wishes of the population, but I never expected people in the USA to be sanguine about this idea. Surely the sane reaction would be an overwhelming shout of "no way!!" and Trump getting defeated by a huge margin in the election if not in the primaries. It seems to me that the absence of specific rules is a reflection of the assumption that such a thing would never happen, as the population would reject it roundly. What has happened to this country?
I welcome your comments. Are you just stating the legal position or actually supporting the idea of a convicted criminal being in the White House?
Alien826
No religious beliefs
I had the same thought when I heard that Mark Meadows is testifying and not being indicted. No more than a feeling, and time will tell, but is he playing a long game?
PureX
Veteran Member
They've wanted to be rid of Trump for a long time. He's making them all look absurd and he is exposing them for the power-grubbing cowards that they are. But they aren't willing to dump him if it risk losing his followers. If that happens some of them would immediately be out next election and many would be severely hamstrung trying to win elections in the future without that Trump base support.
And Trump knows it. So he is going to keep a stranglehold on that base as long as possible, and hold it over the republican party's heads. This is why I say they made a 'deal with a devil', and now the toll has come due. And they are trying desperately to get out of it without having to pay that toll. While Trump is going to fight to the bitter end to make damn sure they do. (And they deserve every minute of the grief it brings them.)
Hypotheses non fingo.
Alien826
No religious beliefs
I'll take that as "no comment".
I understand DeSantis is trimming down his campaign staff.
Yazata
Active Member
It's probably too early to speak of either party having a candidate until the primaries have concluded and the nominating conventions have taken place. That's when candidates are selected and there's a whole process to get through first.
There are about a dozen Republicans running for President in 2024. Several are well known names, others are relative unknowns.
Given the recent polling, I'd say that anyone other than Trump is a long-shot.
But that being said, political campaigns have a way of taking unexpected turns during their primary election stages. As I recall, Howard Dean was the early democratic frontrunner in 2004. Jeb Bush looked like he had the Republican nomination all locked up in 2016.
The voters in the primary elections often fail to behave as their supposed betters in the media predict they should.
Secret Chief
Vetted Member
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
We watched the last hour of the debate, and here's what my wife and I thought:
DeSantis come off flat as if he thought the debate as just a campaign speech that he'd give, plus he avoided answering some questions and then when called out on that he claimed he did answer them.
Ramaswamy came off "weird", as my wife called his character, but the crowd seemed to like him.
Christie was good with his logic and morality dealing with the Constitution, but the crowd definitely wasn't behind him.
Pence seemed like a fish out of water at times but did a good job defending his actions on January 6th.
Haley came off the best in our opinion, as she kept to the points by answering the questions and didn't come off as some as being shallow.
The others were "there", and that's all it seemed.
I’m pro choice.
I’m anti-Trump.
I’m pro social security and Medicare.
I’m pro universal healthcare.
I’m pro public education.
I’m pro civil rights (it’s actually my job).
I’m pro gun control.
I’m pro gay marriage.
I could go on and on. The fact is you don’t know me, you’re making **** up, and you’re on the attack because as a typical far left winger you are intolerant.
As for the debate, DeSantis will continue to fall in national polls. Halley and Ramaswamy will surge. Pence might get a bump. He showed some fight, which is unlike him. Chris Christie is a pitcher past his prime—he no longer has a fastball. Scott was just ho hum.
Sounds like you are a typical left winger too. Welcome to the reasonable club of citizens.
YmirGF
Bodhisattva in Recovery
I did manage to hear Christie say that Ramaswamy sounded like ChatGPT. Thought that was the line of the night. The rest was a waste of time.
Left-wing Socialist radical!
Ok, what is your position on the environment and AGW?
What I found worrisome is the denial of human generated climate change -- or even the fact of climate change, by the Republican leadership. When asked whether they believed climate change was real, not one of the candidates raised his hand. Ramaswamy, in fact, seemed to think the whole thing a hoax: "a wet blanket on our economy."
www.bbc.com
The GOP seeks to sidetrack complicated policy or Big Picture issues and appeal to emotional. often religiously motivativated lifestyle issues, and dangerous threats of cultural collapse under a Democratic administration.
Republican debate: What they said (and didn't say) about climate
Twenty minutes into the presidential debate came a simple question. The answers were anything but.
The GOP seeks to sidetrack complicated policy or Big Picture issues and appeal to emotional. often religiously motivativated lifestyle issues, and dangerous threats of cultural collapse under a Democratic administration.
You called me far right last time and now I’m a left winger? Which is it? Lol. I think I’m a prime example of why we really can’t and should t lump people into two camps. I know that’s the reality of US politics, but the individual voter is so much more than that.