How "conservatives" have jumped the shark
Forums:
In light of information obtained from Cohen's plea agreement re: having made false statements related to the administration's transactional involvement with Russia, would it not be prudent and judicious to insure the POTUS has not been compromised?
IMO, to not even considering the possibility is to relinquish any legitimate claim to "conservatism". Since when do conservatives take such large gambles on something so consequential? Why are conservatives not willing to run a sober risk / benefit analysis - without prejudice -- of the known facts to date?
- Log in to post comments
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: nebulous nelly
^"Power is not a means; it is
^"Power is not a means; it is an end."
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 19.5 Degrees
Ultimately, that appears to
Ultimately, that appears to be the bottom line operating principle at play.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: gypsy tailwind
>>> Since when do
>>> Since when do conservatives take such large gambles on something so consequential? <<<
Since every GOP member has known enough and has been part of the "cover up" since day 1.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Hitchhiker awaiting "true call"
Are guys pumped about
Are guys pumped about impeachment or do you want to wait and win 2020?
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Def. High
No point in impeaching with a
No point in impeaching with a Rep. senate.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: New & Improved
Your premise is flawed.
Your premise is flawed.
Politicians, regardless of party, want to be re-elected.
Most non-swing state/district conservatives know that to get re-elected they must pound the following issues: Illegal immigration and continuing to investigate Hillary (it helps to call her Killary). tRump is pounding those issues daily.
It reminds me of when a sports team makes a trade/acquires the star player from the competing team. Suddenly he's a good guy. If tRump gets to the point where he's toxic to any politicians chances to get re-elected, then they will toss him out with the trash. It really is that simple.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Ken D.
>>>> Since when do
>>>> Since when do conservatives take such large gambles on something so consequential?
Climate change denial, invasion of Iraq, and massive deregulation come to mind (and are all much more serious than paying hush money to porn stars).
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Def. High
As does Donny Dumpster
As does Donny Dumpster himself.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: gypsy tailwind
>>> If tRump gets to the
>>> If tRump gets to the point where he's toxic to any politicians chances to get re-elected, then they will toss him out with the trash. <<<
Manu Raju's conversation yesterday with the longest serving Republican Senator in history.
12-10-2018
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 19.5 Degrees
It reminds me of when a
It reminds me of when a sports team makes a trade/acquires the star player from the competing team. Suddenly he's a good guy. If tRump gets to the point where he's toxic to any politicians chances to get re-elected, then they will toss him out with the trash. It really is that simple.<<<
Would you really want to route for a "Bill Laimbeer" on your team?
If you're saying that ideology has never actually factored into the equation as a matter of substance, then fair enough.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 19.5 Degrees
Climate change denial,
Climate change denial, invasion of Iraq, and massive deregulation come to mind (and are all much more serious than paying hush money to porn stars)<<<
Was referring more to the possibility of Putin having great leverage by virtue of having a full understanding of Trump's financial involvement / arrangements with Russian operatives vs. hush money to porn stars. The door has been officially opened on this front with information contained within Cohen's plea.
... but yeah, "conservatives" have been willing to take big leaps of faith on large issues in the face of very little (if any) supporting evidence
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: New & Improved
Hatch is a lame duck and
Hatch is a lame duck and retiring.
Laimbeer was a monster in the paint. Who wouldn't want that?
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 19.5 Degrees
Same goes for Flake and
Same goes for Flake and unless he's pivoting to make a bid for the white house in 2020, why hasn't he hunkered down in the bunker with Hatch?
I give major credit to Phil for getting through to Rodman, but I have serious doubts that even he would be able to remove the "dirty" from Laimbeer ... just couldn't ever bring myself to route for him even if he was "my monster".
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: gypsy tailwind
>>> Hatch is a lame duck and
>>> Hatch is a lame duck and retiring.
My point is that he's been Senator longer than anybody...
Why in hell would he basically throw away all his "conservative values" and back Trump all the
way to the very end, if he wasn't "dirty" and part of the cover up?
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: New & Improved
Because tRump is defunding
Because tRump is defunding Planned Parenthood. That's why.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: gypsy tailwind
Non Lame ducks:
Ned,
Non Lame ducks:
Republican Senators Chuck Grassley, Susan Collins, Roy Blunt
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: New & Improved
I'm up to speed with the news
I'm up to speed with the news, TOD. Thanks.
Did you read my previous comments?
If 51%+ of their constituency supports tRump they will run cover for him.
If 51%+ of their constituency still thinks this is a Rigged Witch Hunt, they will echo the same.
If that dips below 50% then maybe they will change their tune. I highly doubt super-conervative states and/or districts will ever flip to be anti-Trump.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: gypsy tailwind
Cool Ned...
Cool Ned...
Then you know what you just said 51% etc, etc...
IS conventional thinking and I totally agree with you when thought about it that way.
That being said...
NOTHING has been "conventional" since January 20th, 2017
Also,
Orrin Hatch took $140,748 from the NRA.
Chuck Grassley took $232,337 from the NRA.
Susan Collins took $18,099 from the NRA.
Roy Blunt took $4,551,146 from the NRA.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Ken D.
>>>I highly doubt super
>>>I highly doubt super-conervative states and/or districts will ever flip to be anti-Trump.
Really depends out the outcome of the investigation. Recall that Nixon won re-election in 1972 by one of the biggest electoral and popular vote landslides in political history, but was forced to resign just two years later after even his most ardent supporters had abandoned him. But for that to happen here, there is going to have to be much stronger evidence of really bad, bad stuff. People knew Trump was a sleaze bag before he was elected and the bar for ethical conduct is now set so low that paying off porn stars and funny business dealings with Russians isn't going to do it.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Def. High
NRA took millions from Russia
NRA took millions from Russia through a "dark" PAC.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: gypsy tailwind
That's right Surf.
That's right Surf.
The Republicans are hoping that people stick to conventional wisdom and the public awaits for the 51% narrative to happen.
Meanwhile,
The cover up continues...
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: jonaspond
All while a PACK of dems are
All while a PACK of dems are running around denouncing Pelosi and another PACK doesn't quiet get that it's not the time to scream 'freebies for all'. Control first then implement policy.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Hitchhiker awaiting "true call"
People are getting laid off.
People are getting laid off. Times are rough. So many homeless. #sad
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: nebulous nelly
Slack, if a rich, liberal
Slack, if a rich, liberal state like California can't solve the housing crisis, who can?
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Hitchhiker awaiting "true call"
Nobody is interested in
Nobody is interested in fixing it.
Nobody wants to discuss it.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 19.5 Degrees
Then you know what you just
Then you know what you just said 51% etc, etc...
IS conventional thinking and I totally agree with you when thought about it that way.<<<<
I agree as well about conventional thinking; however, I'm not so sure that conventional thinking will apply if the shark jumping continues; and all indications are that it will. "Conservative" propaganda is not leaving ANY room for compromise and is extremely adversarial. I would find it difficult to believe that most will not continue to keep doubling down; even in light of overwhelming evidence contrary to their "position". Their narrative is that of a war and until more people realize this to be the case, they will have the upper hand by virtue of their willingness to do whatever it takes to "win".
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: gypsy tailwind
>>> Their narrative is that
>>> Their narrative is that of a war and until more people realize this to be the case, they will have the upper hand by virtue of their willingness to do whatever it takes to "win".<<<
I believe they're many more people paying attention, it's gonna be a helluva lot harder to deny the facts that are staring them right in their face.
Health Care, Education, Taxes etc...
Add that to ALL the shady shit of the Russian Trump/GOP has done and will continue to be reported.
"Grand Old Party" not so much.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 19.5 Degrees
I believe they're many more
I believe they're many more people paying attention, it's gonna be a helluva lot harder to deny the facts that are staring them right in their face<<<
Yes, many more will become aware over time, but will it really matter if McConnell & the rest of the GOP in the Senate simply shrug it off because their constituents simply don't care about the facts?
^ and this sort of "51% calculation" assumes that all Senators are playing on the level (relatively speaking) & does not account for the possibility of external leverage being applied by Putin, the Saudies, etc.
Personally, I'd like nothing more than for this to ultimately play out "conventionally" and see justice served; however, I wouldn't bet a dime on it at this stage of the game. I laugh fearfully inward whenever I read someone say something along the lines of "when this is all over and historians write about this or that".
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 19.5 Degrees
Yeah, I'd say the GOP went
Yeah, I'd say the GOP went astray from its roots in relative short order ... during the latter years of Grant admin.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Def. High
>>>>>they will have the upper
>>>>>they will have the upper hand by virtue of their willingness to do whatever it takes to "win".
This has always been the problem. The right's philosophy that the individual is supreme above all leads to an 'ends "Trump" means' conclusion.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: good at drinking water
What the hell is "conservative" about these nitwit greedy GOP traitor fucks who sold out the US for Russian/Israeli/Saudi money?
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: nebulous nelly
>What the hell is
>What the hell is "conservative" about these nitwit greedy GOP traitor fucks who sold out the US for Russian/Israeli/Saudi money<
Nitwit greedy GOP has been the "conservative" standard for some time now.