Will Trump Destroy the Republican Party?

[Underhill]

I see dogmatic thought on both sides.
(Try getting lefties to understand anyone else's perspective here. It's hard work.)
Who is worse?
I dunno.....but I'll wager you don't either.

When I think of emerging issues, even progressive ones like drug legalization & gay marriage,
Democrats have been in opposition when some Republicans have been in favor. So even if
a difference is discernible, there's too much variation to put groups of people in neat little boxes.

I think you are missing the point. I'm not claiming they agree, or even that they don't have firm positions. But when you talk to many pro lifers out there, they are not happy with anything remotely approaching compromise. When talking to the pro gun crowd, most of them will not even entertain the notion of a compromise, no matter how reasonable.

Can you think of a single issue on the left that is that way?

And considering that those two camps make up a huge percentage of republicans... it explains why there is so much less diversity of opinion on the right. In most of the red states you cannot even hint at being pro choice or for any kind of gun reform and have a chance in the polls.

 

[Riders]

No, because after Trump has served his 8 years the choice is the same, Republican or Democrat.

He wont be here 8 years your dreaming. I don't know if hell be impeached, he maybe here the 4 years but if he is he wont be voted back in believe me.

 

[Revoltingest]

I think you are missing the point. I'm not claiming they agree, or even that they don't have firm positions. But when you talk to many pro lifers out there, they are not happy with anything remotely approaching compromise. When talking to the pro gun crowd, most of them will not even entertain the notion of a compromise, no matter how reasonable.

Perhaps it's just you, & how you would want compromise.

Can you think of a single issue on the left that is that way?

You brought up abortion. The pro crowd (including me) are loath to compromise.
Feminists....try having a civil disagreement with them.

Disclaimer:
The above is not to say that all feminists are dogmatic.
But a great many are.

And considering that those two camps make up a huge percentage of republicans... it explains why there is so much less diversity of opinion on the right. In most of the red states you cannot even hint at being pro choice or for any kind of gun reform and have a chance in the polls.

I don't see that the left is any more diverse than the right.
And I won't claim the libertarians are more diverse either.

Other than me & mine, I'd say everyone thinks their own side is better in every way.
And of course, they're in a poor position to judge.

 

[Jeremiahcp]

I will go with the following:
http://thefederalist.com/2016/07/14/how-obama-has-bitterly-divided-america/

No they are not "statements". But they speak for themselves.

The fact that is the source of your information is just pathetic.

 

[Shad]

Will Trump destroy the Republican Party? If he does, I think the destruction will most likely take the form of a split in the Party that leaves both parts too much in the minority to win most elections. What do you think? Will Trump destroy the Republican Party?

Trump himself? No. GOP internal conflicts combined with taking side for/against Trump could. I am waiting for GOP damage control to roll out for the midterms. How effective their pandering is will tell the tale.

 

[Sunstone]

I will go with the following:
http://thefederalist.com/2016/07/14/how-obama-has-bitterly-divided-america/

No they are not "statements". But they speak for themselves.

Your inability to provide the statements I asked for speaks volumes.

 

[Underhill]

Perhaps it's just you, & how you would want compromise.

You brought up abortion. The pro crowd (including me) are loath to compromise.
Feminists....try having a civil disagreement with them.

Disclaimer:
The above is not to say that all feminists are dogmatic.
But a great many are.

I don't see that the left is any more diverse than the right.
And I won't claim the libertarians are more diverse either.

Other than me & mine, I'd say everyone thinks their own side is better in every way.
And of course, they're in a poor position to judge.

Yes, I know. You think everyone is always equally guilty of everything.

Disagree all you want, but in general there is a difference in how conservatives and liberals think. By their very nature the conservative clings to the things they know and understand. It is the nature of conservatism. Liberals are looking for change. Again this is the nature of the beast and not a judgement.

There are exceptions in every generality, this more than most. But the very definition of liberal is "open to new behavior or opinions and willing to discard traditional values."

You are essentially arguing that those on the left aren't liberal. I would say they aren't all liberal, but they are much more likely to be than those on the right.

 

[esmith]

Your inability to provide the statements I asked for speaks volumes.

Let's take a look where you went off-track

As you can see from the following, I responded to @leibowde84 statement that had nothing to do with "statements"

What about the fact that Trump has divided the country in such a dangerous way?

And Obama didn't divide the country?

Then you decided to interject your own parameters as you can see.

Please quote divisive statements made by Obama.

Now I will kindly respond to you in a very simple way by saying
Actions speak louder than words. Obama divided the country by his actions.

 

[Revoltingest]

You think everyone is always equally guilty of everything.

Here is a response in your style......
"And always want to think your group (liberals) are fundamentally better than everyone else."
"If you really want me to believe you're smarter & more flexible, then be it....don't just claim it."

Now, back to the ordinary response....
There is great individual variation.
But the larger the group of humans, the greater the similarities.

Disagree all you want, but in general there is a difference in how conservatives and liberals think. By their very nature the conservative clings to the things they know and understand. It is the nature of conservatism. Liberals are looking for change. Again this is the nature of the beast and not a judgement.

There are exceptions in every generality, this more than most. But the very definition of liberal is "open to new behavior or opinions and willing to discard traditional values."

You are essentially arguing that those on the left aren't liberal. I would say they aren't all liberal, but they are much more likely to be than those on the right.

I'm only saying that the "liberal" personality is different from the politically "liberal"
They could coincide.....or not, as in the case of "illiberal liberals".
The politically liberal want some changes, they also have much invested in the status quo.
The same can be said of conservatives.

 

[Stevicus]

Disagree all you want, but in general there is a difference in how conservatives and liberals think. By their very nature the conservative clings to the things they know and understand. It is the nature of conservatism. Liberals are looking for change. Again this is the nature of the beast and not a judgement.

I'm not so sure if it's like that in practice. Some of it might be generational. That is, someone who was a liberal during the 1960s would likely support the civil rights and anti-war movements - and would see many liberal reforms implemented during that time frame. Now, 50 years later, many of those same programs are still in place, and a liberal from back then would not likely want those policies to change. Would that then make them "conservative" because they're resistant to change?

 

[Underhill]

I'm not so sure if it's like that in practice. Some of it might be generational. That is, someone who was a liberal during the 1960s would likely support the civil rights and anti-war movements - and would see many liberal reforms implemented during that time frame. Now, 50 years later, many of those same programs are still in place, and a liberal from back then would not likely want those policies to change. Would that then make them "conservative" because they're resistant to change?

There are two different things. Politics and personality. You are right that the two don't always align. But the right in this country despises the very notion of being 'liberal' so it is unlikely that they will be open minded in any way shape or form. The only time they are likely to want change is to revert back to old systems or methodology.

So yes, a person leaning left may not be liberal in their thinking, but a liberal thinker is almost never a conservative politically. The two are almost counter-intuitive.

 

[tytlyf]

Actions speak louder than words. Obama divided the country by his actions.

Oh ya? What actions?

Do you think hearing RW media talking about 'division' for 8 years 24/7 makes an impression on the mind? That's propaganda.

 

[Stevicus]

There are two different things. Politics and personality. You are right that the two don't always align. But the right in this country despises the very notion of being 'liberal' so it is unlikely that they will be open minded in any way shape or form. The only time they are likely to want change is to revert back to old systems or methodology.

So yes, a person leaning left may not be liberal in their thinking, but a liberal thinker is almost never a conservative politically. The two are almost counter-intuitive.

There's an old saying: If you're not a liberal by age 20, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative by age 30, you have no brain. I don't think I ever really agreed with that sentiment, although I can understand how a person's view can change over the course of their lifetime. I guess from my own perspective, I've had influences from both the conservative and liberal side of things - and I see a lot of similarities. They're two branches on the same tree.

 

[esmith]

Do you think hearing RW media talking about 'division' for 8 years 24/7 makes an impression on the mind? That's propaganda.

Now for your obvious mistaken concept; here are links
America really is more divided than ever
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...6/11/21/poll-americans-feel-divided/94224968/
We're More Divided As A Nation Than Ever, And This Poll On Obama's Legacy Shows It | HuffPost
CNN/ORC poll: A nation divided, and is it ever - CNNPolitics.com

Are the above your RW media propaganda source that you are referencing. It appears to me that any source of media that does not agree with Your opinion is RW. Suggest you stop watching so much TV and searching the internet for stories that you can fixate on as RW propaganda

Now the Question:.
Is the country more divided now than it was 9 years ago?
If your answer is no, you are being brainwashed by your media sources
If your answer is yes, who has been the leader of the country between Jan 2009 and Jan 2017

 

[Underhill]

There's an old saying: If you're not a liberal by age 20, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative by age 30, you have no brain. I don't think I ever really agreed with that sentiment, although I can understand how a person's view can change over the course of their lifetime. I guess from my own perspective, I've had influences from both the conservative and liberal side of things - and I see a lot of similarities. They're two branches on the same tree.

I'm 40 and I have witnessed first hand the good government done well can do. So I have a serious problem with the right and their notions of evil government.

I've never understood how a government 'of the people' is a scary thing. If there is a problem then 'we the people' need to make a change.

In fact the entire notion of the evil big government seems counter productive. We want people active in government not running from it or afraid of it. Conservatives in this country, starting with Reagan, have distorted peoples view of what government is supposed to be. I'm not in favor of unlimited government power or anything close to it. But the people are supposed to be in control. We have lost sight of that and as a result have largely lost control.

 

[tytlyf]

Now for your obvious mistaken concept; here are links
America really is more divided than ever
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...6/11/21/poll-americans-feel-divided/94224968/
We're More Divided As A Nation Than Ever, And This Poll On Obama's Legacy Shows It | HuffPost
CNN/ORC poll: A nation divided, and is it ever - CNNPolitics.com

Are the above your RW media propaganda source that you are referencing. It appears to me that any source of media that does not agree with Your opinion is RW. Suggest you stop watching so much TV and searching the internet for stories that you can fixate on as RW propaganda

Now the Question:.
Is the country more divided now than it was 9 years ago?
If your answer is no, you are being brainwashed by your media sources
If your answer is yes, who has been the leader of the country between Jan 2009 and Jan 2017

You missed the point. The country is divided because of RW propaganda. They are the ones polarizing everything and dividing the country. Breitbart, Daily Caller, etc are all responsible. You see, democrats don't have propaganda mills like these spreading fear, paranoia, conspiracy theories and propaganda all day long.

On to your questions:

Is the country more divided now than it was 9 years ago? (yes)
If your answer is yes, who has been the leader of the country between Jan 2009 and Jan (Obama)

Anything else? You're still missing the point.

 

[leibowde84]

Let's take a look where you went off-track

As you can see from the following, I responded to @leibowde84 statement that had nothing to do with "statements"

Then you decided to interject your own parameters as you can see.


Now I will kindly respond to you in a very simple way by saying
Actions speak louder than words. Obama divided the country by his actions.

What actions?

 

[Mister Emu]

When talking to the pro gun crowd, most of them will not even entertain the notion of a compromise, no matter how reasonable.

It's like you don't even acknowledge that the current situation is the result of a series of compromises that have almost exclusively added regulations to gun ownership.

If we're going to talk about lack of willingness to compromise, how many gun regulation proponents do you know that are okay with compromising on the issue in the other direction? How many gun regulations would you be okay giving up?

Would you be okay if the compromise were enhanced background checks but removing the special licensing required to own an automatic weapon?

 

[leibowde84]

It's like you don't even acknowledge that the current situation is the result of a series of compromises that have almost exclusively added regulations to gun ownership.

If we're going to talk about lack of willingness to compromise, how many gun regulation proponents do you know that are okay with compromising on the issue in the other direction? How many gun regulations would you be okay giving up?

Would you be okay if the compromise were enhanced background checks but removing the special licensing required to own an automatic weapon?

I would be OK with that if background checks for all gun purchases were enhanced/increased.

 

[Revoltingest]

There's an old saying: If you're not a liberal by age 20, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative by age 30, you have no brain.

Addition....
If you're not a libertarian by age 40, you've probably moved out of your parents' basement.