David Frum: Trump Has Exposed Just How "Pitifully" Few Conservatives Exist in the Republican Party; the "Social Issues Veto" is No More

Provocative claims, but almost assuredly correct ones.

I'm not particularly socially conservative (some, but not all that much; conservative-ish moderate) but I've largely adapted my political preferences to reflect the reality, as I previously understood it, in the Republican Party. Though Giuliani was one of my favorite politicians (and I had been a fan of his since he was mob-busting US Attorney), I couldn't really support him for President in 2008.

His pro-choice position would crack the party, I thought. Ergo, he wasn't a serious candidate. Maybe I'd like him as president, but so what? I'd like Wolverine as president. Doesn't mean people will set aside the natural born citizen clause to allow Logan to take office.

But I don't think I'm going to be adapting my views to the socially-conservative mainstream any longer, because I'm not sure these views are actually the Republican mainstream any longer. I knew social conservatism wasn't quite as believed as was claimed; I knew many politicians claimed to be pro-life who were in fact pro-choice, and I knew many of the Beltway class of advisers, think-tank workers, etc. were pro-choice, or more pro-choice than the GOP was as a formal matter. They were certainly more pro-gay (if not always actually pro-gay-marriage).

But the fact that a clear social liberal, who practically no one believes is "pro-life" or even pro-gun, is the runaway favorite for the GOP nomination is a fact with major implications for the party going forward. If Trump's liberalism can be accepted, why can't the liberalism of Giuliani (or a Giuliani type to be named later) be accepted?

I had thought a whole bunch of things were non-negotiable demand points from an important part of the coalition.

Now it seems they either are plenty negotiable, or that part of the coalition isn't as important as I thought.

Donald Trump spoke to genuinely underrepresented people. Concerned that the GOP was captured by theocratic Southerners? Where Republicans are most secular and supposedly most moderate--the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic--Trump has done best. By all indications, he'll do crushingly well in California, too. It's where Republicans are least moderate that he was most resisted: Texas, Utah, and wherever party activists gather in caucuses and conventions....

That's a big takeaway for me: How very much part of the part seems to dislike "Jesusy" candidates like Ted Cruz. Who isn't really all that Jesusy. He's not Sam Brownback, for crying out loud.

And yet he is a big of an anathema because of his social conservatism to many. So many more than I ever anticipated.*

I read an article a while back that the party had four main groupings: moderates/liberals, about 30% of the party; moderately conservative voters, about 30%; very conservative and religious voters, 30%; and a last category, very conservative and very secular voters, about 10%. (Which I guess is my own category.)

I think maybe that 10% is more like 30%. I'm not sure all the people who say they're religious really are all that religious.

....

[H]ere's something that traditional ideological conservatives will want to consider: Trump rose by shoving them aside. Trump's rise exposed the weakness of social conservatives in particular. For a third of a century, social conservatives imposed a pro-life litmus test on Republican nominees for both presidency and vice presidency. They pulled the party into confrontations over sexuality and religion that many Republican elected leaders would have preferred to avoid. And then, abruptly, poof: The social conservative veto has vanished. New York values have prevailed, with a mighty assist from Jerry Falwell Jr. and other evangelical leaders. It seems unlikely the religious right will return in anything like its awesome previous form. A visibly conscientious objector to the culture wars easily defeated candidates who elevated the defunding of Planned Parenthood to the top of their agenda. That lesson, once demonstrated, won’t soon be forgotten....

The big internal conservative struggle of 2017 will be the fight to write the narrative of how Trump emerged and why he lost. Anti-Trump conservatives will want to say that Trump lost because he wasn’t a "true conservative." But 2016 to date is proposing that "true conservatives" constitute only a pitiful minority of the Republican Party, never mind the country as a whole. Why should any practical politician care about them ever again?

Some of this might be good news for me as it would open up the possibility that the things I care about -- restraining the size of the government, on the theory that the bigger the government, the smaller the citizen it reigns over; reducing spending; following the Constitution for a change -- could advance as the GOP's core issues.

But it seems that most of the party doesn't care much about those things, either.

* One complaint I hear forever about Ted Cruz is that he's just personally dislikable, and people can't get over it. I get that -- I had trouble with that hump myself. Yes, he does speak in a sermony, lawyer-making-an-overwrought-closing-statement way.

But who's left? And -- the alternative is the... apparently much more likable Trump?

At the same time I hear his tone is too sermoney, I hear things like "All I ever hear him talk about is religious stuff like protecting religious liberty."

1, that's not true. 2, that's not something we're all pretty agreed on?

I'm very secular and I'm still very animated by that issue. If the religious aren't allowed to maintain their consciences and beliefs, then the non-religious damnsure won't be.

Eh -- Cruz has defects of charisma that make him a less-than-ideal candidate.

Still and all, I remain shocked at the Preference Cascade by many to declare they simply do not care about religious or social issues at all, and in fact strongly dislike candidates even playing in that field.

A Few Points: Pro-life Trump supporters are making several points in the comments. Let me respond to them, or my paraphrase of them.

"There are more important things to worry about at the moment, like protecting the integrity of the nation," is the general claim.

Understood -- and I agree. Pro-lifers are being, they say, tactical here, and reasonable about what can and cannot be done.

Here's the problem with that: If you want to maximize your leverage in political negotiations, you really have to establish you're unreasonable on the issue, and will not compromise -- if your demands are not met, you'll walk.

So yes, it's great to see pro-lifers are willing to compromise on this. Sure, it demonstrates they are flexible, adaptable, and willing to make tactical compromises for the greater good.

But now we know that going forward -- and you don't just get to say "Our flexible position only applies in 2016, and only to Trump." No, it applies going forward, generally.

We now know that this is not the deal-breaker some of us thought it was.

Another claim:

"Well, the GOP-e has sold us out again and again on the issue. We don't expect anyone to do anything about our cause, so why not Trump?"

This is, like the last claim, fine as a defense of the self -- "I'm reacting reasonably to the actual facts of the world" -- but it's not a good defense of the position.

Once again, the hand is now tipped that pro-lifers don't expect much and don't actually demand much. They are "reasonable" and get the adverse cultural situation they're in.

But once again, this just is a reason why the rest of the party doesn't have to adopt this issue as their own any more. It's not a disputation of the fact that the party no longer has to be pro-life.

Just an explanation why that is.


Posted by: Ace at 03:40 PM




Comments

(Jump to bottom of page)

1 1st?

Posted by: Skip at May 03, 2016 03:42 PM (PFZvJ)

2 Malarkey... a whole steaming pile of it.

Posted by: Jacob's Step Stool at May 03, 2016 03:43 PM (sqs5K)

3 Wrote this morning on the ONT that Dennis Prager wondered first thing yesterday on his show how many Republicans are conservatives

Posted by: Skip at May 03, 2016 03:44 PM (PFZvJ)

4 It's a stupid label game. Harry Reid campaigned as pro-life. So did Joe Biden early in his career.

How many right-leaning people do you know that really want abortion completely outlawed? Almost all will call themselves "pro-life" but don;t actually want it criminalized.

It's simply a sop we give to the Religious Right that keeps costing Republicans elections.

I hope Trump puts a nail in the coffin on this plank.

Posted by: Bally at May 03, 2016 03:45 PM (C6cBW)

5 Dems have the blueprint on how to win against social Reps.

Posted by: redenzo at May 03, 2016 03:46 PM (WCnJW)

6
Amen amen amen. Ace, you actually seem optimistic here, and I'm with you 100%. Maybe the new division is authoritarian/libertarian, with religious issues left to religious institutions and families where they belong.

Posted by: iforgot at May 03, 2016 03:47 PM (pC96u)

7 Coming down to it I've become more conservative with age.

Posted by: Skip at May 03, 2016 03:47 PM (PFZvJ)

8 "War is a great clarifier. It forces people to take sides. The paleoconservatives have chosen and the rest of us must choose too. In a time of danger, they have turned their backs on their country. Now we turn our backs on them."

--- David Frum c.2003

Well, you did a bang up job of forcing everyone who disagreed with you out, Mr. Frum, so I guess you can't complain all that much, can you now?

Posted by: Bigby's Hobo Gloves at May 03, 2016 03:47 PM (3ZtZW)

9 ...But here's a parchment with the seal of Caesar. I found it in his closet. Tis his will. He left you money. Just the money for you to have a good life. But it has been stolen from you and I will tell you by who...

People will believe fairy tails (Obama) when hard times hit. Maslow's hierarchy of needs.

Posted by: huh? at May 03, 2016 03:47 PM (Bbcs8)

10 if Trump does well pushing a conservative economic agenda, the social conservatives will probably vote for him rather than let Hillery get to put more lefties on the Sup Court. At least I hope so.

Posted by: Mallflower at May 03, 2016 03:47 PM (qSIlh)

11 The GOPe doesn't represent conservatives. It represents itself.

Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at May 03, 2016 03:48 PM (Gq5Jb)

12
How many right-leaning people do you know that really want abortion completely outlawed? Almost all will call themselves "pro-life" but don;t actually want it criminalized.

It's simply a sop we give to the Religious Right that keeps costing Republicans elections.

I hope Trump puts a nail in the coffin on this plank.
Posted by: Bally at May 03, 2016 03:45 PM (C6cBW)
---------------------

YES.

Posted by: iforgot at May 03, 2016 03:48 PM (pC96u)

13 Total guess: people who are socially conservative were willing to back Trump because he was right* on other issues, such as immigration and defending Christians.


*Insert caveat here that this assumes he'll do what he says - at least on the days he says what they like to hear yadda yadda yadda.

Posted by: Lizzy at May 03, 2016 03:48 PM (NOIQH)

14 "To God be the glory"

Posted by: Ghost of kari - certified sidebar at May 03, 2016 03:49 PM (xuouz)

15 12 The GOPe doesn't represent conservatives. It represents itself.
Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at May 03, 2016 03:48 PM (Gq5Jb)

---

This.

The GOP has nothing to do with conservatives or conservative values. Nothing.

Posted by: Seems Legit at May 03, 2016 03:49 PM (U+nHb)

16 Nation trumps all else. You can't have any of the rest of it if you give up the nation. Yet, the GOP leadership has been, piece by piece, giving up the concept of America as a nation. Ted Cruz has been allied with the globalists.

I would rather have a better warrior on abortion, 2nd amendments rights, constitutional law, and all the rest. But, all the GOP had on offer this primary, except for Trump, were the globalists.

It will not do.

Posted by: Anon Y. Mous at May 03, 2016 03:50 PM (R+30W)

17 "How many right-leaning people do you know that really want abortion completely outlawed? "

All the ones who aren't into politics full or part time.
Strange bedfellows.

Posted by: huh? at May 03, 2016 03:50 PM (j2xmV)

18 I think Frum overstates the case. Trump has at least pretended to be pro-life, and he's been much more agressive at defying Republican orthodoxy on positions like trade and entitlement spending. I do think social conservatism has weakened on many issues, but Trump has shown the weakness of just about every part of the coalition. If Trumpism has to be distilled to anything, it's identity politics for working class (increasingly welfare class) whites.

Posted by: Anachronism at May 03, 2016 03:50 PM (LOC7Q)

19 "Because God told me..."

Is something I never want to hear a pesident say about any issue ever.
Cruz will NOT be the nominee.

Posted by: Triple Twenty at May 03, 2016 03:50 PM (OPfVc)

20 Mitt Romney disabused me of these notions.

Posted by: Mortimer at May 03, 2016 03:50 PM (8ZHTC)

21
Coming down to it I've become more conservative with age.
Posted by: Skip at May 03, 2016 03:47 PM (PFZvJ)
-------------------

Me too, which is to say simultaneously more pro-family, more respect for tradition, and more government hands-off all of it. I don't want any damn bathroom laws either way; EITHER WAY, this legislation weakens common sense and common decency.

Posted by: iforgot at May 03, 2016 03:51 PM (pC96u)

22 Like Ace, I'm a Libertarian who hasn't been in 100% on the Social Con agenda.

For things like gay marriage and legal abortion, I would be for a libertarian accommodation of both. What bothers me, greatly, is imposing these things on a populace via court ruling and a "living constitution." And changing the narrative of things like abortion from trying to minimize a tragedy, to using totalitarian tactics to bully into silence anyone who objects to butchering babies.

I find it unacceptable -- and a tyranny -- that courts will rule one way and impose rules on, say, an unpopular religion, just because it isn't as popular as it used to be. So I throw my lot in with the So-Cons on the meat of their former agenda. For Liberty.

If the self-described evangelicals decide that Trump is their huckleberry, meh, I can't stop them. But if we're ditching principles for the sake of celebrity and expediency, then me and the TrumPets are completely in different parties with different agendas.

Posted by: Leo Spaceman at May 03, 2016 03:51 PM (p2I2N)

23 "How very much part of the part seems to dislike "Jesusy" candidates like Ted Cruz. Who isn't really all that Jesusy. He's not Sam Brownback, for crying out loud."



I have to disagree with you there. Ted Cruz's campaign is pretty over the top with the religious language. I really think when "Body of Christ is inserted into political soundbites, it's a big problem.


I have family members that are basically agnostic, but Republican and it pretty much disqualified Cruz for them.

Posted by: Bally at May 03, 2016 03:51 PM (C6cBW)

24 So if this is true and if the Republicans become purely nationalists vs the democrats as purely internationalist...would anyone here would actually switch sides to the dems?

This is ALL tribal identity. Ace has touched on it before. It is just our brain rationalizing why we like our tribe/team. We like our team b/c we like them ou can't help what you like - its a feeling. And once you have that feeling your brain WILL come up with a million rational reasons for why...after the fact.

What really made you like it was a feeling.

Trump/SMOD 2016

Posted by: TeamRawDog at May 03, 2016 03:52 PM (10hEu)

25
"Because God told me..."

Is something I never want to hear a pesident say about any issue ever.
Cruz will NOT be the nominee.
Posted by: Triple Twenty at May 03, 2016 03:50 PM (OPfVc)
------------------------

I was going to flee this thread as the flame-throwers approached, but I think I'll stick around to second comments like this.

Posted by: iforgot at May 03, 2016 03:52 PM (pC96u)

26 Nothing against your analysis Ace but the fact Trump is ahead is very simple. He says he is going to fight for Americans. Nothing about the ideology but just put Americans first.

It is pretty simple and I'm sure I will get called names (but I'll put my IQ personal success against anybody's) because I believe this is what is going on.

Posted by: Jukin, Former Republican, Now Reregistered to VOTE TRUMP in California at May 03, 2016 03:52 PM (AhyHb)

27 Well yes and no. What Frum seems to be missing is that many social conservatives seem to think that Trump is going to be their strong man for religious freedom.

Just as Jeff Sessions thinks Trump will be his strong man on immigration reform.

Both groups couldn't be more wrong.

Posted by: tsrlbke PhD(c), rogue bioethicist at May 03, 2016 03:52 PM (tM4uk)

28 The social issues chunk of Disintegrating Life Raft America floated away completely in 2012.

It's just pragmatic survival now.

Posted by: Mortimer at May 03, 2016 03:52 PM (8ZHTC)

29 I have a difficult time envisioning men actually voting for Hillary. I've been proven wrong so many times before
but this is hard to imagine.

Posted by: washrivergal at May 03, 2016 03:52 PM (CFc5L)

30 > Cruz has defects of charisma that make him a less-than-ideal candidate.

Cruz has the charisma of a wet mop.

Posted by: just wait, you won't believe what happens next at May 03, 2016 03:52 PM (IQI2h)

31 David Frum: Trump Has Exposed Just How Pitifully Few Conservatives
Exist in the Republican Party; the Social Issues Veto is No More



Remarking only on the headline for now but David Frum has zero qualifications to talk about the Republican Party, much less conservatives. The problems isn't that there are few conservatives in the Party. The problem is that there are not enough in congress to override the RINOs and DIABLOs in the party who are liberals like Frum.


And no being anti-abortion or pro-Religion does not make you a conservative. Our current Pope fits that description and he is the next thing to a communist.


As I said this morning, where conservative are lacking is a solid definition of a conservative that everyone agrees on. Muddling round with this allows the MFM and idiots like David Frum to make up their own definition,

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at May 03, 2016 03:53 PM (vvmPQ)

32 People are setting aside their pet issues because they realized that, if not for Trump, we would be in the midst of a media-run campaign, adhering to all the rules of social correctness, with our candidate constantly on an apology tour to appease the victim group he insulted the day before.

Pretty much a rerun of McCain and Romney.

There's a cry of "never again" in the air.

Posted by: jwest at May 03, 2016 03:53 PM (Zs4uk)

33 > I remain shocked at the Preference Cascade by many to declare they simply do not care about religious or social issues at all ...

I've been looking forward to a good Preference Cascade since the summer of 2008.... But this is not the one I wanted!

Posted by: ArthurK at May 03, 2016 03:53 PM (h53OH)

34 >>>Cruz has the charisma of a wet mop.

He most certainly does not!

Posted by: a handsome wet mop wearing a jaunty ascot at May 03, 2016 03:53 PM (dciA+)

35 >>>"I had thought a whole bunch of things were non-negotiable demand points from an important part of the coalition."

I don't think this year is "normal" and I wouldn't judge the past or future trends on this Black Swan election year.

Posted by: Max Power at May 03, 2016 03:53 PM (q177U)

36 12 The GOPe doesn't represent conservatives. It represents itself.

Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at May 03, 2016 03:48 PM (Gq5Jb)


One might even say it insists upon itself.

Posted by: OregonMuse at May 03, 2016 03:54 PM (e8ge6)

37 "But it seems that most of the party doesn't care much about those things, either."

Amen, brother. If Trump wins the nom, I'm gonna vote for him and then spend the next 4 years (minimum) drunk.

Posted by: West at May 03, 2016 03:54 PM (1Rgee)

38 ...my Muslim faith...

Posted by: Barry Soetoro, AA, BFD at May 03, 2016 03:54 PM (HgMAr)

39 Where else they gonna go?

10% Ted?
Karate Kasich?
Kommisaar Bernie?

Hacking *cough* Hillary?


Posted by: Mortimer at May 03, 2016 03:54 PM (8ZHTC)

40 I used to think there was a coalition, a set of mutually agreeable compromises that held the GOP table upright.

I now realize that was nonsense.

It is and has been always a compromise between restraint and indulgence, power and indifference, rectitude and pragmatism.

I look forward to the debate that's been bubbling in the dextrosphere regarding the New GOP. I look forward to it because it is looking more and more like a beast that cocooned as Compassionate Conservatism and is morphing into a eunuch bitch.


Posted by: weft cut-loop at May 03, 2016 03:54 PM (OcD4G)

41 Bally: "I hope Trump puts a nail in the coffin..."

Oh, this will certainly put the final nail in quite a few coffins. Metaphorically speaking, of course -- I mean, they don't use actual coffins when they butcher babies, they sell the good parts and discard the rest as medical waste.

But hey, yay, "Republicans" might win more elections this way, long term, if we triangulate on this issue, and that one over there, and this other one.

Posted by: Pastafarian at May 03, 2016 03:54 PM (LqrRo)

42 re 5:
"How many right-leaning people do you know that really want abortion completely outlawed? Almost all will call themselves "pro-life" but don't actually want it criminalized.

It's simply a sop we give to the Religious Right that keeps costing Republicans elections."


I recall a very powerful Dem in the House, I believe it was Vic Fazio, urging Repubs to say away from the pro-life crowd before the 1994 election. They didn't listen to him and you know what happened.

"And Rep. Vic Fazio (D-West Sacramento), chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, assailed what he called "the fire-breathing Christian radical right." "

http://tinyurl.com/jscln9d (LA Times 1994)

Posted by: Mallflower at May 03, 2016 03:54 PM (qSIlh)

43 I guess I just never understood the issue with having traditional values in your own life, but not making it an obsession that the criminal code reflect your Biblical beliefs.

I think abortion even in cases of rape is wrong, I sure as hell don't expect our laws to reflect that. Yet this is a dumb issue that even people like Cruz have signed off on.

Why can't we just allow these people that make immoral choices stand in judgement of God? We do that for all sorts of other sinful behavior.

Posted by: Bally at May 03, 2016 03:54 PM (C6cBW)

44 Interesting hypothesis, Ace, but here's the thing: not only is Trump not a social conservatism; he's not *any* type of conservative. He's not an economic conservative, he's not a limited-government conservative, he's not a states-rights conservative, he's not even a temperamental conservative. You cannot put him in any conservative category. And if you assume (as you should) that he's not at all serious about the Wall, what conservative positions does he take?

So if the hypothesis is that Trump's success shows that the GOP isn't a socially conservative party, well, his success also shows that it isn't remotely conservative on any issue at all.

I don't think that's right.

Posted by: Masturbatin' Pete at May 03, 2016 03:54 PM (26zxJ)

45 And it's way, way too strong to say "doesn't care about." There are a hierarchy of concerns for virtually all voters. Plenty (and I do mean plenty) of people are pro-life, but when the polity seems to be crumbling around them and the international order is falling apart and people haven't had a real increase in wages in going on twenty years and there are more foreigners here than at almost any time in history and the national debt is about to top $20 trillion and the workforce is at its lowest point since the Ford administration...

Well, there are issues, and there are issues.

Slicing constituencies into semi-permanent demographic chunks is one of the stupidest things political professionals do. People have agency. Free will. Changing minds and changing circumstances.
Posted by: Apostate at May 03, 2016 03:45 PM (HYy1S)


This couldn't be said any better.

Remember Maslow's Hierarchy?
Supporting the hierarchy is biological and physicalogical needs , then safety is next.

Conservatives and religious folks are not stupid. We realize that these two large supporting layers of needs are not only not being met, but are threatened by our current government. So we are looking to fix these most basic needs by fighting and replacing the government.

All the rest of the hierarchy is totally dependent on that. One's faith's tenets only can be realized when the other needs are met.

Stop accusing the religious of not being faithful because they have the intelligence to realize what needs to come first to support their beliefs.

Posted by: Jen the original at May 03, 2016 03:55 PM (391wI)

46 The open expression of one's religious beliefs, particularly Christian beliefs, has been turned into a sign of ignorance/bigotry by the mass media for decades. It's no surprise fewer people are (or profess to be) Religious. Seth McFarlane probably converted more people than Billy Graham.

Posted by: Lincolntf at May 03, 2016 03:55 PM (2cS/G)

47 It's Liberals who will allow men into ladies bathrooms "just to browse". Conservatives will soon demand they pee.

Posted by: dfbaskwill at May 03, 2016 03:55 PM (zllbf)

48 From what I saw, it wasn't his stance on abortion that did in Giuliani. It was his treatment of one of his ex-wives. The wife in question apparently found out that he was divorcing her when he announced it at a press conference. And word got out that his kids from that marriage were pretty unhappy with him.


As for SoCons and their presence in the party...

Maybe they're not that popular. It's hard to tell. But small government doesn't appear to be all that popular, either. One of Huckabee's advisors famously crowed in 2008 that Huckabee's campaign had dispensed with Reagan's famous three-legged stool - referring, in this instance, to the leg that was made up of the small government types. Huckabee ultimately lost, of course. But he managed to do well enough during the primary to make a nuisance of himself.

I hate to say it, but I wouldn't be surprised if the stool is about to come apart. And that's a problem for me, because I'm a part of all three groups that make up the stool.

Posted by: junior at May 03, 2016 03:55 PM (t+Qw5)

49
Maybe we should stop calling these things "social" issues since they're moral issues.

And since we are rightly outraged at the doings of Kermit Gosnell and the persecution of Christians in our own nation by a minority of militant perverts, then these issues are terribly important, indeed crucial, to a sane, moral society.

My two cents.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at May 03, 2016 03:55 PM (p4UlV)

50 It's the demo change, gang.

Not white v non-white. Generational demos. WW2 generation is about out the door, leaving the Korea War vets as the oldest population.

But the majority of Seniors are now Boomers. And we now have more Millenials than Boomers.

Factor in the cultural PTSD of Gen X/Y/whoever, from Divorce/Roe/LGBTXYZ/Drugs and blammo -Euro Strong wins out.

Trump will start baiting Cruzers with "Ted for SCOTUS", then tell lefties it won't happen...but once Hillary's people said Bill's focus is going to be as the Jobs Czar, Donald is now going to have to spend all his time reliving NAFTA.

Everything really comes down to Don's Veep pick. It will be the first hard decision he makes that he can't retract.

Posted by: budfox at May 03, 2016 03:55 PM (eUJB/)

51 >>>I don't think this year is "normal" and I wouldn't judge the past or future trends on this Black Swan election year.

you may think that, but I, for one, will never fear the Social Conservative Dog That Didn't Bark ever again.

They're a great deal more pragmatic and open to compromise than they maybe previously suggested.

Posted by: ace at May 03, 2016 03:55 PM (dciA+)

52 >>>I'd like Wolverine as president. Doesn't mean people will set aside the natural born citizen clause to allow Logan to take office.

You fucking traitor.

Posted by: Bruce Wayne/Dick Grayson 2016 at May 03, 2016 03:56 PM (MCmqp)

53

There may not be a religious right, and I think it's debatable if there really was one, the media can create boogeymen out of anything...

But there is an Islamist left, and they are home in the Democrat Party...and maybe the GOP as well.

Posted by: Rev Dr E Buzz The Main Dude My Man Esq at May 03, 2016 03:56 PM (sItQg)

54 53 Everything really comes down to Don's Veep pick. It will be the first hard decision he makes that he can't retract.
Posted by: budfox at May 03, 2016 03:55 PM (eUJB/)


Sargent Shriver redux.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at May 03, 2016 03:56 PM (p4UlV)

55 >>Still and all, I remain shocked at the Preference Cascade by many to
declare they simply do not care about religious or social issues at all,
and in fact strongly dislike candidates even playing in that field.

Yes, this election has been weird.

I think it speaks to the desperation of conservatives who have been treated so poorly by the GOPe - you know, the ones who sound super-conservative during re-election who then pivot to Democrat-lite while in DC.

Also, how many times has the GOP been ripped by the media, the Dems, over abortion? They love that sh#t - "Ooh, Mitt Romney is going to ban birth control because: religious nutcase!!" Considering that abortion will remain legal, and it's small potatoes compared to everything else on a president's plate, this abortion Charlie Brown-Lucy dance has gotten so dang old. I'm at a point where this is just not that important in a candidate - I'd just like them to stop harassing nuns and federally-funded abortions, thanks.

Posted by: Lizzy at May 03, 2016 03:57 PM (NOIQH)

56 I think you are reading way too much into this election.

I agree that social conservatives are losing some ground. However, I think a lot of social conservatives are suspending those issues because the GOP has failed on ALL issues and they despise/distrust the GOP. And, the anti-politician vibe adds to that. I Don't think a traditional politician could get away with being "pro-choice" win the GOP nomination.

But, the bigger problem is that if you do take "social conservatives" (read religious conservatives) out of the GOP, the vast majority of them will become economic liberals. Look at the stances of evangelical churches on the issues of anti-poverty spending or illegal immigration. They are all for big-gov't spending entitlement programs in the name of religion.

I don't think there is an equally sizeable group who are hard-core social liberals but economic conservatives to make up the loss of those voters for a "small gov't GOP".

As far as this: "Some of this might be good news for me as it would open up the
possibility that the things I care about -- restraining the size of the
government, on the theory that the bigger the government, the smaller
the citizen it reigns over; reducing spending; following the
Constitution for a change -- could advance as the GOP's core issues."

If the GOP had any of those issues in the first place, it wouldn't be in the mess it is in.

A bigger problem though, is what people always ignore - that "social liberalism" has real world costs. For instance, "open borders" is social liberalism. Amnesty is social liberalism. Both of those ideas would cost billions upon billions of dollars.

I, like you, don't put "pro-life" as a high priority in my politics, but I think if the GOP abandons that plank, the chance of the GOP also adopting (for the first time ever) a small gov't, reduced spending, fiscally responsible approach is almost nil. Indeed, the GOP would likely have to move leftward to attract voters to make up the loss of the religious voters who start voting economically liberal.

Also, my experience has always been that socially conservative politicians tend to maintain their fiscal conservatism/small gov't conservatism far better than "socially liberal" republicans, who tend to be just as "flexible" on economic issues as they are on social issues. I'm not saying this is 100% true, but I bet it is close to 97% true. The rare exception would be someone like Rand Paul.

Posted by: Golden at May 03, 2016 03:57 PM (3ZtZW)

57 Conservatism has always been a minority. How the hell else do you explain Nixon/Bush/Dole/Bush/McCain/Romney for president? In the last 200 years we've had, what three conservative Republican presidents? Harding, Coolidge, Reagan? Trump didn't create this, he's just another example of it.

Posted by: Republican Delegates at May 03, 2016 03:57 PM (39g3+)

58 I don't vote for the person whom I think will be the most popular, we've had that for 8 years and it hasn't worked out.

Posted by: Skip at May 03, 2016 03:57 PM (PFZvJ)

59 If Trump's liberalism can be accepted, why can't the liberalism of Giuliani (or a Giuliani type to be named later) be accepted?

As a pro-life conservative I could have accepted Giuliani. What I have a hard time accepting is a person who was pro-choice, pro-gun control, backed up his beliefs with cash to the left wing politicians and then comes out and says, I'm one of you.

types
deletes

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at May 03, 2016 03:57 PM (voOPb)

60
Time to feed the kittehs.

BBL.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at May 03, 2016 03:57 PM (p4UlV)

61 Ban this "juicer" idiot he was calling people cucks in a thread the other day.

Posted by: Ghost of kari - certified sidebar at May 03, 2016 03:57 PM (xuouz)

62 Simpler answer - a large segment of the party is tired of losing with the same old sort of candidates and is therefore trying a very different sort of candidate. The GOP has failed, completely, to do anything conservative since the mid 90s so it is not a bad answer in and of itself*

*Though Trump as that other sort of candidate is a different question of course.

Posted by: 18-1 at May 03, 2016 03:58 PM (X7E8f)

63
"To God be the glory"
Posted by: Ghost of kari - certified sidebar at May 03, 2016 03:49 PM (xuouz)
---------------------

To man be the votes.

Posted by: iforgot at May 03, 2016 03:58 PM (pC96u)

64 Frum may very well be correct. Idk.

I do know that if he's right and the "socially conservative" wing has withdrawn/been thrown out, you ain't seen nothing yet.

The hated socons have been the only thing holding back the wave of sexually perverted progressives from truly getting what they want

Posted by: Suppressed Flasher at May 03, 2016 03:58 PM (X+nFp)

65 >>>>People are setting aside their pet issues because they realized that, if not for Trump, we would be in the midst of a media-run campaign, adhering to all the rules of social correctness, with our candidate constantly on an apology tour to appease the victim group he insulted the day before.


You make some great points.

Posted by: Max Power at May 03, 2016 03:58 PM (q177U)

66 60 Conservatism has always been a minority. How the hell else do you explain Nixon/Bush/Dole/Bush/McCain/Romney for president? In the last 200 years we've had, what three conservative Republican presidents? Harding, Coolidge, Reagan? Trump didn't create this, he's just another example of it.
Posted by: Republican Delegates at May 03, 2016 03:57 PM (39g3+)


Beg to differ. Conservatism is the majority position still. Center-right to be precise. It's the GOP establishment that is in the minority. But a majority of them control the party apparatus and the money.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at May 03, 2016 03:58 PM (p4UlV)

67 Let you in on a secret. If immigration slows down dramatically the SCOTUS will suddenly find that it made a mistake on roe vs wade. Check out all the countries and states that have strong anti-abortion laws. Economic motives. If automation picks up to replace immigration then SOTUS wouldn't have made a mistake. Gay mafia loses all its money in a downturn? (information age dying?) Sodomy laws written and enforced.

Posted by: huh? at May 03, 2016 03:59 PM (j2xmV)

68 >>>31
Cruz has the charisma of a wet mop.
Posted by: just wait, you won't believe what happens next at May 03, 2016 03:52 PM (IQI2h)

______

I may be a wet mop, sir, but in the morning I will be dry and Cruz will still be creepy.

Posted by: Churchill's Wet Mop at May 03, 2016 03:59 PM (10hEu)

69 It's more than just the abortion issue. Conservatism, the way many here think of it, is dead as a practical political philosophy.

Should the USA be the World's cop and intervene in places like Iraq and Libya and Syria. That's what the NeoCons want, no? The Bush family, Lindsey Graham, John McCain, Karl Rove ... even Hillary.

Should we promote the interests of Big Business, even though it's now aligned with elements of Big Gov and increasingly with the Cultural Left. That's what the Chamber of Commerce crowd wants. People like Paul Ryan and Karl Rove and dare I say her name, Carly Fiorina.

Let GE and Apple defend their own outsourced trade routes. Let Disney haggle with Peking to get paid a nickel out of China for its copyrights.

Yes, I'd like Constitutional Conservatives appointed as judges, especially to SCOTUS, but it does nothing for how to govern. You want to kill the Dept of Education, that's a political question, not a Constitutional one. Sorry, Mark Levin.

Posted by: Ignoramus at May 03, 2016 03:59 PM (r1fLd)

70 "Where Republicans are most secular and supposedly most moderate--the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic--Trump has done best. By all indications, he'll do crushingly well in California, too."

So he does best in states that are solid locks for Hillary. Not really a surprise.

Posted by: V the K at May 03, 2016 03:59 PM (O7MnT)

71 My principles of conservatism:
First: The conservative believes that rights are inherent in each human's existence.
Second: The conservative acknowledges tradition without codifying rituals.
Third: Conservatives are guided by personal responsibility.
Fourth: Conservatives choose choice.
Fifth: Conservatives are imperfect, freedom is messy.
Sixth: Conservatives are persuaded that freedom and prosperity are linked.
Seventh: The conservative perceives the need for prudent restraints upon power.
Eighth: The thinking conservative understands that change happens in a prosperous society.
Ninth: The conservative is part of a diverse society

Posted by: Tracy Coyle at May 03, 2016 03:59 PM (SXT9g)

72 The thing is, Trump's support has never been about his conservatism or lack thereof. Its been about a big FU to the GOP elite, furious anger about immigration, and a guy who finally stands up and tells the left to go to hell when they attack him. Its refreshing and shocking to finally see someone like that. People aren't supporting Donald Trump for president, they're supporting "not like those other mincing douchebags in the past" for president.

Posted by: Republican Delegates at May 03, 2016 04:00 PM (39g3+)

73 > Everything really comes down to Don's Veep pick. It will be the first hard decision he makes that he can't retract.

Posted by: budfox

Someone to assuage teh butthurt of the GOPe.

John Thune?

Posted by: just wait, you won't believe what happens next at May 03, 2016 04:00 PM (IQI2h)

74
I have to disagree with you there. Ted Cruz's campaign is pretty over the top with the religious language. I really think when "Body of Christ is inserted into political soundbites, it's a big problem.


I have family members that are basically agnostic, but Republican and it pretty much disqualified Cruz for them.

I did a look, and a Gallup Poll from 2012 says about 60% of Republicans believe in "Creation by God," which counts, I guess, both "Intelligent Design" and other evangelical-y flavors.

The amount of Democrats, though, who believe in Creation, is 38% Let that roll around for a bit. No Democrat could win without the Left-Wing religious vote.

Conversely, only about 5% of voting Republicans identify as atheistic in their outlook. But only about 20% of Democrats identify themselves that way.

It annoys me that only Republicans -- conservatives -- have to wrangle with the "associations" of that. Neither party can win without the religious vote.

Which tells me, if nothing else, that people have outwardly socialized views and opinions on ethereal things, which may not entirely determine their core principles on, say, the role of government.

Posted by: Leo Spaceman at May 03, 2016 04:00 PM (p2I2N)

75 Ace, the GOPe pretty much threw socons under the bus and fully funded PP. Meanwhile, I don't think they could rush fast enough to the microphones after the SCOTUS decision to declare that while they didn't like it, homosexual marriage was now the law of the land.

Do you think a country and party that doesn't care about human life or some semblance of morality is going to care what the Constitution says or give you a smaller government?

Posted by: WOPR - Nationalist at May 03, 2016 04:00 PM (vPdas)

76 Trumpiods don't have a philosophy, they have a savior. They do not understand that Trump can NOT do any of the things he says he will do. Eliminate the national debt in eight years while increasing our military? I mean who in their right mind believes this shit?


I don't think Trump understands that, and his cult followers certainly do not.



Benito Trump, a disaster coming to your home soon.


Posted by: Nip Sip at May 03, 2016 04:00 PM (jJRIy)

77 It's not the role of government to get involved in social or religious issues. There is a word for people who believe otherwise: liberal.

Posted by: Paul at May 03, 2016 04:01 PM (QOp9B)

78 "the GOP establishment"

...controlled the choices until Trump.

Trump is the "I'm fed up..." candidate. They couldn't Herman Cain him.

Posted by: huh? at May 03, 2016 04:01 PM (Bbcs8)

79 I used to think there was a coalition, a set of mutually agreeable compromises that held the GOP table upright.

I now realize that was nonsense.

===

There was. A shade under 20 years ago.

Posted by: Bigby's Hobo Gloves at May 03, 2016 04:01 PM (3ZtZW)

80 Where's your messiah now Glenn Beck?

Posted by: Biggus Dickus at May 03, 2016 04:02 PM (YSUgx)

81 Some of this might be good news for me as it would open up the possibility that the things I care about -- restraining the size of the government, on the theory that the bigger the government, the smaller the citizen it reigns over; reducing spending; following the Constitution for a change -- could advance as the GOP's core issues.

But it seems that most of the party doesn't care much about those things, either.


Yeah, if we're following this argument to its logical conclusion, this doesn't bode well for people who want to restrain the size of government.

I think it might be a stretch to read too much into this ideologically, though. A number of things caused this, but one of them was that no one saw Trump as being in their lane. So he didn't face the number of attacks and negative ads as others did until it was too late.

A person with Barack Obama's beliefs and background wouldn't have been elected unless he was Barack Obama in 2008.

A person with Trump's beliefs and background wouldn't have been nominated unless he was Trump in 2016.

Posted by: AD at May 03, 2016 04:02 PM (eepYc)

82 Conservatism is the majority position still.

I'd like that to be true, but there isn't a shred of evidence for it.

Posted by: Republican Delegates at May 03, 2016 04:02 PM (39g3+)

83 Trump not pro-life? Shit, the dude's the most extreme pro-lifer guy out there, so much so he's gonna throw all those sluts what couldn't keep from spreading their legs in prison, ain't nobody proer-life than the Trumpster.

Posted by: mugiwara at May 03, 2016 04:02 PM (D5hxK)

84 "Maybe the new division is authoritarian/libertarian, with religious
issues left to religious institutions and families where they belong"
_________________________

Which issues are "religious issues?" How has waiting for the government to leave "religious institutions and families" alone been working out?

I swear libertarianism is politics for Autistics sometimes.

Posted by: Alec Leamas at May 03, 2016 04:02 PM (RfZaB)

85 I thought Cruz was being pushed as the savior. That is what Beck and Cruz's father say.

Posted by: huh? at May 03, 2016 04:03 PM (Bbcs8)

86 81
It's not the role of government to get involved in social or religious
issues. There is a word for people who believe otherwise: liberal.

Posted by: Paul at May 03, 2016 04:01 PM (QOp9B)

THIS!

Posted by: Nip Sip at May 03, 2016 04:03 PM (jJRIy)

87 >>>Supporting the hierarchy is biological and physicalogical needs , then safety is next.

Conservatives and religious folks are not stupid. We realize that these two large supporting layers of needs are not only not being met, but are threatened by our current government. So we are looking to fix these most basic needs by fighting and replacing the government.

All the rest of the hierarchy is totally dependent on that. One's faith's tenets only can be realized when the other needs are met

...

fine, but if Trump is acceptable, a candidate I like should be acceptable in the future as well.

You're simply explaining WHY these things are in fact highly negotiable -- not disputing that they ARE in fact negotiable.

Posted by: ace at May 03, 2016 04:03 PM (dciA+)

88 I think that's semantic nonsense. Or was there a memo in 2010, 2014 that I somehow missed, where the party suddenly jettisoned its usual pro-life stance and so won historic Congressional gains?


Posted by: Apostate

_____________________


Many of the big gains were made by pro-choice Republicans in traditional blue states. Governors of Maryland, Michigan, Illinois, etc were all pro-choice. Once you get that issue off the table, people are more open to a conservative message.

Presidential candidates basically write off half the country with pro-life purity (and most women voters) while only a sliver of conservatives really care about this issue in a legal sense.

Trump was the only real "pro-choice" Republican running and it didn't hurt him a bit. Anyone that really cared about this issue knew he was not pro-life, yet he easily won over even Evangelicals.

This was always a paper tiger that SoCons clowns like Pat Robertson would threaten to "walk" if their demands weren't met.

Posted by: Bally at May 03, 2016 04:03 PM (C6cBW)

89 I don't know if the conclusion Frum reaches is right.

My boss was talking to me today and he said, when you have a vermin problem, rats in the attic eating things, you don't give a crap if the exterminator is rough around the edges, smokes, drinks, whatever. You just want him to get rid of the rats.

For better or worse (worse) a lot of republican voters are fed up, and they think that Trump will get rid of the rats.

Posted by: Jollyroger at May 03, 2016 04:03 PM (t06LC)

90 Ace, the GOPe pretty much threw socons under the bus and fully funded PP.

SoCons were thrown under the bus at least a decade ago. Aside from lip-service from the GOP-e, there hasn't been any action on Socially Conservative issues. The fact that the GOP-E couldn't cut Planned Parenthood funding even after the baby parts scandal shows how little status the Social Right actually has in the GOP.

Abandoning social conservatives in 2008 and 2012 didn't really help the GOP much electorally did it?

Posted by: V the K at May 03, 2016 04:03 PM (O7MnT)

91 ace/cobs...




(kiM4X) needs a banning.

Posted by: Mortimer at May 03, 2016 04:03 PM (8ZHTC)

92 They're a great deal more pragmatic and open to compromise than they maybe previously suggested.



Posted by: ace at May 03, 2016 03:55 PM (dciA+)


As a former SoCon ("reformed" as I call myself) I realized that FiCon-ism and smaller less intrusive government is the vehicle for expanding my beliefs anyway. (As I snarkily say, "I used to be a SoCon then I read Aristotle")

The point being that I need maximum freedom to carry out my beliefs so that I can show them to others and charge hearts and minds not laws. (Put differently, merely enforcing my beliefs via the law is at best ineffective at worst counterproductive.)

Does this mean I'm "pragmatic and open to compromise?" I don't think so, I still believe strongly all the things I believed before, I just have a different approach to making them broadly accepted.

Posted by: tsrlbke PhD(c), rogue bioethicist at May 03, 2016 04:03 PM (tM4uk)

93 Yup I think it goes without saying that *at a minimum*, Trump's SCOTUS nominees would be squishy on abortion and social issues generally.

And now it's been revealed that the people who are really willing to fight for these important social issues are a small minority who can easily be dismissed and ignored.

Get ready for mandatory gay marriage!

Posted by: chemjeff at May 03, 2016 04:03 PM (dpnZC)

94 WASTF

Posted by: Drill at May 03, 2016 04:04 PM (/AoJR)

95 I never understood the need to place a presidential candidate under a microscope. I don't want to marry the guy and make him have my babies. I want him to balance a budget, command a military, beat down commies, and otherwise stay the fuck out of my way.

This "president boyfriend" nonsense has got to stop.

Posted by: Fritz at May 03, 2016 04:04 PM (UzPAd)

96 So my tribe loses. Stockpile and embrace the suck.

Posted by: Grump928(c) says Free Soothie!, with purchase of commentor of equal or greater value at May 03, 2016 04:04 PM (evdj2)

97 "A bigger problem though, is what people always ignore - that 'social liberalism' has real world costs. For instance, 'open borders' is social liberalism. Amnesty is social liberalism. Both of those ideas would cost billions upon billions of dollars."
--------

This is an excellent point: I don't know who first brought this to my attention a decade or more ago (John Derbyshire, perhaps), but there is no such animal as the "Social Liberal, Economic Conservative."

Social liberalism has real economic costs. It's almost always the case that social liberalism results in the government getting bigger and spending more money.

This is not to be confused with social libertarianism, which says "do what you want, and bear your own costs."

Posted by: Masturbatin' Pete at May 03, 2016 04:04 PM (26zxJ)

98 75 Posted by: Tracy Coyle at May 03, 2016 03:59

That's pretty good, where did it come from?

Posted by: Skip at May 03, 2016 04:05 PM (PFZvJ)

99 76 The thing is, Trump's support has never been about his conservatism or lack thereof. Its been about a big FU to the GOP elite, furious anger about immigration, and a guy who finally stands up and tells the left to go to hell when they attack him. Its refreshing and shocking to finally see someone like that. People aren't supporting Donald Trump for president, they're supporting "not like those other mincing douchebags in the past" for president.

Posted by: Republican Delegates at May 03, 2016 04:00 PM (39g3+)

++++

Just think about how differently this primary might have played out if the GOP could point to what they did to reign in Obama after being given their House and Senate majorities. They could say it made no sense to take a flyer on a celebrity like Trump just when the GOP had the chance to build on their successes once they had the White House as well.

Instead, what the voters see is they just want to continue their bargains with the Left.

Posted by: Anon Y. Mous at May 03, 2016 04:05 PM (R+30W)

100 Perhaps we were overdue for a coalition shift in the GOP -- the social conservatives seemed to be fighting an endless rearguard action on issues that (aside from abortion) they were going to lose (like gay marriage, prayer in schools, etc).

The problem that I have with it is that there is no coherence to the new "Trump" coalition, and little to distinguish it from the democrat policies of yesteryear. Trade protectionism coupled with jingoism and a border wall seem to be its major tenents. There is little to unite these ideas other than a broad based nationalism. I'm not against nationalism per se, but Trump coalition does little to advance the reform that is actually needed in this country to fix the massive government overreach that has caused Washington to exert the gravity of a super-massive black hole on the rest of the country.

I'd like a president that has the governing principles of a Calvin Coolidge. I'd like the American voter to be primarily interested in betting his or her life on their own, and to look with skepticism, or even disdain, on the idea that their problems can be fixed by more government intervention -- (instead, they should push for less intervention and more freedom). I'd like to see the growing recognition that the middle class welfare systems we have (like social security and medicare) are unaffordable and need to be diminished and repealed. I'd like the primary opposition party to the socialist-democrat party be a party that is actually, in fact, anti-socialist.

Instead, what has become clear this election is that the GOP positions are simply what the democrat positions were some 50-odd years ago. There is no stomach to move against the democrat/socialist gains made in this country in the early-mid twentieth century. There is little to no appetite for diminishing the role of the feds. Instead, partisans from both parties run with outstretched arms to government solutions to their problems.

If the coalition of the Great Ronald is unravelling, what is replacing is going to be just as ineffective at stopping the ever-encroaching reach of the Federal government into all of our lives.

Posted by: Revenant at May 03, 2016 04:05 PM (y64uP)

101 I live in the Midwest in what would be considered one of the more "conservative" suburbs of a liberal town (Chicago). Maybe half the people I know go to church. Of that half, maybe 1/5th are Jesus-y and even less are vocal social cons. However, most of them hate what has been done to our economy, to healthcare, are torn but conservative leaning on immigration, most aren't anti-gun but aren't going to be getting a CCW any time soon.
I'm not sure what that indicates, but in my real-life (not online) social circle, there is not a strident call for more social conservatism. Most issues that get discussed over a beer or glass of wine seem to revolve around jobs, freedom, and once in a while, swapping partners for the night.

Posted by: ajmojo at May 03, 2016 04:05 PM (1H9ox)

102 When people can't get jobs, the esoteric becomes less important.
Trump talks about concrete things, things we can see everyday.
Cruz talks about principles. Things that are important, but seemingly removed from everyday life.
Most people don't want to think about politics. They want to make their money, put food on the table and tuck their kids into bed at night.

Posted by: Iblis at May 03, 2016 04:05 PM (9221z)

103 As a pro-life conservative I could have accepted Giuliani. What I have a hard time accepting is a person who was pro-choice, pro-gun control, backed up his beliefs with cash to the left wing politicians and then comes out and says, I'm one of you.
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at May 03, 2016 03:57 PM (voOPb)


I think Trump is doing well in the northeast because northeastern republicans know what it's like to have to hide their conservatism from their colleagues and even friends. The things Trump has said about gun control and abortion look and more importantly feel like things I've said so I didn't get a kick under the table from the girlfriend. I have had arguments that spiraled into shouting matches and led to me basically being cold-shouldered out of a party because I made a polite rebuttal to some cutie grad student's lies about taxes/Obamacare/islam/police violence/pick your poison and refused to apologize for doing so.

Trump has been a squish northeastern republican his entire life. Not an arch liberal. You can protest that Cruz isn't as bad as Sam Brownback but Glenn Beck is worse and that shit does not play on the coasts, man. Trump has got even liberals in MA saying that maybe we do need to look at the border.

You see these hedged, non-answer responses to social issue questions and smell a communist. I see them and recognize a daily reality of my life.

And I am no socialist.

Posted by: Ghost of kari - certified sidebar at May 03, 2016 04:06 PM (xuouz)

104 Posted by: budfox

Someone to assuage teh butthurt of the GOPe.

John Thune?
Posted by: just wait, you won't believe what happens next at May 03, 2016 04:00 PM (IQI2h)

Thune isn't lower tier enough.

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at May 03, 2016 04:06 PM (voOPb)

105 The fact is, you can't have a small Government fiscally conservative society unless it is based on Social Conservatism. The bedrock principle of Social Conservatism is that you are responsible for your own actions. Toss that principle out, and the all-intrusive socialist welfare state is the inevitable result.

Posted by: V the K at May 03, 2016 04:06 PM (O7MnT)

106 Just think about how differently this primary might have played out if the GOP could point to what they did to reign in Obama after being given their House and Senate majorities. They could say it made no sense to take a flyer on a celebrity like Trump just when the GOP had the chance to build on their successes once they had the White House as well.
...
If my aunt had a dick she'd be my uncle.

Posted by: ajmojo at May 03, 2016 04:06 PM (1H9ox)

107 Who says you need charisma?

Posted by: Richard Nixon at May 03, 2016 04:06 PM (6NIyO)

108 A long time ago I had a discussion with a very religious person in my work group while we were sitting around a conference table eating lunch. We were discussing this particular issue, i.e religion in politics.


My response to him was that this was a very dangerous thing to do. If you try to get religion in your politics then inevitably you will get politics into your religion.


And lo and behold, that is exactly what we are seeing now with the Gaystapo forcing themselves on devout Christians through lawfare and court rulings.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at May 03, 2016 04:06 PM (vvmPQ)

109 Well Pro-life may now be a negotiable position within the party, but it isn't for me.

And I am NOT a religious person. However, abortion remains an abhorrent and barbaric practice. I can no more support it in a candidate as I can being pro-slavery.

THIS is my hill to die on. If I see any softening of Trump's supposed pro-life position, then I will definitely not vote this year.

And it offends me that people try to lump being pro-life into a "social issues agenda". I can view you as having a reasonable position for being pro-gay marriage, or wanting to curb pornography. But abortion is a bright line for me, because you a KILLING CHILDREN.

I am against the political position of killing children.

Posted by: Dave in Fla at May 03, 2016 04:07 PM (My0qG)

110
Juicer's erudite charm will no longer be available, sadly.

Posted by: ace at May 03, 2016 04:07 PM (dciA+)

111 "Presidential candidates basically write off half the country with pro-life purity (and most women voters) while only a sliver of conservatives really care about this issue in a legal sense."

----------

Seems a little weird that an issue where the GOP position is shared by half or more of the country is the issue we're supposed to abandon.

I mean, okay, being pro-life might hurt you in blue states, but it should be a winner elsewhere.

Posted by: Masturbatin' Pete at May 03, 2016 04:07 PM (aFa2V)

112 Maybe, Ace, people have just taken it for granted that NONE of the candidates will do anything about abortion. Supposedly pro-life Bush 43 didn't, Bush 41 didn't, and even Reagan didn't. Trump offers victory on other issues, and Cruz doesn't offer anything Trump doesn't. Has Cruz done more than say he's pro-life? Like: has he promised to end abortion? If not, why do you think he has a right to the support of pro-lifers?

Posted by: joeclark77 at May 03, 2016 04:07 PM (yypjm)

113 Trump tried to run in 2012.

Posted by: huh? at May 03, 2016 04:07 PM (Bbcs8)

114 I have been saying this for the longest time. I didn't need for phony David Frum to tell me this or validate my perceptions.
And as much as I respect--and share, mostly--the views of millions of decent, God-fearing folks, the jig was up long ago. The left won the culture war on social issues and there are more conservatives than we think who are quite relieved about that.
And let's all admit that abortion is the cause of all of this. If abortion was never "legalized", we wouldn't need to import millions of low-skilled Mexicans to do the jobs that white teenagers used to do--work at fast-food restaurants, mow lawns, etc.
Abortion was always about convenience, wasn't it? A "get-out of jail-free card" for sexually-active young women who wanted to go to school and have a career--and for their parents who wouldn't have to support the baby, and most of all for young men who could go around banging as many chicks as possible secure in the knowledge that they would never get stuck paying the bill--which of course led to the phenomenom of thirty-five year old men who still play video games all day --and night.
And make no mistake, even "conservative" women wanted the abortion escape-hatch for their daughters. That guilt, regret and possible health problems later on could rear their head never entered the equation--and that's why we have "cat ladies" today. It might be hard to believe, but many of them were hot young chicks once who opened their legs to all and sundry and missed the boat on marriage and became embittered in the process.
It was all a lie, the hedonism that most of us enjoyed to one degree or another, and it was always centered--in one way of another--by the pill and abortion.

Posted by: JoeF. at May 03, 2016 04:07 PM (7feDS)

115

the single issue voters change with the current environment


it just doesn't happen to be a social issue historically the repubs were known for supporting this round

Posted by: artisanal 'ette at May 03, 2016 04:07 PM (qCMvj)

116 As a former SoCon ("reformed" as I call myself) I realized that FiCon-ism and smaller less intrusive government is the vehicle for expanding my beliefs anyway. (As I snarkily say, "I used to be a SoCon then I read Aristotle")

The point being that I need maximum freedom to carry out my beliefs so that I can show them to others and charge hearts and minds not laws. (Put differently, merely enforcing my beliefs via the law is at best ineffective at worst counterproductive.)

Posted by: tsrlbke PhD(c), rogue bioethicist

____________


That's sort of where I'm at.

I used to be more of a social conservative in the political sense, but now, I believe the best I can get is some sort of "leave me alone" type coalition.

Abortion will be here forever, it's a dumb issue to truly try and outlaw.


Posted by: Bally at May 03, 2016 04:07 PM (C6cBW)

117 The thing is, Trump's support has never been about his conservatism or lack thereof. Its been about a big FU to the GOP elite, furious anger about immigration, and a guy who finally stands up and tells the left to go to hell when they attack him. Its refreshing and shocking to finally see someone like that. People aren't supporting Donald Trump for president, they're supporting "not like those other mincing douchebags in the past" for president.

This ^

Posted by: free tibet with purchase of equal or great value tibet at May 03, 2016 04:08 PM (iXRe2)

118 But remember, I trot out Jerry Falwell Jr. all the time, my mom's Bible, and accuse Lyin' Ted of being a religious phony to fake my way through and get the support of those wacky Evangelicals.

Posted by: D. Trump, tightly clutching his mom's Bible at May 03, 2016 04:08 PM (H9MG5)

119 If my aunt had a dick she'd be my uncle.
Posted by: ajmojo at May 03, 2016 04:06 PM (1H9ox)

---

.. your gay married uncle....

Posted by: fixerupper at May 03, 2016 04:08 PM (8XRCm)

120 Abortion is used by both parties to rile up the base. Nothing is ever going to change regardless of what party is in power. It would take a constitutional amendment to overturn Roe. Ain't gonna happen.

Posted by: Duke Lowell at May 03, 2016 04:08 PM (kTF2Z)

121 Ace, I don't think it is the issues, it is the candidates and the party. The GOP has ruined the brand, so people don't care what the candidates say anymore.

There isn't much point defending the GOP, when they have gone against all of the social issues for the past decade. People may very well still want social conservatism (I think they do), but since the republican party has not done anything besides lip service, and in fact has voted against social conservatives at every turn, why support them - which is why the two most anti-GOP candidates together have sewn up 70 percent of the primary vote.

Posted by: Vashta Nerada at May 03, 2016 04:08 PM (Qvgg/)

122 In case anyone hasn't noticed, the modern GOP is neither socially nor fiscally conservative.

Posted by: V the K at May 03, 2016 04:08 PM (O7MnT)

123 "And lo and behold, that is exactly what we are seeing now with the Gaystapo forcing themselves on devout Christians through lawfare and court rulings."

----------

So you think there's an alternative universe where Christians stayed out of politics, and in return the BAKE THE CAKE enforcers decided to live and let live?

Posted by: Masturbatin' Pete at May 03, 2016 04:08 PM (aFa2V)

124 So Ace, what *if*, as your progressive betters argue, you simply very slow to adopt their correct views of the world? Are you going to mirror Bernie in 20 years?

Posted by: SD3 at May 03, 2016 04:08 PM (/HLmV)

125 Meh. Maybe 99% of the 30% are staying home. I'm borderline moderate/conservative on the social scale and I prefer Cruz, but the clown is winning so I'll probably not vote. I'm an (R) only so I can vote in the primary, but didn't bother. I just don't care anymore, the tyranny of the minority has taken over the country. I'll just watch from the sidelines and try to preserve some knowledge of better sides for the process of rebuilding.

Posted by: aka.john at May 03, 2016 04:08 PM (zPa3K)

126 Is that really such a new phenomenon, ace? Since John McCain basically moved into the New York Times offices a long time ago, and assuming that Trump will be the nominee, all our nominees since W. will have been pretty secular north-eastern half-Dems.

And this isnt merely about nominations: look at the House leadership in Congress! Boehner was from Ohio, Ryan is from Wisconsin, McCarthy from California and McMorris-Rodgers is from Washington. How conservative is this party supposed to be with people like this in charge?

Trump is the logical continuation of McCain and Romney. There is no big break here, as many NeverTrump'ers like to pretend. The GOP just isnt a very conservative party. Its a Rockefeller/Nixon party that uses conservatism as PR strategy.

Posted by: Dixie Wetsworth at May 03, 2016 04:09 PM (WoLH7)

127 I think there is a problem down the line if we continue to see corporate interests decide that peoples religious preferences don't matter. I think we could get to the point where socons start to wonder why they are supporting low taxes and low regulations for these people. On a broader note, I also think that the way people take in religion now a days has changed. Traditional protestant churches has veered way off course in values and has had a damning effect (ha! see what I did there). Many have flooded evangelical churches, but also many have not come back. Also many new churches don't really have the fire and the pulpit preacher that they once did. So people like Cruz, who I like, doesn't sound like the person they here on sunday.

Posted by: Adam Smith's Invisible Pimp Hand at May 03, 2016 04:09 PM (uFueJ)

128 As a religious person, I'm more turned off by a guy who pretends to be overly religious when we all know he's faking it. He gives us some 1950's preacher voice when the modern evangelical movement is much more represented by men like Andy stanly or Craig Groeschel. It's not that I mind that he does it. It does however bother me that he does it to try to win me over. He also presents this judgmental version of Christianity full of shaming and guilt that I'm not about, especially as part of my government. Trump, on the other hand, lies about his beliefs all the time, but their is one thing he is honest about and that's that he doesn't hide the egotistical piece of shit that he is.

I'm far more turned off by a guy who pretends to be this bullshit perfect image, then a guy who just embraces his in your face "piece of shit" image.

Posted by: Connor at May 03, 2016 04:09 PM (Z1VE6)

129
David Frum has zero qualifications to talk about the Republican Party, much less conservatives.
--------------------------

He did write the best, most damning deconstruction of Jeb I ever read.

Posted by: iforgot at May 03, 2016 04:10 PM (pC96u)

130 Trump is the best hope for cutting Planned Parenthood from the public tit. Trump would do this to help cut the public deficit.

Posted by: huh? at May 03, 2016 04:10 PM (Bbcs8)

131 Maybe the new division is authoritarian/libertarian,
with religious issues left to religious institutions and families where
they belong.

Posted by: iforgot at May 03, 2016 03:47 PM (pC96u)
=============================================

Jiminy Christmas. Yes, you can have your religious "freedom" as long as you keep it out of the public square. Just like you can have your "freedom: of speech as long as you keep it out of the public square. Or you can have "freedom" of the press just so long as you restrict media usage to your own home.

By all means, let these "freedoms" be kept out of the way, where they belong.

Posted by: grammie winger at May 03, 2016 04:10 PM (dFi94)

132 Good post, Ace. I'm not sure that religious, social conservatives have given up the fight as much as they see Trump as willing and able to fight on different terrain for them.

Posted by: MaxMBJ at May 03, 2016 04:10 PM (eXTZt)

133 This is not to be confused with social libertarianism, which says "do what you want, and bear your own costs."



Libertarian Party Platform - Plank 3.4 is killing you.
Libertarianism in all flavors. Hard to support libertarianism with Open Borders as a plank.

Posted by: rickb223 at May 03, 2016 04:11 PM (cWLG9)

134 Creepy Guy versus Hillary or Alpha Male versus Clinton.

My $ on Alpha Male.

I just see her woman card going to 11 with Cruz. Goes down to 0 with Trump.

Posted by: Jukin, Former Republican, Now Reregistered to VOTE TRUMP in California at May 03, 2016 04:11 PM (AhyHb)

135 >>>116 Maybe, Ace, people have just taken it for granted that NONE of the candidates will do anything about abortion. Supposedly pro-life Bush 43 didn't, Bush 41 didn't, and even Reagan didn't. Trump offers victory on other issues, and Cruz doesn't offer anything Trump doesn't. Has Cruz done more than say he's pro-life? Like: has he promised to end abortion? If not, why do you think he has a right to the support of pro-lifers?
Posted by: joeclark77

...

fair point (and others have echoed it), but the fact remains: Going forward, we all now know the abortion plank is a hollow demand. No one expects action on it -- including pro-lifers -- so why push it?

Posted by: ace at May 03, 2016 04:11 PM (dciA+)

136 I can't argue with your point Ace ,I think we have reached the point where we are Europe. If social conservatism dies so will this countries values as founded.

We had a damn good run. It's time to sit back and watch the chaos to come.

Posted by: Gene Kelly at May 03, 2016 04:11 PM (xZc4z)

137 IMHO, Trump is the Let It Burn candidate.

The media hates him.
Other politicians hate him.

I think that people are looking at what professional politicians on both sides have done in the past eight years, and are tired of it. Things are not better, they're worse, and professional politicians are acting as if they are our overlords.

Trump is NOT a professional politician.

Supporting Trump is a big 'Eff you' to the establishment. It transcends liberal/ conservative.

IMHO.

Posted by: shibumi who is awaiting SMOD at May 03, 2016 04:11 PM (AHDxb)

138 "I'd like Wolverine as president."

I want Batman, he can self-fund.

Posted by: *Mikey NTH - The Outrage Outlet is Sense and Censorship Free! at May 03, 2016 04:11 PM (hLRSq)

139 You see these hedged, non-answer responses to social issue questions and smell a communist. I see them and recognize a daily reality of my life.

And I am no socialist.
Posted by: Ghost of kari - certified sidebar at May 03, 2016 04:06 PM (xuou

No where did I say he was a communist.
What I've said is that he has lived a left of center life and now he is claiming he is right of center. I do not believe his Road to Damascus conversion.

He's a crude demagogue. And his sthtick is tiring

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at May 03, 2016 04:11 PM (voOPb)

140 The hated socons have been the only thing holding back the wave of sexually perverted progressives from truly getting what they want

===

They've done such a great job, too.

Posted by: Bigby's Hobo Gloves at May 03, 2016 04:11 PM (3ZtZW)

141 I, for one, look forward to life under President Hillary Rodham Clinton. Thank you so much, Trumpkins, for making this woman our President.

Posted by: Ugh at May 03, 2016 04:11 PM (AxklU)

142 Just think about how differently this primary might have played out if the GOP could point to what they did to reign in Obama after being given their House and Senate majorities. They could say it made no sense to take a flyer on a celebrity like Trump just when the GOP had the chance to build on their successes once they had the White House as well.

Yeah. Its sad, but true, its the fault of the GOPe that we have Trump as a front runner. They created this monster, if monster he be. Now they have to deal with it.

It would have been so easy to simply do what they were elected to do and campaigned on doing. Instead they chose the path of betrayal and misery. And I have no sympathy to give.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at May 03, 2016 04:11 PM (39g3+)

143
Google given access to UK patient records for research

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-36191546

Posted by: Bruce With a Wang! at May 03, 2016 04:12 PM (iQIUe)

144 It took eight years of Bush to drive voters to the insanity of Obama and eight years of the theft, slavery and indecency of his socialism to drive voters to the insanity Trump.

When Hillary's two terms are over I look forward to the Russell Brand/Ted Nugent presidential showdown.

Posted by: CrustyB at May 03, 2016 04:12 PM (GvSpB)

145 So how many times does the party have to nominate a McCain a Romney, and a Trump before the obnoxiously loud minority realizes that is what the party actual wants.

It isn't some boogeyman stealing the nominations, it's the voters.

On a similar note, true libertarianism will never win in this country because women care about helping someone immediately and don't care how it is done; so big government is perfectly fine by them. They can't help it, for 10,000 years they have depended on someone stronger than them to take care of and lord over themselves. No man, no problem... As long as big government is there instead.

Posted by: Rory at May 03, 2016 04:12 PM (XNdCd)

146 They've done such a great job, too.

Yeah, tough fighting when your own side is using your back as a knife holder.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at May 03, 2016 04:12 PM (39g3+)

147 The fact is, you can't have a small Government fiscally conservative society unless it is based on Social Conservatism. The bedrock principle of Social Conservatism is that you are responsible for your own actions. Toss that principle out, and the all-intrusive socialist welfare state is the inevitable result.
...
True...but Social Conservatism (tm), to many, seems to have morphed into "God says x so fuck you". I'm not saying that is what Social Conservatism (tm) is, but it sure looks that way to many.
As an example...I don't really give a shit about a politicians views on the afterlife. As long as I don't think that person has some weird altar to the lord of goats in his basement I'm fine. But if that politician did not at least pretend to be a man of God his ability to run on the R ticket is destroyed.

Posted by: ajmojo at May 03, 2016 04:12 PM (1H9ox)

148 If all three parties are open borders, you might as well vote Libertarian anyway.

Posted by: V the K at May 03, 2016 04:12 PM (O7MnT)

149 A lot of what is going on is that the true establishment consists of interest group leaders, campaign/media consultants, and campaign donors. Thus, we see leaders of this group or that group issue diktats for Republican (or Democrat) candidates or else. Most of the current cast of Congress got there by negotiations between the establishment and the candidates brought together by Party apparatchiks.

This invisible primary sorts out the black sheep from the herd and we end up with the lowest common denominator candidates. Some have risen through the ranks, others through chance and accidental celebrity (see Carolyn McCarthy or Patty Murray), some through the incompetence or scandal of their opponent (Sen. T. Stevens losing in Alaska or Cong. Jefferson in Lousiana), and some simply bought the office e.g. Michael Huffington or John Corzine.
But most candidates come to their offices via the iron triangle of interest group machinations.

Little of this actually deals with representing the average unconnected Joe or Josephine voter who have little to give money wise, little time to research and absorb complex policy issues, and little political influence outside of being a pawn for different interest groups (see AARP). As DC has grown in importance vis a vis the states, the lure of money and perhaps celebrity to be gained at Gomorrah on the Potomac proves irresistible to second-raters not good enough for business, nor stardom via accomplishments, nor service to the people. Today, Capra's Mr. Smith Goes to Washington would end with Smith going along to get along or else Smith's expulsion from the Senate.

I suggest that you get a copy of Take Back Your Government from Robert A. Heinlein to see what our political culture used to be like. I think that most of you would mourn the fall of the Old Republic, I know that I do despite all of its warts.

Posted by: whig at May 03, 2016 04:12 PM (mlyQI)

150 I get what people are saying that the GOP-e isn't particularly more pro-life than Trump.

But you're missing the point: Trump proves that this is doable.

You can win a GOP nomination while being pro-choice. You just have to pretend (barely) that you're pro-life, and pretend so little no one believes you.

Yes, I get the reason for the cynicism.

but what some are you are not getting is that you don't get a This Only Applies to Trump Hall Pass.

No, it applies to everyone going forward.

If Trump was acceptable to you, so will another pro-choicer.

Posted by: ace at May 03, 2016 04:12 PM (dciA+)

151 123 If my aunt had a dick she'd be my uncle


That sounds like a nice children's nursery rhyme waiting to happen. Maybe Big Bird could work with it.

Posted by: MaxMBJ at May 03, 2016 04:13 PM (eXTZt)

152 This "president boyfriend" nonsense has got to stop.
Posted by: Fritz at May 03, 2016 04:04 PM (UzPAd)

This is a huge point. Everything is identity these days, politics as much as anything else. It's all marketing bullshit. And it HAS to stop.

Posted by: Ghost of kari - certified sidebar at May 03, 2016 04:13 PM (xuouz)

153 The country hasn't been as conservative --as people like Rush, Mark Levin and Beck have been instructing their listeners--for quite awhile. Probably 1963. Reagan won because there will still enough people who remembered the old days--and because he was a great candidate; Bush 43 won because Al Gore was a lousy candidate --and he was re-elected because of 9/11. It wasn't because he was "conservative."

Posted by: JoeF. at May 03, 2016 04:13 PM (7feDS)

154 true libertarianism will never win in this country because women care about helping someone immediately and don't care how it is done

Yeah, those bitches, if it weren't for stupid women, libertarianism would rule the world!!!!

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at May 03, 2016 04:13 PM (39g3+)

155 The funny thing is that down ticket, many conservatives and so-cons are being elected. The grassroots has done alot to advance the agenda.
I think that many so-cons have seen the folly of the Rick Santorum view of government, that it can be wielded for so-con purposes. I think they've finally realized that government is the One Ring, and at its heart is evil, and nothing it touches is ever for the good. So the emphasis has shifted to shrinking it, instead of using it to push an agenda.

Posted by: Iblis at May 03, 2016 04:13 PM (9221z)

156 Trump is the Bread and Circus candidate.
That's why.

Posted by: Roland THTG at May 03, 2016 04:14 PM (QM5S2)

157
Well Pro-life may now be a negotiable position within the party, but it isn't for me.



And I am NOT a religious person. However, abortion remains an
abhorrent and barbaric practice. I can no more support it in a
candidate as I can being pro-slavery.



THIS is my hill to die on.
======================================



Thank you Dave in Florida. One human is not the property of another human, to be disposed of by the human with the most power. I thought the party of Lincoln would get that.

Posted by: grammie winger at May 03, 2016 04:14 PM (dFi94)

158 2016 The Lesser of two weevils election.

Posted by: Master and Comander at May 03, 2016 04:14 PM (tf9Ne)

159 155 123 If my aunt had a dick she'd be my uncle


That sounds like a nice children's nursery rhyme waiting to happen. Maybe Big Bird could work with it.
Posted by: MaxMBJ at May 03, 2016 04:13 PM (eXTZt)

Seems of a kind with "Go the Fuck to Sleep."

Posted by: Insomniac at May 03, 2016 04:14 PM (0mRoj)

160 Seems a little weird that an issue where the GOP position is shared by half or more of the country is the issue we're supposed to abandon.

I mean, okay, being pro-life might hurt you in blue states, but it should be a winner elsewhere.
Posted by: Masturbatin' Pete

__________________


When you ask someone "pro-life or pro-choice" ?
that's usually more a statement about the morality of abortion.

Also, many minorities are opposed to abortion, but don't care one bit about it in the political sense. So the support for the "Republican" position looks higher than it really is.

The "pro-life" position is, it's basically outlawing all abortion. That polls MUCH lower than just saying "pro-life."

Posted by: Bally at May 03, 2016 04:14 PM (C6cBW)

161 But the fact that a clear social liberal, who practically no one believes is "pro-life" or even pro-gun, is the runaway favorite for the GOP nomination is a fact with major implications for the party going forward.

Bullshit.

I support Trump and I do it without thinking that he's secretly pro-choice and anti-gun.

Posted by: HopefulMonster Bravely supporting kittens at May 03, 2016 04:15 PM (uURQL)

162
And let's all admit that abortion is the cause of all of this. If abortion was never "legalized", we wouldn't need to import millions of low-skilled Mexicans to do the jobs that white teenagers used to do--work at fast-food restaurants, mow lawns, etc.

------------------------

That's debatable. We don't "need" those low-skilled Mexicans; they were imported not for their labor but because Ted Kennedy realized that America was a center-right country and that if he wanted elections to go his way, he would have to get voters from somewhere outside our borders.

Posted by: iforgot at May 03, 2016 04:15 PM (pC96u)

163 Conservatives are not 'pitiful' nor 'few'.
We are just mostly silent because we have been pushed to the point where we either walk away or things turn really ugly.


David Frum, like so many experts who comment on political events of the day, looks at events and draw exactly the wrong conclusion from the available evidence. Third paragraph for example where he conflates the personal views of politicians with the majority view of the population.

Fourth paragraph, Frum concludes that Trump is being 'accepted' by the GOP when, in fact, much of Trump's support comes from independents, and disgruntled democrats. Trump is opposed by the leadership of the GOP.

I had thought a whole bunch of things were non-negotiable demand points from an important part of the coalition.

Yet another wrong conclusion. Those things which are not negotiable, are still not negotiable. I, as a conservative, simply will not be trolled by trouble makers who are trying to stir shit up, not any more.

Religious? We are still religious. We have stopped trying to show you the errors of your ways. If you want to destroy your life, we will get out of your way and let you.

In short, it's David Frum, expert, credentialed, well respected by his peers, who lives in a bubble, in an enclave, surrounded by like minded people who agree with him and reinforce his ignorance about fly over country.

How many of us (conservatives) are there? I waver between thirds, quarters, and twenty percent. Political thought is a spectrum, not (need a little thesaurus help ) a discrete homogeneous sub category of x,y,z dimensions.

Posted by: Skandia Recluse at May 03, 2016 04:15 PM (QjabV)

164 Social Conservatism (tm), to many, seems to have morphed into "God says x so fuck you". I'm not saying that is what Social Conservatism (tm) is, but it sure looks that way to many.

That's what the left has morphed it into, yes. But, here we go again letting the Left define our terms for us. OK then, Free Markets have morphed into "rich people screwing the poor." Expecting women to pay for their own contraception has morphed into "Denying Women Access to Health Care." Law and Order is a dog whistle for "Racism."

We will forever lose this game.

Posted by: V the K at May 03, 2016 04:15 PM (O7MnT)

165 "IMHO, Trump is the Let It Burn candidate."

He's the SMOD candidate, IMHO. Can't understand why Ace doesn't like him.

Posted by: MaxMBJ at May 03, 2016 04:15 PM (eXTZt)

166
I'd like Wolverine as president."

I want Batman, he can self-fund.
Posted by: *Mikey NTH - The Outrage Outlet is Sense and Censorship Free!
........................

As long as it's not Sad Batman, I'm sick of all the whining.

Posted by: wth at May 03, 2016 04:15 PM (HgMAr)

167 Or maybe people are just putting Jobs and Revenge ahead of everything else.

Posted by: DaveA at May 03, 2016 04:16 PM (DL2i+)

168 The Teri Schiavo mess began the decline of the National GOP
Frist et al pushed it, but many voters were not comfy with the Federal govt. stepping into a family matter, and thus saw it as overreaching here. Add W's Jesusy compassionate conservative crap, and the Amnesty bullshit, which was sold as such and voila, the Crash of election year 2006.

Posted by: La Frontera at May 03, 2016 04:16 PM (H6mA6)

169
They've done such a great job, too.

Posted by: Bigby's Hobo Gloves at May 03, 2016 04:11 PM (3ZtZW)
=========================================

You want I should beat someone up?

Posted by: grammie winger at May 03, 2016 04:16 PM (dFi94)

170 >>>Who isn't really all that Jesusy.


anyone who speaks in tongues is more Jesusy than about 99% of America. way more.

Posted by: x at May 03, 2016 04:16 PM (nFwvY)

171 What has been the most distressing for me has been that it seems that a lot of people in the Republican Party* actually don't care about conservative values, even leaving social conservatism aside. I have come to realize that a lot of people are Republican just because they don't like Democrats, not for any particular held values. And they're willing to support a cronyist who wouldn't know any type of conservatism if it slapped him in the face. And also that they tolerate or even health behavior that would be considered absolutely unacceptable if it came from a regular person but excuse It's because this is a celebrity billionaire. And that this awful demagogue has such a hold on people It's all quite distressing.

I think the worst have been all the "conservative" media types shilling for newly arrived charlatan Trump while faithful Cruz languishes in the corner. (Note that I used the word shilling, not supporting.) I expect Howie Carr to support Trump, but not Laura Ingraham.

Note: the above does not apply to Burn it down-ers.

Posted by: chique d'afrique at May 03, 2016 04:16 PM (iynDC)

172 The "pro-life" position is, it's basically outlawing all abortion. That polls MUCH lower than just saying "pro-life."
Posted by: Bally at May 03, 2016 04:14 PM (C6cBW)


When a bunch of pro-lifers flacked Trump for saying women should be punished for choosing abortion, they clarified that pro-life is not anti-abortion.

I am anti-abortion, not pro-life.

And I am against the pro-abortion types.

Posted by: HopefulMonster Bravely supporting kittens at May 03, 2016 04:16 PM (uURQL)

173 anyone who speaks in tongues is more Jesusy than about 99% of America. way more.
Posted by: x at May 03, 2016 04:16 PM (nFwvY)

I'm sorry we Pentecostals offend you.

Posted by: chique d'afrique at May 03, 2016 04:17 PM (iynDC)

174 True...but Social Conservatism (tm), to many, seems to have morphed into "God says x so fuck you".

The only people I hear saying anything remotely like that are.. people who dislike social conservatism spraying straw all over the room.

It reminds me of a story about a pro golfer and Billy Graham. They were at a pro/am tournament and the golfer with Graham got back to the club house. He was asked what it was like golfing with billy and complained "It was terrible, he wouldn't shut up about God and the Bible all the time!"

When he calmed down, he admitted Billy was a genial companion who never said anything at all about that, but that he'd had a lousy game and was just upset.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at May 03, 2016 04:17 PM (39g3+)

175 "...I, for one, will never fear the Social Conservative Dog That Didn't Bark ever again.



They're a great deal more pragmatic and open to compromise than they maybe previously suggested."

======

Well, good luck with "them." As for me, I simply won't vote anymore. I'll just walk away from politics entirely.

What I won't do is willingly support a future of Trumps OR Giulianis, and I won't be browbeaten into supporting them because the Democrats are even more hideous.

Posted by: Kensington at May 03, 2016 04:17 PM (7Kbxu)

176 I just see her woman card going to 11 with Cruz.

Why wait? Why don't you come over and watch us some time?

Posted by: Huma at May 03, 2016 04:17 PM (OF/aZ)

177 I would agree we are becoming Europe freedom and liberty are going by the wayside and equality is taking over, or at least the leftists version is. Equally to Europe is nothing but class warfare without the shooting.

Posted by: Skip at May 03, 2016 04:17 PM (PFZvJ)

178 Seriously now, you have to set your issues by priority. When the house is on fire you don't worry about who left the toilet seat up. A lot of issues that may have been really important to social conservatives are not that important when you can't find a job. When the border has signs saying "Please wipe your feet" in Spanish.

Perhaps people are not so concerned about conservative ideology or social issues when they believe that the National Identity is at risk of being permanently, fundamentally transformed.

Perhaps the Great and Wise Pundits of the Beltway need to get out a little bit more often.

Posted by: *Mikey NTH - The Outrage Outlet is Sense and Censorship Free! at May 03, 2016 04:17 PM (hLRSq)

179 You can win a GOP nomination while being pro-choice. You just have to pretend (barely) that you're pro-life, and pretend so little no one believes you.

Posted by: ace at May 03, 2016 04:12 PM (dciA+)
______

I think Romney proved that point 4 years ago, ace.

Posted by: Dixie Wetsworth at May 03, 2016 04:17 PM (WoLH7)

180 "You can win a GOP nomination while being pro-choice. You just have to
pretend (barely) that you're pro-life, and pretend so little no one
believes you."
______________________

I'm not entirely certain how this breaks from the status quo ante.

The GOP since Reagan has always let the Presidential nominee come to Jesus on the issue on the eve of an election - Bush the greater comes to mind.

Strategically, the rubber meets the road with Supreme Court nominees and pro-lifers have had some good and some bad, but so has everyone else in the coalition on their own issues,

Posted by: Alec Leamas at May 03, 2016 04:17 PM (RfZaB)

181 If Trump was acceptable to you, so will another pro-choicer.





Posted by: ace at May 03, 2016 04:12 PM (dciA+)

wait, he isn't pro choice any longer is he?

Posted by: phoenixgirl at May 03, 2016 04:18 PM (0O7c5)

182 The problem with this whole discussion is what is a republican? Really, what is it? I used to believe that republicans were for limited government, responsible regulation, liberty (ie speech, gun rights, etc), and the protection of life either back when slavery was an issue or now during the age of abortion (see Bill Whittle for a more eloquent use of this analogy). I have not seen nor experienced in my own state a republican who lives up to this definition. All I have seen are politicians who once in office ignore the "principles" of limited government. Since Newt's republican congress, there have been no limits on government spending, regulation, its encroachment into our lives via cameras, civil forfeiture, eminent domain expansion, not enforcing laws against banks, fellow lawmakers, etc. Nevermind the piss poor job they did managing the war against terror and the sickning ROE's our troops have to put up with. Everybody points to Regan as a "true" Republican. Was he really a republican? I am starting to think that given how much of an anomaly that Regan was, that maybe I don't know what a republican truly is anymore.

Posted by: lightning at May 03, 2016 04:18 PM (AP+SF)

183 If the religious aren't allowed to maintain their consciences and beliefs, then the non-religious damnsure won't be.

Reason number 4,328 why the founders set up a limited federal government with specifically enumerated powers. If the Feds can dictate the social compact then either the secularists will be made to be religious or the religious will be made secular. There doesn't seem, to me, to be any middle ground.

Ultimately, if you care about personal liberty, I believe you absolutely cannot be a modern-day Democrat.

Posted by: MTF at May 03, 2016 04:18 PM (/m8T6)

184 It also seems a lot of Republicans, not just the elite, aren't too fond of Christians.

Posted by: chique d'afrique at May 03, 2016 04:18 PM (iynDC)

185 "Maybe I'd like him as president, but so what? I'd like Wolverine
as president. Doesn't mean people will set aside the natural born
citizen clause to allow Logan to take office."


Be honest, Ace. It's not Logan you want to be President, it's that dreamy Aussie Huge Ackman. Who is DEFINITELY not eligible.

Posted by: BurtTC at May 03, 2016 04:18 PM (TOk1P)

186 In order to love your country, it should be lovely.

Posted by: Grump928(c) muses at May 03, 2016 04:18 PM (evdj2)

187 Question. Would the pro lifers accept a 20 week abortion limit like Europe? Would they take an incremental win?


Posted by: Jukin, Former Republican, Now Reregistered to VOTE TRUMP in California at May 03, 2016 04:18 PM (AhyHb)

188 No where did I say he was a communist.
What I've said is that he has lived a left of center life and now he is claiming he is right of center. I do not believe his Road to Damascus conversion.
He's a crude demagogue. And his sthtick is tiring
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at May 03, 2016 04:11 PM (voOPb)

No, I'm sorry, I was really reacting to stuff I saw in the last thread that you didn't say.

But my point was that it isn't demagoguery. In the past, as a public figure, he walked the line of "socially acceptable speech, for leftists" just like we all do, to a greater or lesser extent. And if you live in Texas or the south you just don't understand what it's like living and working and going to school in a liberal enclave. And I'm someone who almost never bites his tongue about this stuff.

It's not a road to damascus conversion. It's him putting his foot down and saying "no more, Obama and Hillary have gone too far, we're taking our country back."

He can put the northeast in play. And in order to undo so much that the left has done we need a mandate like that. The stock republican playbook is NOT going to work.

Posted by: Ghost of kari - certified sidebar at May 03, 2016 04:18 PM (xuouz)

189 So-cons should be Abrahams, praying for Lot (Trump) who's negotiating with all the creeps of Sodom. God doesn't answer Abraham's prayer to save Sodom, but he does get Lot the hell out of there.

So my point is, keep your eye in the sky for a big, fat SMOD.

Posted by: MaxMBJ at May 03, 2016 04:18 PM (eXTZt)

190 ine, but if Trump is acceptable, a candidate I like should be acceptable in the future as well.

You're simply explaining WHY these things are in fact highly negotiable -- not disputing that they ARE in fact negotiable.
Posted by: ace at May 03, 2016 04:03 PM (dciA+)

Ace, I'm not sure what you mean. The country was presented initially with a slate of 17 candidates. Only three are still in the primary process, and one of those is not eligible per party rules.

We are going to elect a new president. That is going to happen, no matter how much the 'faithful" or the conservatives, or republicans stay home and kick the furniture in protest.

The country sees this. As candidates fell off the primary train one by one, people started making decisions as to who they felt was most viable to win and beat one of the two communists running on the other side, and who might be able to do what they say they are going to do.

One thing voters know for sure. If you don't vote, your candidate doesn't receive your vote. It's as simple as that. One thing most Americans still have is the desire to try. We keep trying to get things fixed.

I would have loved for Cruz or Walker or one of the more , um, historically reliable candidates to have run a campaign that demonstrated that they could fight back against the establishment and win most of the time.
Walker fell out of that category early, and sadly, Cruz has now shown that his campaign is about as effective as he has been in the Senate. He can't seem to rally enough people that matter to join with him. I don't know exactly why. Maybe it's the history of being blocked in the Senate in most of his efforts, which labels him as impotent, and Trump has been able to get done virtually all the projects he sets out to do, which makes him look strong and able to get to the finish line.

I would be thrilled if Trump wins, and nominates Ted for the Supreme Court. I'd take Hillary as president if it meant Cruz was on the SC.

I admire Ted for basically torpedoing his political future by standing up for his principals in the Senate. He is going to be an asset to the country in some capacity in the near future. What that will be, I don't know, but I don't think it will be as president.

Posted by: Jen the original at May 03, 2016 04:19 PM (391wI)

191 175 >>>Who isn't really all that Jesusy.


anyone who speaks in tongues is more Jesusy than about 99% of America. way more.
Posted by: x at May 03, 2016 04:16 PM (nFwvY)

When did Ted Cruz claim to have spoken in tongues?

Posted by: Insomniac at May 03, 2016 04:19 PM (0mRoj)

192 So you think there's an alternative universe where
Christians stayed out of politics, and in return the BAKE THE CAKE
enforcers decided to live and let live?

Posted by: Masturbatin' Pete at May 03, 2016 04:08 PM (aFa2V)

And yes, the government started intervening in religion a long time ago too, despite the fact that the Constitution forbids that.

And they did it by perverting the interpretation of the constitution to mean not freedom of religion, but freedom from religion.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at May 03, 2016 04:19 PM (vvmPQ)

193 Listening to Trump rant on CNN right now about Carrier moving to Mexico. He has the exact same position as Bernie fucking Sanders, punish Carrier by raising taxes on any products they try to import.

No clue that the reason Carrier is moving is because of the insane policies coming out of DC. Nope, first reaction is to use government to punish businesses that are 1) doing something that is perfectly legal and 2) largely caused by the policies coming out of DC.

Why would I want to support this just because the guy spewing it has an R behind his name?

Posted by: JackStraw at May 03, 2016 04:19 PM (/tuJf)

194
The thing about abortion is the pradigm is shifting.... much in part to scientific revelations about the complexity and "humaness" of even very young fetus's. Slighty more than fifty percent of people polled think abortion is wrong. A resounding majority oppose late term abortions and partial birth aboortions.

I think in 100 years time people will look back on supporters of abortion with the same animosity that people today look back on slavery and institutionalized racism.

Posted by: fixerupper at May 03, 2016 04:19 PM (8XRCm)

195 You want I should beat someone up?
Posted by: grammie winger at May 03, 2016 04:16 PM


Are you up for it, given your recent near-death experience? I've heard those can be taxing.

Posted by: Duncanthrax the Bellicose at May 03, 2016 04:20 PM (OF/aZ)

196 Donald Trump is a mental lightweight with a severely stunted intellect. I would bet that if he could be anonymously evaluated -- his words, thoughts, mannerisms and cognitive abilities-- he would be diagnosed as having multiple personality disorders.
Why don't his obvious mental illnesses bother people? It's not like he's very clever in hiding them...his issues are overtly apparent after watching and listening to him for 5 minutes.

The whole "Trump Cult" is odd imo.

Posted by: Mimzey at May 03, 2016 04:20 PM (aRUb8)

197 186 If Trump was acceptable to you, so will another pro-choicer.





Posted by: ace at May 03, 2016 04:12 PM (dciA+)

Not to be a jerk, but really were McCain or Romney considered hard core pro-life? I think this has been the rule since 2008.

Posted by: Jollyroger at May 03, 2016 04:20 PM (t06LC)

198 I admire Ted for basically torpedoing his political
future by standing up for his principals in the Senate. He is going to
be an asset to the country in some capacity in the near future. What
that will be, I don't know, but I don't think it will be as president.





Posted by: Jen the original at May 03, 2016 04:19 PM (391wI)

sadly i think his scotus opportunity is done ......

Posted by: phoenixgirl at May 03, 2016 04:20 PM (0O7c5)

199 It also seems a lot of Republicans, not just the elite, aren't too fond of Christians.

Posted by: chique d'afrique at May 03, 2016 04:18 PM (iynDC)
=============================================

If they hated me, they will also hate you. A servant is not greater than his master.

Posted by: grammie winger at May 03, 2016 04:20 PM (dFi94)

200 All the other candidates were selling policy prescriptions. Trump has been selling an idea. He didn't come up with make America great again off the cuff. People look around and see a shitty economy, a terrible job market, and bad guys everywhere flipping us the bird. They don't want a detailed treatise on why the top marginal rate should be 34%, they want to know if the fucking Iranians will be able to take our guys hostage and get away with it. Trump is selling the idea that things will get back to normal. Anyway, that's the way I see it YMMV

Posted by: Duke Lowell at May 03, 2016 04:20 PM (kTF2Z)

201 He's the SMOD candidate, IMHO. Can't understand why Ace doesn't like him.
Posted by: MaxMBJ at May 03, 2016 04:15 PM (eXTZt

Where have you been? Reseda?

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at May 03, 2016 04:20 PM (voOPb)

202 ...that dreamy Aussie Huge Ackman. Who is DEFINITELY not eligible.


Posted by: BurtTC at May 03, 2016 04:18 PM (TOk1P)




What really pisses me off is I added the word "dreamy" to my comment, so the name Huge and Ackman would be on the same line. Which it appeared to be, in the box into which I was typing. But the posted version?

Nope.

Pixy software: ruining my jokes, since 2004.

Posted by: BurtTC at May 03, 2016 04:20 PM (TOk1P)

203 A election between the corrupt politician and the enabler of corruption isn't really a choice.

Posted by: Skip at May 03, 2016 04:20 PM (PFZvJ)

204 i've responded to a couple of repeatedly-made claims in the post above, as an update.

Posted by: ace at May 03, 2016 04:20 PM (dciA+)

205 When Regan ran for office (either the first or second time) was the term "conservative" every widely used or was he simply referred to as a "republican" during the election process?

Posted by: lightning at May 03, 2016 04:21 PM (AP+SF)

206 Heh. Its amusing how many people here think that Trump support is about issues or anything rational.

It's about chaos, tribalism, misplaced, stupidity, anger and cult of personality. Pick any two and that is your trump voter.

Posted by: Malachi45 at May 03, 2016 04:21 PM (Y9zAG)

207
If social conservatism dies so will this countries values as founded.

We had a damn good run. It's time to sit back and watch the chaos to come.
Posted by: Gene Kelly at May 03, 2016 04:11 PM (xZc4z)
--------------------------

Social conservatism isn't going to die. It might step back from politics, but it isn't going to die.

Posted by: iforgot at May 03, 2016 04:21 PM (pC96u)

208
When a bunch of pro-lifers flacked Trump for saying women should be punished for choosing abortion, they clarified that pro-life is not anti-abortion.

I am anti-abortion, not pro-life.

And I am against the pro-abortion types.
Posted by: HopefulMonster Bravely



I did find that exchange illuminating.

Of course you would have to punish women for getting an illegal abortion, just like you punish a Meth user for buying Meth. The idea that only the "dealer" is at fault is absurd.

Yet SoCons flipped out.

The whole concept of outlawing abortion is futile on this Earth and in this political environment.. The people that have abortions will answer to God.

I'm not willing to cede the entire country to the Left over this issue.

Posted by: Bally at May 03, 2016 04:21 PM (C6cBW)

209 >>>Not to be a jerk, but really were McCain or Romney considered hard core pro-life? I think this has been the rule since 2008.

see my update.

Posted by: ace at May 03, 2016 04:21 PM (dciA+)

210 189 It also seems a lot of Republicans, not just the elite, aren't too fond of Christians.
Posted by: chique d'afrique at May 03, 2016 04:18 PM (iynDC)


Why should they? Christianity has been subject to at least 50 years of non-stop attacks. Many self-inflicted. In this country it started with anti-Catholicism which was a strain of anti-immigration, and then morphed from there. I mean has there ever been a Law & Order episode where the Christian wasn't the bad guy or hypocritical perv?

Posted by: Iblis at May 03, 2016 04:21 PM (9221z)

211 fair point (and others have echoed it), but the fact remains: Going forward, we all now know the abortion plank is a hollow demand. No one expects action on it -- including pro-lifers -- so why push it?

Posted by: ace at May 03, 2016 04:11 PM (dciA+)



you can only lose so many times

Posted by: artisanal 'ette at May 03, 2016 04:21 PM (qCMvj)

212 20
"Because God told me..."



Is something I never want to hear a pesident say about any issue ever.

Cruz will NOT be the nominee.

Posted by: Triple Twenty at May 03, 2016 03:50 PM (OPfVc)

If you're trying to attribute that to Cruz, you're imaging things that fit you bias.

Posted by: Mimzey at May 03, 2016 04:21 PM (aRUb8)

213 Are you up for it, given your recent near-death experience? I've heard those can be taxing.


Posted by: Duncanthrax the Bellicose at May 03, 2016 04:20 PM (OF/aZ)
=====================================

I am ready to rumble, as those darn kids say nowadays.

Posted by: grammie winger at May 03, 2016 04:21 PM (dFi94)

214 *walks away, head down*

At least it's baseball season.

*click*

Posted by: Slapweasel, (Cold1), (T) at May 03, 2016 04:21 PM (OQ9R7)

215 For decades now, conservatives have been reluctantly and exasperatedly been voting for liars, charlatans, idiots, and moderates. We've been frustrated and disgusted with the choices we've had to support just to stop the far worse alternative.

Claiming that social conservatives secretly don't give a damn about what they claim or are stupidly and easily fooled by blatant liars is idiotic. Its like saying fiscal conservatives are the same with people who they know will NEVER reduce the size of government, yet vote for them anyway.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at May 03, 2016 04:22 PM (39g3+)

216 Well, if Texas is about the only place that cares about Conservative values and such, it makes that Secession Talk much more appealing all the time. Not sure about ya'll, but it's getting damn frustrating watching northern liberals piss away my rights because it doesn't fit the urbane lifestyles.

Posted by: 2nd Amemdment Mother at May 03, 2016 04:22 PM (USAOW)

217 "But the fact that a clear social liberal, who practically no one believes is "pro-life" or even pro-gun, is the runaway favorite for the GOP nomination ..."
---------------

I'm not sure that 'runaway' is the right word to use. If The Donald had been pulling majority votes in *most* of the primaries, then I would agree, but that just isn't the case.

It is undeniable that the guy has been able to take advantage of the weaknesses of the primary system, but that does not constitute a runaway nomination. Actually, I would say that it has fallen into his lap.

Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at May 03, 2016 04:22 PM (9mTYi)

218 Trump did perform a great service in revealing everyone's true colors.

After this election, I think I will change my registration to Independent. I thought that I at least had some things in common with a decent chunk of the party. It appears I was wrong.

This has been a demoralizing but enlightening season.

Posted by: chique d'afrique at May 03, 2016 04:22 PM (iynDC)

219 Perhaps it's time to quit making speeches Kyle.

Posted by: DaveA at May 03, 2016 04:22 PM (DL2i+)

220 but the fact remains: Going forward, we all now know the abortion plank is a hollow demand. No one expects action on it -- including pro-lifers -- so why push it?

Going forward, we now know the small government plank is a hollow demand. No one expects action on it -- including small government types -- so why push it?

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at May 03, 2016 04:23 PM (39g3+)

221 Posted by: ace at May 03, 2016 04:12 PM (dciA+)


---------------------------------------
Not to be a jerk, but really were McCain or Romney considered hard core pro-life? I think this has been the rule since 2008.

Posted by: Jollyroger at May 03, 2016 04:20 PM (t06LC)


If we're being honest about it, W is pretty much the only Republican candidate for President since Roe v. Wade who was really serious about being pro-life.


Even Reagan was fairly tepid to it.

Posted by: BurtTC at May 03, 2016 04:23 PM (TOk1P)

222
I'd like Wolverine as president
....................

I'll settle for Russel Crowe and Tuggers

Posted by: wth at May 03, 2016 04:23 PM (HgMAr)

223 When everyone was yelling "Let it burn", I guess they thought everyone meant it.

Posted by: Roy at May 03, 2016 04:23 PM (VndSC)

224 199, "Slightly more than 50% think abortion is wrong."

That doesn't mean they want it outlawed. Most smokers think smoking is wrong; most drinkers think drinking is wrong; But what would they say if you tried to outlaw their vices?

And I'm not comparing fetuses to bad habits. Just trying to make a point.

Posted by: JoeF. at May 03, 2016 04:24 PM (7feDS)

225 214 >>>Not to be a jerk, but really were McCain or Romney considered hard core pro-life? I think this has been the rule since 2008.

see my update.



Posted by: ace at May 03, 2016 04:21 PM (dciA+)

"Pro-life Trump supporters are making several points in the comments. Let me respond to them, or my paraphrase of them."

I thought we were friends ace, why'd you have to go and call me names like "Trump supporter"?

Posted by: Jollyroger at May 03, 2016 04:24 PM (t06LC)

226 This has been a demoralizing but enlightening season.

Posted by: chique d'afrique at May 03, 2016 04:22 PM (iynDC)
==========================================

Ya, I bailed on the Republican Party too.

Posted by: grammie winger at May 03, 2016 04:24 PM (dFi94)

227 I'm not willing to cede the entire country to the Left over this issue.

Posted by: Bally at May 03, 2016 04:21 PM (C6cBW)

sorry, but if you won't defend the right to life of an innocent baby.....you already have ceded the entire country to the left

Posted by: phoenixgirl at May 03, 2016 04:24 PM (0O7c5)

228 "But the fact that a clear social liberal, who practically no one
believes is "pro-life" or even pro-gun, is the runaway favorite for the
GOP nomination"

Does anyone else feel like Ace is going little green footballs on us

Posted by: Village Idiot at May 03, 2016 04:24 PM (bf86X)

229 The whole concept of outlawing abortion is futile on this Earth and in this political environment.. The people that have abortions will answer to God.

The nation that spills the blood of its children in worship of prosperity and materialism and sex will also answer to God.

Obama is a warning of worse judgement to come.

Abortion has grown by leaps and bounds since Roe vs. Wade. It is foolish to believe that is irreversible "progress".

Posted by: HopefulMonster Bravely supporting kittens at May 03, 2016 04:24 PM (uURQL)

230 But now we know that going forward -- and you don't just get to say "Our flexible position only applies in 2016, and only to Trump." No, it applies going forward, generally.

Wrong - voters get to say and voter for whoever they want.
The parties problems are their own damned fault.

Posted by: DaveA at May 03, 2016 04:24 PM (DL2i+)

231
Posted by: grammie winger at May 03, 2016 04:10 PM (dFi94)
----------------

What? You used the word "freedom" in some kind of ironic quotes how many times when I never used it once. Who here isn't for religious freedom and all Constitutionally guaranteed freedoms?

Posted by: iforgot at May 03, 2016 04:25 PM (pC96u)

232 Kari, which is it, do you want the politics as marketing bullshit to stop, or do you want Trump to win because he's the best at marketing his political bullshit?

Or do you want Trump to win and be such a disaster that he kills the political marketing bullshit for good? Because that's some fantastic Rove-esque 14 dimensional checkers if so.

Posted by: broseidon on his magic glowing square at May 03, 2016 04:25 PM (tWE9w)

233 "It's about chaos, tribalism, misplaced, stupidity, anger and cult of personality. Pick any two and that is your trump voter.

Posted by: Malachi45 at May 03, 2016 04:21 PM (Y9zAG)"

Yes of course you are correct. Nice bit of name calling there. Again, I pit my IQ and success against anyone here. But keep name calling, it demonstrates your superior intellect.

Posted by: Jukin, Former Republican, Now Reregistered to VOTE TRUMP in California at May 03, 2016 04:25 PM (AhyHb)

234 In the end, it's about power. It always is.

Posted by: Tommy V at May 03, 2016 04:25 PM (SRQwr)

235 Look, long story short, i'm pro-choice but supporting the pro-life guy, and the pro-lifers are largely supporting the pro-choice guy.

Fine -- I understand, we're in a weird situation.

But in the future, don't fucking expect me, the pro-choice guy, to cotton to the pro-lifers on this issue. They've smoked themselves out and revealed most of their position here is theoretical and aspirational.

Posted by: ace at May 03, 2016 04:25 PM (dciA+)

236 I did find that exchange illuminating.
Of course you would have to punish women for getting an illegal abortion, just like you punish a Meth user for buying Meth. The idea that only the "dealer" is at fault is absurd.
Yet SoCons flipped out.
Posted by: Bally at May 03, 2016 04:21 PM (C6cBW)

True that.

Furthermore people want to say Trump support is irrational but I have seen this exchange over a hypothetical cited as a "flip flop" for Trump every day since it happened, which is very pure demagoguery.

Posted by: Ghost of kari - certified sidebar at May 03, 2016 04:26 PM (xuouz)

237 225
but the fact remains: Going forward, we all now know the abortion
plank is a hollow demand. No one expects action on it -- including
pro-lifers -- so why push it?



Going forward, we now know the small government plank is a hollow
demand. No one expects action on it -- including small government types
-- so why push it?

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at May 03, 2016 04:23 PM (39g3+)

Yeah, both, pretty much. The GOP is being remade into Trumpism, aka back to paleoconservatism - protectionism and flag-waving jingoism.
So I guess those of us who favor small government not because it's popular or nationalistic per se, but because it is *the right thing to do*, need to find another home.

Posted by: chemjeff at May 03, 2016 04:26 PM (dpnZC)

238 It's simply a sop we give to the Religious Right that keeps costing Republicans elections.



I hope Trump puts a nail in the coffin on this plank.



Posted by: Bally


Wrong and an ignore_user()

Posted by: DaveA at May 03, 2016 04:26 PM (DL2i+)

239 If we're being honest about it, W is pretty much the only Republican candidate for President since Roe v. Wade who was really serious about being pro-life.

Even Reagan was fairly tepid to it.


Correct, Bush was the only president we've had since Roe v Wade to actually take definitive, tangible action to protect babies. One of his first actions upon taking office was to end free abortion services overseas on military bases.

That doesn't mean they want it outlawed. Most smokers think smoking is wrong; most drinkers think drinking is wrong; But what would they say if you tried to outlaw their vices?

It doesn't take any special talent at perception to notice the difference between smoking and killing babies.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at May 03, 2016 04:26 PM (39g3+)

240 I don't think the social issues have gone away, they have just taken a back seat to more dire issues. Many people feel that the country is slipping away, and that we need to address immediately the border, the budget, and terrorism, while freedom of speech, the right to bear arms, and taxes and abortion are of secondary importance - though for the life of me I don't know why. Whether any issues will be resolved, I have my doubts. I see the strategy now as getting the people who will vote R no matter what to the polls, along with enough democrats who don't want a felon in the white house to try and snatch a victory. Odds: slim.

Posted by: Vashta Nerada at May 03, 2016 04:26 PM (Qvgg/)

241 But once again, this just is a reason why the rest of the party doesn't have to adopt this issue as their own any more. It's not a disputation of the fact that the party no longer has to be pro-life.

I never thought the GOP was 100% pro-life anyway. Ever.

That's the Democrats screaming that imho. It's how they keep winning. The bogeyman argument.

Posted by: artisanal 'ette mun 2 - 1 atl - insane at May 03, 2016 04:26 PM (qCMvj)

242 If they hated me, they will also hate you. A servant is not greater than his master.
Posted by: grammie winger at May 03, 2016 04:20 PM (dFi94)

----

I always thought John was the smart apostle.

Posted by: fixerupper at May 03, 2016 04:26 PM (8XRCm)

243
In order to love your country, it should be lovely.
Posted by: Grump928(c) muses at May 03, 2016 04:18 PM (evdj2)
.......................

and it should BE a country, like with borders and laws and stuff

Posted by: wth at May 03, 2016 04:26 PM (HgMAr)

244 All hail our white Obama!

Posted by: Drill at May 03, 2016 04:26 PM (/AoJR)

245 I'm sorry we Pentecostals offend you.
Posted by: chique d'afrique

I'm Baptist. I'm not offended until you dance.

Posted by: x at May 03, 2016 04:26 PM (nFwvY)

246 He can put the northeast in play.
Posted by: Ghost of kari - certified sidebar at May 03, 2016 04:18 PM (xuouz)
---------------------------------------------

I'd love to see evidence that's true. So far (and I've looked hard), I haven't.

Posted by: MTF at May 03, 2016 04:27 PM (/m8T6)

247 That's what the left has morphed it into, yes. But, here we go again letting the Left define our terms for us. OK then, Free Markets have morphed into "rich people screwing the poor." Expecting women to pay for their own contraception has morphed into "Denying Women Access to Health Care." Law and Order is a dog whistle for "Racism."
...
I wouldn't say it's just the left. There seems to be a pretty strong belief that comes up every 4 years or so that in order to win the R nomination you have to win the evangelical vote. Now, as a guy who made his first communion only because grandma made his mom do it and has since been in church only for weddings....that sounds like the Jesus wagon is pretty far up in the gravy train to me.

Posted by: ajmojo at May 03, 2016 04:27 PM (1H9ox)

248
Good luck winning without religious conservatives though.
The GOP is dead. Trump just proved it is all.

Posted by: some1 at May 03, 2016 04:27 PM (S5LAZ)

249 But in the future, don't fucking expect me, the pro-choice guy, to cotton to the pro-lifers on this issue. They've smoked themselves out and revealed most of their position here is theoretical and aspirational.
Posted by: ace at May 03, 2016 04:25 PM (dciA+)

Religious conservatives are the right's identity politics base, and like every other thing the DC beltway republican set tries to copy the left on, they lose.

Posted by: Ghost of kari - certified sidebar at May 03, 2016 04:27 PM (xuouz)

250 'bout to piss on us here in Mordor. Time to head out.

Later all.

Posted by: RWC - Team BOHICA at May 03, 2016 04:27 PM (mEZce)

251 If they hated me, they will also hate you. A servant is not greater than his master.
Posted by: grammie winger at May 03, 2016 04:20 PM (dFi94)

So true. So true. I just thought that they were more sympathetic to us. Next time I should just pay attention to what Jesus said.

Anyway, this country is totally messed up. The top candidates in the two parties are only a symptom of what ails us.

And no politician can fix it.

Posted by: chique d'afrique at May 03, 2016 04:27 PM (iynDC)

252 I've been wondering about this myself. Clearly the rank-and-file of the Republican party has become something different. Trump has, at one point or another, articulated a viewpoint radically different from conservatism on just about every major issue, even fiscal ones. Yet, here we are with him on the cusp of being the R presidential candidate.

Posted by: Citizen Cake at May 03, 2016 04:27 PM (ppaKI)

253 >>>Does anyone else feel like Ace is going little green footballs on us

maybe you should leave then, asshole.

I didn't fucking invite you here. You just showed up. If you think my disagreeing with you is censorship, you are invited to go fuck yourself in your own mouth, and do it in a #safespace for you where you're trump fellatio will be better appreciated.

GO.

NOW.

Posted by: ace at May 03, 2016 04:27 PM (dciA+)

254 A question for the masses.

If --and it's still and if-- Trump gets the nomination and does not include Cruz in the ticket, will the horde vote Hillary? Or simply sit this one out?

Just curious.

Posted by: shibumi who is awaiting SMOD at May 03, 2016 04:27 PM (AHDxb)

255 Alternatively, this election is simply about saying "Fuck You" to the DC establishment class and has nothing at all to do with issues.

And Cruz wasn't adequate to that end.

Posted by: Methos, AoS commenter since 2006, now apparently non-voting democrat at May 03, 2016 04:28 PM (ZbV+0)

256 Anyone who is willing to compromise on the murder of hundreds of thousands of little kids, in any way, is a spineless piece of shit that deserves every bad thing they get, saved nation or not.

Posted by: Blano at May 03, 2016 04:28 PM (NHQQx)

257 I'm Baptist. I'm not offended until you dance.
Posted by: x at May 03, 2016 04:26 PM (nFwvY)

So is Ted Cruz, btw.

Posted by: chique d'afrique at May 03, 2016 04:28 PM (iynDC)

258 I hear Gateway Pundit is a #SafeSpace for your ill, Village idiot.

Do you know the url?

Posted by: ace at May 03, 2016 04:28 PM (dciA+)

259 That doesn't mean they want it outlawed. Most smokers think smoking is wrong; most drinkers think drinking is wrong; But what would they say if you tried to outlaw their vices?

And I'm not comparing fetuses to bad habits. Just trying to make a point.
Posted by: JoeF.

_______________________


Exactly, and most people (especially women) make the calculation that they would rather have abortion laws more liberal than their own morality "just in case" they have a situation like that.

Look at the rate pregnant women have testing for things like Down Syndrome, with over 90% aborting if it comes back positive.

We can moan how awful that is, but it's a reality, and you're not going to outlaw it unless you like losing elections to make a point.

Posted by: Bally at May 03, 2016 04:28 PM (C6cBW)

260 But in the future, don't fucking expect me, the pro-choice guy, to cotton to the pro-lifers on this issue. They've smoked themselves out and revealed most of their position here is theoretical and aspirational.

First off I strongly question your assertion that pro-life people are big Trump supporters. I think almost all of them are on the Cruz side of the aisle.

Second, every GOP candidate we've had other than Bush the younger since Roe v Wade has been at best soft if not hostile to the pro life position, with some mouthing platitudes to cover it up. Nobody was fooled; but we put up with it to stop the even worse candidate. Its not exactly new to back the guy we don't see eye to eye on with this issue, but who'll make sounds like he does.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at May 03, 2016 04:28 PM (39g3+)

261 I wasn't going to say this, but I've been imbued with the spirit of Jesus and I'd like a word with you.

Posted by: Glenn Beck at May 03, 2016 04:29 PM (4ErVI)

262 "Again, I pit my IQ and success against anyone here. But keep name calling, it demonstrates your superior intellect.

Posted by: Jukin, Former Republican, Now Reregistered to VOTE TRUMP in California at May 03, 2016 04:25 PM (AhyHb)"

People who blather on about their IQs are always the dumbest motherfuckers around. I don't believe for one second you are anything but human garbage. Go back to your trailer park, Trumpkin, and get used to saying "President Hillary Rodham Clinton".

Posted by: Ugh at May 03, 2016 04:29 PM (AxklU)

263 Question. Would the pro lifers accept a 20 week abortion limit like Europe? Would they take an incremental win?


Posted by: Jukin, Former Republican, Now Reregistered to VOTE TRUMP in California at May 03, 2016 04:18 PM (AhyHb)

Some states already have this in place, which of course, ends up being challenged legally.
Most pro lifers, myself included, find that education about abortion and what it actually is, is actually working. It's the long road to ending abortion as a socially acceptable form of birth control, but one that has much more promise than trying to work through the courts.

The Democrat/Feminists have yet to champion abortion as a wonderful thing to have experienced. (yes, I remember the nutjob college student who filmed her abortion, there are outliers everywhere).
Using human nature to advance a position usually works better, and it's what many prolife advocates have adopted.

We're winning. It's not always evident, and it sometimes takes a step back, but as science is now able to show the viability of babies in and out of the womb, the horror of abortion is more easily evident. And that is more powerful than any politician or party platform.

Posted by: Jen the original at May 03, 2016 04:29 PM (391wI)

264 Who here isn't for religious freedom and all Constitutionally guaranteed freedoms?

Posted by: iforgot at May 03, 2016 04:25 PM (pC96u)
=========================================

I believe you wrote something along the lines of keeping religious faith out of politics, and confine it to religious institutions and within the home. If that was not your intent, I apologize. I have heard one too many comments and seen too many actions trying to keep faith out of the public square. Freedom confined to private isolation is not freedom. I'm looking at you, Ron Reagan.

Posted by: grammie winger at May 03, 2016 04:29 PM (dFi94)

265 Yeah, both, pretty much. The GOP is being remade into Trumpism, aka back to paleoconservatism

So Trumpism is paleoconservatism.

So he is a conservative, now?

Posted by: HopefulMonster Bravely supporting kittens at May 03, 2016 04:29 PM (uURQL)

266 244, I wasn't comparing them, but you're obviously right. It's a moral issue. It's between those who push abortion and God. It's like adultery. Even those who engage in it "know" it's wrong. But they still do it.

Posted by: JoeF. at May 03, 2016 04:29 PM (7feDS)

267 It also seems a lot of Republicans, not just the elite, aren't too fond of Christians.

===

Back in the 3 legged stool days they said the coalition was SoCons, FiCons and Christian Conservatives, with overlaps. That shifted, with the SoCons and CCs becoming merged and a Libertarian wing entering, while the FiCons went total CoC/Wall St.

Part of the shift: The Dems are no longer the 'party of the little guy' but of the bicoastal elites and hipsters. The GOP became the party of the little guy and have no idea what that even means. So they foist off some rhetoric about guns and bibles and etc and call that good.

Which is the contempt everyone felt last go round. They needed to reconfigure before it was forced on them. They failed and here we are.

Its so obvious. I know why Trump is so disliked by so many but he is not to be feared and he is not the last of his kind. And I do have sympathy for the collapse of the conservatives: You had your time in the sun and now its done, the movement is spent. Write your histories, make a buck of it.

Posted by: Bigby's Hobo Gloves at May 03, 2016 04:29 PM (3ZtZW)

268 My principles of conservatism:
First: The conservative believes that rights are inherent in each human's existence.
Second: The conservative acknowledges tradition without codifying rituals.
Third: Conservatives are guided by personal responsibility.
Fourth: Conservatives choose choice.
Fifth: Conservatives are imperfect, freedom is messy.
Sixth: Conservatives are persuaded that freedom and prosperity are linked.
Seventh: The conservative perceives the need for prudent restraints upon power.
Eighth: The thinking conservative understands that change happens in a prosperous society.
Ninth: The conservative is part of a diverse society

Posted by: Tracy Coyle


Re-worked for the sake of it (no slight intended):

1. Rights are individual
2. Our past is instructive not a map.
3, 4, 5, 6. There is no advancement of humanity, no success of a people without the possibility of failure.
7. All power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely.
8. Humanity is a constant amidst an ever-changing sea.
9. 'Diversity' is a figment of a fad of a fickle definition of a furtive figurative.

Posted by: weft cut-loop at May 03, 2016 04:29 PM (OcD4G)

269 I don't know. I feel like all this election is proving is how rapidly our schools have deteriorated. But there is a religious shift. When all discussion of faith is verboten in the classroom, the default religious sermons are of secular humanism. The new public, perhaps precisely because they are unmoored from strong religious affiliation are seeking to fill that void with a new sense of belonging to a tribe based on the modern conception of godhood: celebrity. It's the same phenomenon we saw in 2008 (and with many of the same voters). Much the way religiously faithful have to reconcile or ignore information that contradicts their faith, so too do the members of these cults of personalities resist confronting the real and manifest failings of their candidates.

Posted by: KillianThyme at May 03, 2016 04:30 PM (n2r4H)

270 I will never vote for the Witch of Benghazi.

Trump is doing his best to harden my resolve not to vote for him.

I will just vote down ballot.

Posted by: chique d'afrique at May 03, 2016 04:30 PM (iynDC)

271 262 I'm Baptist. I'm not offended until you dance.
Posted by: x at May 03, 2016 04:26 PM (nFwvY)

So is Ted Cruz, btw.
Posted by: chique d'afrique at May 03, 2016 04:28 PM (iynDC)

Which is why I don't get the comment about speaking in tongues. Glossolalia isn't really a Baptist thing.

Posted by: Insomniac at May 03, 2016 04:30 PM (0mRoj)

272 Jukin, I'll put Mark Zuckerberg and Warren Buffett's successes against anyone here (besides ace, of course - AoS is way more important to the world than Bookface). I guess we should follow their lead politically.

Posted by: broseidon on his magic glowing square at May 03, 2016 04:30 PM (tWE9w)

273 > At least it's baseball season.

*click*

Posted by: Slapweasel,

Cubbies and Red Sox on top! Yankees in the dumps!

Posted by: just wait, you won't believe what happens next at May 03, 2016 04:30 PM (IQI2h)

274 Hannity, Howie Carr, Coulter & others were all pushing trump. Autocorrect doesn't capitalize his name & I am not going to correct it.
Ingraham was pushing trump for the 2 minutes I put Hannity on last night.
I can't stay, I have one hell of a chest cold & coughing fits.

I'm disgusted by this primary season.

Cruz isn't charismatic but he's a true conservative & that's what I wanted for our next president & not a orange Cheeto that tosses out every thing that crosses his mind.
I'll never watch Faux again, CNN has been fairer to Cruz than Faux, despite Hannity's BS that he gave more time to Cruz than trump. Cruz announced last year in March, so it's only timing.

Posted by: Carol at May 03, 2016 04:30 PM (sj3Ax)

275
If we're being honest about it, W is pretty much the only Republican candidate for President since Roe v. Wade who was really serious about being pro-life.


Even Reagan was fairly tepid to it.


Posted by: BurtTC at May 03, 2016 04:23 PM (TOk1P)

Looking back, I think you actually are right about it. I think a lot of people misinterpreted the process and took the wrong lessons from the flameout of northeast republicans in the 90's, and with the politics of W and Rove of the 00's (Hispanics are natural conservatives (ha!)) and think this is true. Really I think that socons have an outsized voice in the party due to the left highlighting them, not the right. Note, my theory does not explain Huckabee who is unexplainable, though maybe he's like Trump with Jesus. I don't know.
In short, I agree with you that I don't think pro life has been a litmus test for a looooong time other than W.

Posted by: Jollyroger at May 03, 2016 04:30 PM (t06LC)

276 I think the only thing Trump has proved is populism is more prevalent than conservatism. There are still conservatives out there and there is a connecting code to bind them.

Posted by: Skip at May 03, 2016 04:30 PM (PFZvJ)

277 They are "reasonable" and get the adverse cultural situation they're in.

Just a minor nit-pick with you Ace, while the culture has been adverse for so-cons in general, the pro-life movement has been the one ray of hope. While Roe vs. Wade hasn't been repealed, there has been progress on lower levels, and the culture is less accepting of the extremist abortion view that it has been.
The rest of the so-con movement has been getting its ass kicked. But it may be reaching a saturation for lack of a better term. The Target Transjenner backlash may be the start.
The Christian Conservative/Moral Majority movement really took off 20 years after the turmoil of the sixties. Something similar may be happening here.

Posted by: Iblis at May 03, 2016 04:30 PM (9221z)

278 >>>First off I strongly question your assertion that pro-life people are big Trump supporters. I think almost all of them are on the Cruz side of the aisle.

not true. self-declared "evangelicals" support Trump by a majority in most states -- now, I don't think they're really evangelical just like I don't think most northeastern liberal presbyterians are really christian in anything but a gestural sense, but the hollowness of the religious right has been exposed.

There are a lot of not-very-religious evangelicals just like there are a lot of not-very-religious yankee presbyterians.

Posted by: ace at May 03, 2016 04:31 PM (dciA+)

279 If --and it's still and if-- Trump gets the nomination and does not include Cruz in the ticket, will the horde vote Hillary? Or simply sit this one out?

Just curious.
Posted by: shibumi who is awaiting SMOD at May 03, 2016 04:27 PM (AHDxb)

#NeverHillary

Posted by: RWC - Team BOHICA at May 03, 2016 04:31 PM (mEZce)

280 Another thing to consider is that what is being called the 'evangelical' vote consists of a lot of people who are not exactly pro-life, or even have much of an affinity for Biblical teaching beyond some basic platitudes. These are people who attend churches where homosexual women are pastors. People who attend churches where racism and global warming, not the gospel, is the theme of sermons.

"Evangelical" does not mean theologically conservative Christian. Its a media term for 'those weirdos who go to church once in a while.'

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at May 03, 2016 04:31 PM (39g3+)

281 Posted by: ace at May 03, 2016 04:27 PM (dciA+)

Way to go Dallas ace!

Posted by: Golfman at May 03, 2016 04:31 PM (48QDY)

282 And I won't sit this one out.

Posted by: RWC - Team BOHICA at May 03, 2016 04:31 PM (mEZce)

283 I changed my party registration to Libertarian shortly after the 2014 elections when the republicans stumbled over themselves to wave the white flag on the budget issues.

The GOPs problem is that is has been leaderless for too long. There's no set of unifying principles that unite the party and can be presented to the public. Can you imagine any person in a leadership position in the party defending free market capitalism? The keys to the party were handed over to the Chamber of Commerce with the instructions to just keep the money flowing.

After the market crash in 2008 and every statist was blaming capitalism, where was the defense. Looking at their shoelaces is where. When the doc fix was brought up again where were they? When they had full control of congress and could have started a fight to establish some degree of fiscal responsibility to the beast where were they?

Let them have Trump now. I'm voting for Gary Johnson all the way with my dignity intact.


Posted by: Scott at May 03, 2016 04:31 PM (Bo7uZ)

284 Does anyone else feel like Ace is going little green footballs on us

Some flexibly-wristed ninny always has to trot out this stupid line every few weeks.

Posted by: prediction rate: 0.00% at May 03, 2016 04:32 PM (2WoCi)

285 I won't argue with people who don't find Cruz likable. To each his own but I just don't see it the reasoning. I like smart, witty people who as an aside can quote entire scenes out of funny movies.

What aggravates me is that it's Cruz that gets this unlikable label instead of Trump. Arguably the most unlikable blowhard in the country for decades. That weasel haired bitch wouldn't allow 90% of his supporters in one of his golf clubs even if they had the money.

Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at May 03, 2016 04:32 PM (6qmBU)

286 But in the future, don't fucking expect me, the pro-choice guy, to cotton to the pro-lifers on this issue. They've smoked themselves out and revealed most of their position here is theoretical and aspirational.

Posted by: ace
_____________

Exactly, and this of all the elections we lose over this issue that:

A) was never going to be made truly illegal if you have any grounding in reality

B) Evangelical voters never really cared all that much about it anyway.


I mean, Europe is largely atheist/agnostic, yet they have stricter abortion laws than we do. That shows you how effective SoCons have been on this issue.

Posted by: Bally at May 03, 2016 04:32 PM (C6cBW)

287 []not true. self-declared "evangelicals" support Trump by a majority in most states -- now, I don't think they're really evangelical just like I don't think most northeastern liberal presbyterians are really christian in anything but a gestural sense, but the hollowness of the religious right has been exposed.

Wait, which is it?

Are they the religious right or not? Are they really Christians and evangelical or not? Because you just admitted what I noted above: these aren't social conservatives at all, for the most part.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at May 03, 2016 04:32 PM (39g3+)

288 I was watering my lawn in 2014 when it suddenly dawned on me that I was God.

Posted by: Glenn Beck at May 03, 2016 04:32 PM (4ErVI)

289 sorry, but if you won't defend the right to life of an innocent baby.....you already have ceded the entire country to the left


Posted by: phoenixgirl at May 03, 2016 04:24 PM (0O7c5)


Then you better get started on that Amendment banning abortion because short of that you will not be able to do so. And that means you are going to have to change the culture.

The president is, for the most part, irrelevant to the entire question.

Posted by: *Mikey NTH - The Outrage Outlet is Sense and Censorship Free! at May 03, 2016 04:32 PM (hLRSq)

290 In his Update about being unreasonable to a negotiation STEALIN' Ace stole my negotiation tactic from the Art Of the Deal

Posted by: Donald F Trump Sock at May 03, 2016 04:32 PM (10hEu)

291
Furthermore people want to say Trump support is
irrational but I have seen this exchange over a hypothetical cited as a
"flip flop" for Trump every day since it happened, which is very pure
demagoguery.

Posted by: Ghost of kari - certified sidebar at May 03, 2016 04:26 PM (xuouz)

Well, Trump has gone from "very pro choice", even so far as wanting to keeping *partial birth abortion* legal, all the way to "very pro life", even so far as wanting to throw women in jail for getting an abortion. So yes he's flip-flopped, but the only question is, no one knows which is the "flip" and which is the "flop".

Posted by: chemjeff at May 03, 2016 04:32 PM (dpnZC)

292 Look at the rate pregnant women have testing for things like Down Syndrome, with over 90% aborting if it comes back positive.

=============================================


Then again, look at the number of women who won't even bother to take the test. As my daughter said with all three - "Why would I take it? It could harm the baby and it's not like it's going to change my mind one way or the other? Waste of money."


She's very frugal.

Posted by: grammie winger at May 03, 2016 04:33 PM (dFi94)

293 Most Pro-"Choice" arguments I see revolve around fictions that they tell themselves. They start with "It's not alive! (laughably fallacious)", then they progress to "It's not good for Society that they're born!" (racist at it's core), then they go to "It's not your business!" (as they campaign on abortion issues), right before they go to "Abortion should be free to all!" because "Population Bomb!".
There are plenty of reasons to oppose abortion, none have to be religious, just based in science and reason.

Posted by: Lincolntf at May 03, 2016 04:33 PM (2cS/G)

294 First off I strongly question your assertion that pro-life people are big Trump supporters. I think almost all of them are on the Cruz side of the aisle.
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at May 03, 2016 04:28 PM (39g3+)


Heh, good point CT. I think there might be a little laziness here (not on ace's part, not exclusively) in assuming that the lowly educated whites going bigly for Trump are all pro-life.

A kind of assumption that that's a socon redoubt. Just because it's a fair assumption doesn't make it a true one.

I could go into some other assumptions, but... this thread seems to actually be less slapfighty than most today.

Posted by: Ghost of kari - certified sidebar at May 03, 2016 04:33 PM (xuouz)

295 "But what some are you are not getting is that you don't get a This Only Applies to Trump Hall Pass.

No, it applies to everyone going forward.

If Trump was acceptable to you, so will another pro-choicer. "

I didn't vote for the goddamn son of a bitch. I will only be voting for him bin the general ecause Hillary and Bernie have promised, _PROMISED_ to keep me unemployed. If you're pretending to use this as an excuse to keep fucking me and keep me permanently blackmailed into voting for the abortion candidate...

Frankly, I've been seeing Trump as just another fucking McCain/Bush/Romney lesser-of-two-evils... your manner of "hey, since you'll go this far, let's force you to do some more shit..." is the sort of evil hypocricy I came to expect from, well, the sort of liberal idiot politicians I thought you disagreed with.

In your quest to find the contradictions of the Trump supporters in the primary you seem to be finding new and inadvertent ways of pissing the rest of us off.

Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain at May 03, 2016 04:33 PM (kCfMX)

296 >>
Abortion is used by both parties to rile up the base. Nothing is ever
going to change regardless of what party is in power. It would take a
constitutional amendment to overturn Roe. Ain't gonna happen.

Agreed. Prior to Obama, it was a "nice to have" if a candidate was pro-life, not a decider/requirement.

However, Obama has been actively pushing abortion and the PP agenda in general with the contraceptive mandate, harassing Hobby Lobby and Little Sisters of the Poor, even requiring Catholic institutions who are contracted by DHS to temporarily house unaccompanied illegal alien minors to pay for their contraceptives and (IIRC) abortions.

So post-Obama, it is no longer a "whatever, it's a law that's not going to be overturned." Electing an abortion activist (like Hillary) will ensure that there will be a lot more of the federal government getting into the abortion business, whether directly (say, offering abortions on military bases) or indirectly by forcing businesses/charities to provide them.

Posted by: Lizzy at May 03, 2016 04:33 PM (NOIQH)

297 >>>294 I was watering my lawn in 2014 when it suddenly dawned on me that I was God.
Posted by: Glenn Beck at May 03, 2016 04:32 PM (4ErVI)

______

I don't know why, but this made me spit out my coffee

Posted by: TeamRawDog at May 03, 2016 04:33 PM (10hEu)

298 So Ace, with all due respect, you're telling us that you're unprincipled on the social side of policy and will jump aboard whichever wagon you think is going to win.

That's your prerogative. Many of us are not. Many of us understand that the moral erosion of civil society affects us all proundly, not just the Jesus-y types.

You basically have a small handful of cultural-left elites who've convinced middle america to abandon their morals and disdain those who have not. And since cowardice is now run amok in the republican party, fewer and fewer are willing to stand up and try to keep america from losing its goddamned collective mind (e.g. Trans...whatever as a civil right.)

You'll reassess your position when the most execrable liberal millionare democrat in history EASILY beats the execrable liberal millionare republican in November.

Posted by: Sam in VA at May 03, 2016 04:33 PM (bNi5D)

299 The tension builds....33 minutes until the polls close.

Edison Research is conducting exit polls throughout Indiana, so expect a call quickly after 7 pm Eastern if a candidate has a substantial lead. Expect the initial exit poll data to stream into media outlets at about 5 pm Eastern.

Posted by: Meremortal at May 03, 2016 04:33 PM (3myMJ)

300 Frum's been riding this hobbyhorse for a long time. I can't find a link, but he once had a cover story about this in the New Republic back in the 1990s.

I think he's over-reading the situation. To judge from my Facebook feed, the religious conservatives haven't gone anywhere. The difference is that the existential threat posed by the Obama-era Left has convinced many of them to make deals they wouldn't have made 10, 20 years ago. It's not that they've lost their "veto power"; they've just decided, as the far Left did when Bill Clinton ran in 1992, that they're going to hold off on exercising it for now.

A lot of old-school Lefties REALLY, REALLY hated Bill Clinton, but they held their noses because by 1992, it was clear that they were really, truly at the precipice; the collapse of communism had utterly discredited their movement (though the discrediting turned out to be only temporary), and they were in very real danger of losing everything. The same thing is happening with religious conservatives today.

Posted by: Ex-liberal at May 03, 2016 04:33 PM (R1mDg)

301
Butterpublican ?

Posted by: The Jackhole at May 03, 2016 04:33 PM (3mTyP)

302 Then again, look at the number of women who won't even bother to take the test. As my daughter said with all three - "Why would I take it? It could harm the baby and it's not like it's going to change my mind one way or the other? Waste of money."
She's very frugal.

Posted by: grammie winger at May 03, 2016 04:33 PM (dFi94)


Lovely woman.

Posted by: HopefulMonster Bravely supporting kittens at May 03, 2016 04:34 PM (uURQL)

303
Yes of course you are correct. Nice bit of name calling there. Again, I pit my IQ and success against anyone here. But keep name calling, it demonstrates your superior intellect.
Posted by: Jukin, Former Republican, Now Reregistered to VOTE TRUMP in California at May 03, 2016 04:25 PM (AhyHb)
_____________________________________________

Right, your trump support must be his consistent record of conservatism, fealty to the Constitution, Advocacy for limited government and calm cool temperament. My mistake.

Posted by: Malachi45 at May 03, 2016 04:34 PM (Y9zAG)

304 >>Does anyone else feel like Ace is going little green footballs on us

Some flexibly-wristed ninny always has to trot out this stupid line every few weeks.

Posted by: prediction rate: 0.00%


AKA 'famous last words'

Posted by: weft cut-loop at May 03, 2016 04:34 PM (OcD4G)

305 And I'm not comparing fetuses to bad habits. Just trying to make a point.

Posted by: JoeF. at May 03, 2016 04:24 PM (7feDS)


Right, there is no comparison. You COULD smoke a fetus, but there's probably not enough meat to make it worthwhile.*

*Yes, I'll burn in hell for that, but it had to be said.

Posted by: BurtTC at May 03, 2016 04:34 PM (TOk1P)

306 And I've yet to meet someone who brags about their IQ and can actually back it up. Pro-tip: Actual geniuses don't dick wave about their IQs because they don't have to.

But if you really want to whip it out, be my guest. As long as it's an actual test with psychometric validity that was administered by a professional, and not a 10 question online scam test.

Posted by: broseidon on his magic glowing square at May 03, 2016 04:35 PM (tWE9w)

307 There are a couple different factions who are Baptists, I have never seen or known anything agaist dancing.

Posted by: Skip at May 03, 2016 04:35 PM (PFZvJ)

308 If Trump's liberalism can be accepted, why can't the liberalism of Giuliani (or a Giuliani type to be named later) be accepted?

People aren't "accepting" Trump's liberal positions.

They are denying that he has liberal positions.

Those who do "accept" them only do so because they are willing to sacrifice everything over immigration.

Posted by: The Political Hat at May 03, 2016 04:35 PM (vBeA5)

309 >>>Are they the religious right or not? Are they really Christians and evangelical or not? Because you just admitted what I noted above: these aren't social conservatives at all, for the most part.

they have been counted as part of the religious right -- incorrectly. They are simply non-northeastern barely-believing nominal christians (or at least there are many of such in their numbers).

I didn't realize that. I took "evangelical" to mean "religious." But I shouldn't have -- it meant that when I was a kid, when evangelism was the sign of a strong religiosity. but now it's just a large established religion, and any large established religion has nominal supporters who simply say they believe in it because their parents did, or because it's what most of their community does.

Posted by: ace at May 03, 2016 04:35 PM (dciA+)

310 Pro life/pro choice... It doesn't matter.
Roe v Wade isn't going anywhere, and abortion as a valid medical treatment isn't either.
Sorry folks, fact of life here, not all pregnancies are wanted. You stand a better chance changing minds through simple sex education than by trying to outlaw abortion.
But go ahead preach to me about it and I'll shut you out, as a religious person myself I don't want religion, even my own, controlling any part of what my (hopefully smaller someday) government does.

Posted by: IP at May 03, 2016 04:35 PM (aQQbl)

311 Just saw the reply to pro-life Trump voters. It reminds me of an old Chappelle quote:

"The girl says "Oh uh-uh, wait a minute! Wait a minute! Just because I'm dressed this way does not make me a whore!" Which is true. Gentlemen, that is true. Just because they dress a certain way doesn't mean they are a certain way. Don't ever forget it. But ladies, you must understand that is fucking confusing. It just is. Now that would be like me, Dave Chappelle, the comedian, walking down the street in a cop uniform. Somebody might run up on me, saying, "Oh, thank God. Officer, help us! Come on. They're over here. Help us!" "Oh-hoh! Just because I'm dressed this way does not make me a police officer!" See what I mean? All right, ladies, fine. You are not a whore. But you are wearing a whore's uniform."

Posted by: KillianThyme at May 03, 2016 04:35 PM (n2r4H)

312 259 sit and cry.

Posted by: Drill at May 03, 2016 04:35 PM (/AoJR)

313 Ace, I think it comes down to something more important, and that is that treating elections as the primary battleground and vehicle for social issues was never the proper way to go.

I'm turning into a broken record about this, but the nature of the government follows the nature of the people. As others have noticed, the pro-life movement has been making solid headway in that category, and it didn't really need the GOP for that. (Quite the contrary, politicizing a moral issue is always a bust in the end.)

Obviously I'd like to see if the religious Trump supporters ramp up their non-political actions in support of their proclaimed social stances before saying that, yes, they simply shifted their tactics, but I have a hunch that's what we're seeing.

Posted by: Brother Cavil at May 03, 2016 04:35 PM (9krrF)

314 Oh wait, 2 hours, 30 minutes til polls close.

Posted by: Meremortal at May 03, 2016 04:35 PM (3myMJ)

315 That weasel haired bitch wouldn't allow 90% of his supporters in one of his golf clubs even if they had the money.
---

LOL. Have to disagree with you on that one.

I have an obnoxious, overbearing Jewish photographer I work with in New Jersey. Really one of those people you love/hate. A pretty solid Democrat as well.

He's gone golfing on one of the Trump courses numerous times.

Posted by: shibumi who is awaiting SMOD at May 03, 2016 04:35 PM (AHDxb)

316 And a Trumpite complaining about name-calling is like Trigglypuff complaining about public decorum. Not only is it endemic among the group, it's a key characteristic of Trump to begin with: insults. "Lyin' Ted." Pfuh.
Posted by: Apostate at May 03, 2016 04:30 PM (HYy1S)

I don't think it's fair to conflate a war of words between two public figures battling for a nomination with perfect strangers in the comments section of pretty exemplary blogging community calling each other fags and shit.

Call Trump anything you want. Please don't call me names. I keep my arms and legs inside the vehicle.

Posted by: Ghost of kari - certified sidebar at May 03, 2016 04:35 PM (xuouz)

317
I was watering my lawn in 2014 when it suddenly dawned on me that I was God.
Posted by: Glenn Beck at May 03, 2016 04:32 PM (4ErVI)
......................

You misspelled 'pissing'.

Posted by: Glen Beck's neighbor at May 03, 2016 04:36 PM (HgMAr)

318 I see where Ace is coming from... I've often said I probably don't belong in this Century, and I'm not super Religious..... Don't know if this old Woman will ever truly change with the times...

Posted by: donna at May 03, 2016 04:36 PM (O2RFr)

319 Posted by: Carol at May 03, 2016 04:30 PM (sj3Ax)

Sorry that you are ill, take care. I am resolved that after I've voted for Cruz in the primary, I'll go ahead and vote for Trump in the general. What's left, anyway?

Posted by: washrivergal at May 03, 2016 04:36 PM (CFc5L)

320
If we're being honest about it, W is pretty much the only Republican candidate for President since Roe v. Wade who was really serious about being pro-life.
Even Reagan was fairly tepid to it.
Posted by: BurtTC


Reagan's main goal was the defeat of the USSR.
Once they fell, the Republican party has been stumbling
around in search of a coherent reason to exist.

Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at May 03, 2016 04:36 PM (k4M/B)

321 If --and it's still and if-- Trump gets the nomination and does not
include Cruz in the ticket, will the horde vote Hillary? Or simply sit
this one out?


I am voting Libertarian at this point.

Posted by: chemjeff at May 03, 2016 04:36 PM (dpnZC)

322 Has Trump indicated he will restore the Mexico City policy? I also bet he will be lobbied to resume embryonic stem cell research utilizing new embryos and will agree. Just my guess.

Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at May 03, 2016 04:36 PM (6qmBU)

323 I'm not big pro-life litmus test but pro-life nonetheless. Easy for me. I dont have a daughter.

My trouble is the inept powers on the right can't even make a decent argument for defunding planned parenthood.

It's the ubiquitous, continuous creep that does me in.

Fucking bathrooms? Argggh.

Posted by: Golfman at May 03, 2016 04:36 PM (48QDY)

324 Village Idiot (Cunt),

How about a little deal: I won't try to moderate YOUR comments and thoughts if you, motherfucker, stop trying to moderate MINE?

How about that, Cunt?

How about as the proprietor of this blog I get to say the things I'm thinking without a stupid faggity cunt like you accusing me of "going little green footballs" every five minutes?

How's that sound, cunt?

Posted by: ace at May 03, 2016 04:36 PM (dciA+)

325
Whuuut ?

And I've yet to meet someone who brags about their IQ and can actually back it up. Pro-tip: Actual geniuses don't dick wave about their IQs because they don't have to.

But if you really want to whip it out, be my guest. As long as it's an actual test with psychometric validity that was administered by a professional, and not a 10 question online scam test.

Posted by: Baraack The Genius Parrot at May 03, 2016 04:36 PM (3mTyP)

326 The problem with the "socially liberal/fiscally conservative" is that there really isn't such a thing.

When it comes to social issues, conservatives believe that the government should reflect those social traditions and mores that are the pillars of society. The Left, in contrast, wish to sweep that away and replace it with their own ideal.

When it comes to fiscal issues, conservatives believe that the government should maintain the rule of law and set stable and straightforward rules by which the economy can natrualy evolve. The Left wishes to impose top-down control.

Posted by: The Political Hat at May 03, 2016 04:36 PM (vBeA5)

327 One of the reasons I was going to vote for Trump despite despising him is that I thought he would at least try to protect religious freedom, which was dumb of me given some of his past statements. But his NC bathroom comments quickly cleared things up for me.

Posted by: chique d'afrique at May 03, 2016 04:37 PM (iynDC)

328 B) Evangelical voters never really cared all that much about it anyway.





Posted by: Bally at May 03, 2016 04:32 PM (C6cBW)



Nonsense. They care. They just know that you don't, and believe you're going to hell for it. While still praying for your pitiful soul anyway.

Posted by: BurtTC at May 03, 2016 04:37 PM (TOk1P)

329 Ace, re your few points update.


What you have just described is how the CIA 'turns' an enemy. It starts with some simple little thing; 'can you get me a phone number' or who is the girl with Putin, or where does Gorbachev spend his weekends?

One little thing here, another little thing there, and here is a small payment for your trouble.

Then, voila, congratulations comrade, you are now an agent working for the CIA.

So you use your lawyerly skillz to negotiate with me and force me to accept your position on some little thing, and then you believe you own me?

Nope.

Once again, the hand is now tipped that pro-lifers don't expect much and don't actually demand much.

Not me. I refuse to let you troll me on most topics, racism, sexual perversion, religion because when I tell you what I think, you would go ballistic and ban me. I'm posting here under my real name. It wouldn't be difficult to identify me. My views haven't changed, my principles haven't changed. You have not persuaded me, you can not convert me, you can not 'turn' me into one of your agents. Your brilliant logic has no effect on my convictions.

It's best if we don't talk about it any further. Don't push me.

Posted by: Skandia Recluse at May 03, 2016 04:37 PM (QjabV)

330 Rule Going Forward:

Anyone accusing me of "going little green footballs" by daring to express my thoughts on my own fucking blog, immediately gets an actual Little Green Footballs treatment, and gets banned.

Does that work for everyone?

Posted by: ace at May 03, 2016 04:37 PM (dciA+)

331 But in the future, don't fucking expect me, the pro-choice guy, to
cotton to the pro-lifers on this issue. They've smoked themselves out
and revealed most of their position here is theoretical and
aspirational.



Posted by: ace
======================================


Obviously, you were not around for my first pregnancy, when they told me I might die. Or my second pregnancy (against medical advice) when they told me my son was going to be born with horrific heart and brain damage. Yeah, the son who graduated with honors from both high school and college, was the quarterback for the football team, and served 12 years in the Army. They told me to abort him. Or again, I might die.


Lookee here. Still kicking. Me and my two kids.


Theoretical my aunt fanny.

Posted by: grammie winger at May 03, 2016 04:37 PM (dFi94)

332 Yes, I'll burn in hell for that, but it had to be said. /i]

It wouldn't be the HQ without this kind of darkly humorous thing that makes people gasp

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at May 03, 2016 04:38 PM (39g3+)

333 Does that work for everyone?
Posted by: ace at May 03, 2016 04:37 PM (dciA+)


Your blog, your rules.

Posted by: HopefulMonster Bravely supporting kittens at May 03, 2016 04:38 PM (uURQL)

334 If --and it's still and if-- Trump gets the nomination and does not
include Cruz in the ticket, will the horde vote Hillary? Or simply sit
this one out?

I am voting Libertarian at this point.

Posted by: chemjeff at May 03, 2016 04:36 PM (dpnZC)


I also have the option of voting for the canddiate for the Independent American Party (they have their own armed milita), or "None of the above", and option that I've exercised before.

Posted by: The Political Hat at May 03, 2016 04:39 PM (vBeA5)

335 I attend an Evangelical Church and most of my friends and family are Christian and Republican.

I would say maybe 1 out of 50 of that group truly cares about this issue. And that's being generous.

Most are on the same page that it's wrong, but when the topic of politics comes up, nobody is talking about how one candidate is going to restrict the number of abortions.

Most pragmatic people understand that if you want to lower abortions, you're going to have to convince people from the ground up it's immoral. Politicians aren't going to fix this problem.

Posted by: Bally at May 03, 2016 04:39 PM (C6cBW)

336 I think the only thing Trump has proved is populism is more prevalent than conservatism. There are still conservatives out there and there is a connecting code to bind them.

Posted by: Skip at May 03, 2016 04:30 PM (PFZvJ)
---------------------------------------

That's a pretty intriguing way to put it. Might be right. It would be more right if you could work in the theme VDH had in his essay from this morning, specifically that Trump has convinced people that an aggressive bullhorn approach is in itself more important than the words that come through the bullhorn.

In other words, VDH said, voters are sick and tired of flailing losses, ridiculous know-it-all elites and obvious spending stupidity in Washington, along with a whole list of other stuff he mentioned.

Posted by: MTF at May 03, 2016 04:39 PM (/m8T6)

337 Baraaak, Works for me

Posted by: Baraack The Genius Parrot at May 03, 2016 04:39 PM (3mTyP)

338 Fucking bathrooms? Argggh.
-----------------------------------

This trans-nonsense is a turning point for me. If we can't win the argument that a man doesn't become a woman by announcing that he is, then we can't win any argument. Our country is no longer tethered to any sort of reality.

The Rectification of Names can't get here fast enough.

Posted by: Masturbatin' Pete at May 03, 2016 04:39 PM (A6sW3)

339 Does that work for everyone?

Works for me, your blog. If you went nuts and reversed yourself on every topic, it would be a hell of a lot more obvious than just frustration and exasperation with voters. I can't work out why on earth more people who like Trump aren't supporting Cruz either.

I'm just not as close to things as you are any longer. I wrote the nation off in 2012. Saves on Tums and helps me sleep at night.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at May 03, 2016 04:40 PM (39g3+)

340 We're not counting people like Joel Osteen and the megachurches as evangelicals, are we? That Fill Your Pockets With Cash Gospel has never been Christian. In fact, I think it's probably heretical.

Posted by: Dack Thrombosis at May 03, 2016 04:40 PM (4ErVI)

341 Does Trump even know what the Mexico City policy is?

Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at May 03, 2016 04:40 PM (6qmBU)

342 It's all about that four letter word: jobs.

Yesterday on tv they were talking, all excited, about how the middle class in China is expanding at an amazing rate. New markets yay!
@-holes.

The country that lets it people work and produce benefits. So simple even the ChiComs get it.

Americans want jobs. Desperately.

Posted by: @votermom at May 03, 2016 04:40 PM (nbrY/)

343 336. Ace. Abso-fucking-lutely!

Posted by: Drill at May 03, 2016 04:40 PM (/AoJR)

344 Ace: But now we know that going forward -- and you don't just get to say "Our flexible position only applies in 2016, and only to Trump." No, it applies going forward, generally.

Speaking for myself alone, I'll try to reclaim that which I have yielded when the most crushing government abuses have been castrated. So, yes, my concessions can be withdrawn even as I know I'm violating some "principles" now.

This is how the Left has Progressed us into soft tyranny. It will, on the whole, make some concession only to rescind the concession at a future date when more power has been taken. It's the moving of the Overton Window that is essential in a long war.

I have become cynically principled in this regard having learned that, politically, you have to sneak your way to the levers of power and then push them at a more convenient time.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at May 03, 2016 04:40 PM (1CroS)

345 ace is really going Little Green Footballs by expressing an opinion I don't like!

Posted by: a hundred morons babbling stupidly every other week at May 03, 2016 04:40 PM (dciA+)

346 It wouldn't be the HQ without the barrel Mr Taylor...

Posted by: IP at May 03, 2016 04:40 PM (aQQbl)

347 I voted for Cruz here in Texas, but it appears that Trump is the nominee.

On election day, I will get even drunker than I was voting for McCain in 2004 and vote for the Cheeto-colored psychopath.

Posted by: La Frontera at May 03, 2016 04:41 PM (H6mA6)

348 I think if there was some unified leadership of Protestantism, or a Pope of the Protestants, Osteen and his ilk would be kicked out of the class.

Posted by: Dack Thrombosis at May 03, 2016 04:41 PM (4ErVI)

349 Village Idiot: "Does anyone else feel like Ace is going little green footballs on us?"

Um...no. No, it doesn't.

It does seem as though quite a big contingent in the comments section has gone off the rails. There's an ugly anti-Christian element here that I was never aware of.

When someone whose screen name is "Pastafarian" thinks you're being an anti-religious shit-bag, you've probably gone too far.

Posted by: Pastafarian at May 03, 2016 04:41 PM (LqrRo)

350 336 Rule Going Forward:

Anyone accusing me of "going little green footballs" by daring to express my thoughts on my own fucking blog, immediately gets an actual Little Green Footballs treatment, and gets banned.

Does that work for everyone?
Posted by: ace at May 03, 2016 04:37 PM (dciA+)


Used to be, you'd take down guys with an epic 72 pixel font post 'n show off those mad ewok html skillzzzz. I believe the quote was "Don't fuck with the guy who buys pixels by the barrel" or some such.
Gettin old Ace. We're gettin' old.

Posted by: Iblis at May 03, 2016 04:41 PM (9221z)

351

ouch

Posted by: fixerupper at May 03, 2016 04:41 PM (8XRCm)

352 Does that work for everyone?

Posted by: ace at May 03, 2016 04:37 PM (dciA+)


I come here to see what your opinions are, no problem there. Its what makes things fun.

Posted by: Jollyroger at May 03, 2016 04:41 PM (t06LC)

353 If we can't win the argument that a man doesn't become a woman by announcing that he is, then we can't win any argument. Our country is no longer tethered to any sort of reality.

Exactly. Rational argument is pointless when reason its self is under attack and disregarded as inconvenient.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at May 03, 2016 04:41 PM (39g3+)

354 >>Those who do "accept" them only do so because they are willing to sacrifice everything over immigration.

They should read Andy McCarthy's piece today. They are getting lied to about immigration as well. But they won't because they don't care about facts.

They don't care issues, they care about personality.

Posted by: JackStraw at May 03, 2016 04:41 PM (/tuJf)

355
We're not counting people like Joel Osteen and the megachurches as evangelicals, are we? That Fill Your Pockets With Cash Gospel has never been Christian. In fact, I think it's probably heretical.Posted by: Dack Thrombosis at May 03, 2016 04:40 PM (4ErVI)

Pay your contribution and you'll get a better seat, bow to the leper messiah- Metallica

Posted by: Baraack The Genius Parrot at May 03, 2016 04:41 PM (3mTyP)

356 Can we all just finally recognize that the only real function of the Republican Party is as a "beard" for the Democrats, who are creating the single-party totalitarian state the Left has wanted for this country for two generations?

The Republicans have a function as a permanent minority party that allows our rulers to pretend we live in a "democracy" of some kind.

If the current election isn't enough to show how our leaders and their allies feel about "the will of the people," what more do you need?

I live in California, and it's not unusual now to see a ballot where my choice is between two Democrats. I figure if I live long enough, I'll start to see ballots with only one name on them.

And it's not all bad for the Republican elite. They can glide under the palace chandeliers with the rest of them, holding their champagne glasses. It's not like actual political power has ever been all that comfortable for them.

Leave that to the Party that was born to have absolute rule.

Posted by: TB at May 03, 2016 04:42 PM (UXEYz)

357 323

I was watering my lawn in 2014 when it suddenly dawned on me that I was God.
Posted by: Glenn Beck at May 03, 2016 04:32 PM (4ErVI)



My guess is your "magical Mormon underwear" was too tight.

Posted by: Nip Sip at May 03, 2016 04:42 PM (jJRIy)

358 People aren't "accepting" Trump's liberal positions.
They are denying that he has liberal positions.
Those who do "accept" them only do so because they are willing to sacrifice everything over immigration.
Posted by: The Political Hat at May 03, 2016 04:35 PM (vBeA5)


I push back on dishonest representation of Trump's liberalism. He's not a liberal, he's a new england republican. For example, for the billionth goddamn time, punishing women who have an abortion is not a policy position he has advocated. It was an answer to a hypothetical question. He not only reneged on that statement itself, he has pledged not to pursue any abortion policy at all. This is de facto pro-choice. But it's hardly a flip flop.

It's also my position. Even my two grandmothers, both Catholics who go to church 7 days a week, are more concerned with the state of the constitution and the debt and budget and the military and the other social issues fights going on than with abortion, although they're both staunchly pro-life.

So it's a dishonest criticism. As is the "eminent domain" saw, as is the "vulgarity" saw (please see VDH comparing Trump to Obama) as is the "loses with women" saw when he's winning Republican women by large majorities.

And I ask you: what am I "sacrificing" for immigration? What on earth are we going to lose with Trump that the GOP hasn't already capitulated on, either in deed if not in word?

I won't deny he's liberal for a republican. But next to Hillary Clinton he's John Birch.

Posted by: Ghost of kari - certified sidebar at May 03, 2016 04:42 PM (xuouz)

359 I disagree with Frum's thesis and ace's distillation of it.

First, if Trump was free to eschew the pro-life position he would have done so. He didn't. I don't think he's sincerely pro-life but I don't think he's vehemently pro-choice either. It's probably something largely irrelevant to his life up to now other than some shallow thinking about how it affected him. Perhaps one of the silver linings is that in having not thought very much about many issues, he can be persuaded or is flexible - of course this works both ways.

Second, it may actually represent a maturation of the SoCons' political involvement. All politicians - even the good ones - are to some extent whores. What he sincerely believes is far less important than what he does. As far as abortion is concerned, the whole game is predicated on Supreme Court nominations. Say what you will but they did make him dance on the issue.

I say this as someone who voted for Cruz in the Pennsylvania primary as well as the endorsed slate of delegates who were unbound (but likely to thwart Trump). I recognized Cruz's charisma deficit, that sort of uncanny valley-ness about how he presents, etc. and therefore recognized very real problems with his general election candidacy should there have been one.

Posted by: Alec Leamas at May 03, 2016 04:42 PM (RfZaB)

360 Second, there are many nations in Europe, with very different histories and laws, both in and out of the EU. Comparing an entire continent's legal practices with a single federal nation's is impossible.
Posted by: Apostate at May 03, 2016 04:41 PM (HYy1S)


Yet... Europe is more restrictive of abortion than the US is a trueful observation.

It's a flaw of our country that we have more talk than walk on this issue.

Posted by: HopefulMonster Bravely supporting kittens at May 03, 2016 04:42 PM (uURQL)

361
People aren't "accepting" Trump's liberal positions.



They are denying that he has liberal positions.



Those who do "accept" them only do so because they are willing to sacrifice everything over immigration.
---

Devil's advocate here.

Yes, Trump does have liberal positions. And isn't a conservative or really a Republican.

That being said, is it better to not vote and let Hillary and the army of Muslims/Mexicans/Others take over our country and change it for us and our children forever?

Or is it better to consider accepting Trump to stop the flow of immigrants that could turn us into the land of Rape and Coverups, like Europe?

To put it another way... the Muslim invasion could be seen an an existential threat to Western Europe. Do we want to elect a president that openly supports creating an existential threat to our way of life in the U.S?

Posted by: shibumi who is awaiting SMOD at May 03, 2016 04:43 PM (AHDxb)

362 Ace fires the banhammer warning shot again.. it's your house, your rules. I'm good.




Posted by: IP at May 03, 2016 04:43 PM (aQQbl)

363 Ace,

You seem to conflate "religous" with "social conservative".

A person can be a dyed in the whool athiest, and still hold socially conservative positions.

Though both were religious and mentioned God in their writings, but Edmund Burke and James FitzJames Stephens defense of conserving social mores and such stand independent of the veracity of the existance of any diety.

Posted by: The Political Hat at May 03, 2016 04:43 PM (vBeA5)

364 In other words, VDH said, voters are sick and tired of flailing losses, ridiculous know-it-all elites and obvious spending stupidity in Washington, along with a whole list of other stuff he mentioned.
Posted by: MTF at May 03, 2016 04:39 PM (/m8T6)

And they will get the same thing with Trump and ask, "May I have another Sir?"

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at May 03, 2016 04:43 PM (voOPb)

365 Most pragmatic people understand that if you want to lower abortions, you're going to have to convince people from the ground up it's immoral. Politicians aren't going to fix this problem.

Posted by: Bally at May 03, 2016 04:39 PM (C6cBW)


Politicians race each other to get to the front of the parade.

Posted by: *Mikey NTH - The Outrage Outlet is Sense and Censorship Free! at May 03, 2016 04:43 PM (hLRSq)

366 Ace, you know how much we love when you get your dander up and start wailing away with the Banhammer. The only thing that makes us happier is gender confused kittehs.

Posted by: broseidon on his magic glowing square at May 03, 2016 04:43 PM (tWE9w)

367 313 There are a couple different factions who are Baptists, I have never seen or known anything agaist dancing.
Posted by: Skip

joking. my church held dances. but the general population thinks Baptists are like Footloose.

Posted by: x at May 03, 2016 04:43 PM (nFwvY)

368 I'm finally resigned to the fact that Trump is gonna be the Candidate... I'm not gonna throw a tantrum because honestly I'm not that fond of Cruz either.... Let the chips fall where they may...

Posted by: donna at May 03, 2016 04:43 PM (O2RFr)

369 >>My trouble is the inept powers on the right can't even make a decent argument for defunding planned parenthood.
It's the ubiquitous, continuous creep that does me in.


THIS

I doubt Roe v Wade would ever be overturned, but I think at the state level, it is valid to argue/fight over the point at which a woman cannot abort (barring any unforeseen medical complications). If you're going to abort, at least take the responsibility to do it before it has developed enough to survive outside the womb with basic, available assistance (i.e., in the NICU).

That's not too much to ask --- and yet Planned Parenthood and a frightening number of feminists think it is evil to put such limits on abortion.

Also, the harvesting of late-term abortion body parts is truly ghoulish - I cannot believe our GOP in Congress could not doing something - anything - about this. This does not bode well for other "life" issues, specifically Obamacare guidelines and reimbursement/incentives for other medical issues.

Posted by: Lizzy at May 03, 2016 04:44 PM (NOIQH)

370 Again, I pit my IQ and success against anyone here. But keep name calling, it demonstrates your superior intellect.


Posted by: Jukin, Former Republican, Now Reregistered to VOTE TRUMP in California at May 03, 2016 04:25 PM (AhyHb)

Doesn't Trumps obvious mental illness bother you? One doesn't have to be very smart in order to spot it. How do you explain it?

Posted by: Mimzey at May 03, 2016 04:44 PM (aRUb8)

371 "Can we all just finally recognize that the only real function of the Republican Party is as a "beard" for the Democrats, who are creating the single-party totalitarian state the Left has wanted for this country for two generations?"
----------

On the national level, yes. The party may still have some value at the state and local level, but once Republicans get to Washington they realize that there's a lot of money and comfort in selling out and going along.

Posted by: Masturbatin' Pete at May 03, 2016 04:44 PM (A6sW3)

372 I'm not sure we can make larger conclusions because so much of this phenomenon is Trump-centered. It is a cult of personality, it is largely about the man and not mostly the issues.

Look at the things he's said and done. He called Pelosi up to get her to impeach Bush. What other candidate could do that? Pro-life, pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, whatever. Who could do that?

He said Bush lied about WMD. Who could do this?

If you remove Trump from this I don't think there's a lot of substance there. Sure, a bit here and a bit there. But making these larger conclusions is, right now, I think a reach too far.


Posted by: SteveMG at May 03, 2016 04:44 PM (G1H9X)

373 >336 This should flush some of them out by itself.

Get em.

Posted by: Ghost of kari - certified sidebar at May 03, 2016 04:44 PM (xuouz)

374 The post-Reagan trajectory in Commiefornia gubernatorial politics is interesting.

After Moonbeam Brown's first stint as governor, CA tilted right and elected George Deukmejian. Then followed him with Pete Wilson. Both of these fellows were moderate good-government types instead of socially conservative God-government types. They didn't wear religion on their sleeves.

Then the socons got Dan Lungren, a Christian anti-abortion firebrand, eventually nominated for governor, and he was pounded at the polls.

The only Republican elected since then, statewide, was Ahnuld der Schtuppenfuhrer, who tacked back to the good-government angle as a candidate instead of pushing socon issues. (Ahnuld didn't deliver on that and wasn't anywhere nearly as effective a governor as Deukmejian or Wilson.)

As CA goes, so goes the nation, in many ways. For good or for ill.

Posted by: torquewrench at May 03, 2016 04:44 PM (noWW6)

375 369 Ace fires the banhammer warning shot again.. it's your house, your rules. I'm good.

Posted by: IP at May 03, 2016 04:43 PM (aQQbl

Well whoever confuses Ace with that douceweasel at LGF deserves to be ridiculed first, then banned second

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at May 03, 2016 04:44 PM (voOPb)

376 @347 No. I would bet my life Donald Trump has no idea what the Mexico City policy is.

@348 Americans want jobs. Desperately.

Posted by: @votermom at May 03, 2016 04:40 PM (nbrY/)

^ This. Like it or not, our economy blows and the average American worker knows the govt has been conspiring for 7 years to piss on their heads and say its raining.

Posted by: Jollyroger at May 03, 2016 04:44 PM (t06LC)

377 >>>It's probably something largely irrelevant to his life up to now

hundred bucks says we find out before the general that abortion hasn't been quite irrelevant to his life up to now

Posted by: ace at May 03, 2016 04:44 PM (dciA+)

378 And they will get the same thing with Trump and ask, "May I have another Sir?"Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at May 03, 2016 04:43 PM (voOPb)This ^

Posted by: The Jackhole at May 03, 2016 04:44 PM (3mTyP)

379 The only thing that makes us happier is gender confused kittehs.
Posted by: broseidon on his magic glowing square at May 03, 2016 04:43 PM (tWE9w)


And bewbs. Can't forget the bewbs. Preferably dipped in chocolate pudding.

Posted by: Iblis at May 03, 2016 04:44 PM (9221z)

380 This trans-nonsense is a turning point for me. If we can't win the
argument that a man doesn't become a woman by announcing that he is,
then we can't win any argument. Our country is no longer tethered to any
sort of reality.

--

I agree. Not fighting the social conservative fight has led to this, and I place the blame squarely at the feet of the GOP. You wanted to make sure you could feather your nest with contributions, and it became more important than standing for the principles you claimed to have when you ran for office, and now it has come back to bite you in the ass.


Anyone who doesn't see the connection between fighting for religious freedom, pro-life positions, and the rest of the socon platform - see what backing off has gotten you? Now, your daughters cannot use a public restroom without fear.

Once the GOP stopped actually pushing for what they claimed to support, the battle lines moved to the left.

Posted by: Vashta Nerada at May 03, 2016 04:45 PM (Qvgg/)

381 It does seem as though quite a big contingent in the comments section has gone off the rails. There's an ugly anti-Christian element here that I was never aware of.

Its been here, mostly was visible in 2008 when Palin was chosen for VP. Some truly unfortunate things said then, especially after the election. But forgiveness is at the heart of Christianity

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at May 03, 2016 04:45 PM (39g3+)

382 I want women using ladies' room & men using men's room. Last week I went to get hair done at shop & used ladies room but there wasn't any soap. It's a one bathroom each & I used men's room & left door open to wash my hands.

Posted by: Carol at May 03, 2016 04:45 PM (sj3Ax)

383 We're not counting people like Joel Osteen and the
megachurches as evangelicals, are we? That Fill Your Pockets With Cash
Gospel has never been Christian. In fact, I think it's probably
heretical.

Posted by: Dack Thrombosis at May 03, 2016 04:40 PM (4ErVI)
=============================================

My opinion? Yes - heretical. Not evangelical. Tell the Christians in Pakistan or Syria to name it and claim it. If it isn't applicable outside First World countries, it's not of God. IMO. I am not a pastor but I do hope to be sleeping with one soon.

Posted by: grammie winger at May 03, 2016 04:45 PM (dFi94)

384 >>>Our country is no longer tethered to any sort of reality.


Just so. We should just change the name of the country to Navelgazia.

Posted by: Citizen Cake at May 03, 2016 04:45 PM (ppaKI)

385 not true. self-declared "evangelicals" support Trump by a majority in most states -- now, I don't think they're really evangelical just like I don't think most northeastern liberal presbyterians are really christian in anything but a gestural sense, but the hollowness of the religious right has been exposed.

There are a lot of not-very-religious evangelicals just like there are a lot of not-very-religious yankee presbyterians.

Posted by: ace at May 03, 2016 04:31 PM (dciA+)

I've read that evangelicals who actually regularly attend church aren't going for Trump for the most part.

Posted by: chique d'afrique at May 03, 2016 04:45 PM (iynDC)

386 but what some are you are not getting is that you don't get a This Only Applies to Trump Hall Pass.

Trump IS the exception to the This Only Applies to Trump Rule.
That's how "No, Fuck You" works. Then the fight starts.

Posted by: DaveA at May 03, 2016 04:45 PM (DL2i+)

387 Most pragmatic people understand that if you want to lower abortions, you're going to have to convince people from the ground up it's immoral. Politicians aren't going to fix this problem.


And this is exactly why the left wants Roe to stay in place. Desperately. If SCOTUS had abided by the Constitution and properly stated that abortion restrictions are an entirely state issue, and the Feds have zero say in the matter (since its not mentioned in the Constitution), then local politicians, who are much closer to the people, would have to take up this debate.

Local activists on both sides would get involved. With fifty states, you'd likely have lots of different patterned solutions to the issue, but there would be plenty of debate. Everyone gets their say, and friends and relations would have to understand they cannot go off all half-cocked all the time using condemnation in lieu of discussion. We would have a much better America.

Posted by: MTF at May 03, 2016 04:45 PM (/m8T6)

388 Also, I think the GOP killed abortion as a political issue when they refused to even try to defund PP after the "parts for sale" videos came out.

If that didn't get them to do anything then nothing they ever say about abortion can be believed.

Posted by: @votermom at May 03, 2016 04:45 PM (nbrY/)

389 I push back on dishonest representation of Trump's liberalism. He's not a liberal, he's a new england republican. For example, for the billionth goddamn time, punishing women who have an abortion is not a policy position he has advocated. It was an answer to a hypothetical question. He not only reneged on that statement itself, he has pledged not to pursue any abortion policy at all. This is de facto pro-choice. But it's hardly a flip flop.

I also want to point out that the statement he walked back is a stronger pro-life/anti-abortion position than the average. (incentives to women about to kill their own child matter)

As far as the gaffe was showing his true thoughts - he is more pro-life, not less.

If you want to ding him for the walk back ... he walked back to the average pro-life position. Pick one - he is averagely pro-life, or he is more extremist pro-life.

Posted by: HopefulMonster Bravely supporting kittens at May 03, 2016 04:45 PM (uURQL)

390 This trans-nonsense is a turning point for me. If we can't win the argument that a man doesn't become a woman by announcing that he is, then we can't win any argument. Our country is no longer tethered to any sort of reality.

The Rectification of Names can't get here fast enough.
Posted by: Masturbatin' Pete at May 03, 2016 04:39 PM (A6sW3)


Rectification of So-Called Names

http://politicalhat.com/?p=11672

Posted by: The Political Hat at May 03, 2016 04:46 PM (vBeA5)

391 hundred bucks says we find out before the general that abortion hasn't been quite irrelevant to his life up to now

Yeah I'd say that abortion has played a yuuuge role in the life of Donald Trump and I'm 100% sure he's all for it, as often and unrestricted as possible. But I could be wrong, maybe he's just used a lot of birth control.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at May 03, 2016 04:46 PM (39g3+)

392 Politicians aren't going to fix this problem.

Posted by: Bally at May 03, 2016 04:39 PM (C6cBW)


Which isn't the same as saying they don't care.

Posted by: BurtTC at May 03, 2016 04:46 PM (TOk1P)

393 X - I know it's a stereotype by some who don't know, it hit a nerve with me that's all.

Posted by: Skip at May 03, 2016 04:46 PM (PFZvJ)

394 Just so. We should just change the name of the country to Navelgazia.
Posted by: Citizen Cake at May 03, 2016 04:45 PM (ppaKI)

-----

Im stealing that.

Posted by: fixerupper at May 03, 2016 04:46 PM (8XRCm)

395 Anyone accusing me of "going little green footballs" by daring to express my thoughts on my own fucking blog, immediately gets an actual Little Green Footballs treatment, and gets banned.

Does that work for everyone?
Posted by: ace


Why give them what they seek?

There's wealth in your challenge to commenters like Dumb Dumb and others that troll.

Give them a post level comment, with all the proof they can muster.

Easiest content available.

Posted by: weft cut-loop at May 03, 2016 04:46 PM (OcD4G)

396 I was watering my lawn in 2014 when it suddenly dawned on me that I was God.
Posted by: Glenn Beck at May 03, 2016 04:32 PM (4ErVI)

Through the circular firing squad this place has still got it.

Posted by: Ghost of kari - certified sidebar at May 03, 2016 04:46 PM (xuouz)

397 I am not a pastor but I do hope to be sleeping with one soon.
Posted by: grammie winger at May 03, 2016 04:45 PM (dFi94)


That sounds so much dirtier than it is.

Posted by: HopefulMonster Bravely supporting kittens at May 03, 2016 04:46 PM (uURQL)

398 "I mean, Europe is largely atheist/agnostic, yet they have stricter abortion laws than we do."

That sounds like a bullshit comparison.

For one thing, Roe v. Wade shoves the process down the throat of every state, democracy be damned. So there is a minimum of allowance that all US states HAVE to toe, and it's constantly being probed and pushed back; most recently (and successfully) by Texas.

Second, there are many nations in Europe, with very different histories and laws, both in and out of the EU. Comparing an entire continent's legal practices with a single federal nation's is impossible.
Posted by: Apostate

_____________


Not really.

because SoCons have insisted on extremist nonsense like "no abortion for rape cases", a far more religious part of the world (USA) has instead embraced pro-choice politics.

But because European countries basically have agreement on the legality of abortion, far more reasonable laws have been agreed upon by the population that would seem right-wing here in the States.

I really do believe SoCons have made the abortion laws worse in this country. Had a more centrist position been the agreed upon, we would have been much better off.

Posted by: Bally at May 03, 2016 04:47 PM (C6cBW)

399 "There are more important things to worry about at the moment, like protecting the integrity of the nation," is the general claim.

Understood -- and I agree. Pro-lifers are being, they say, tactical here, and reasonable about what can and cannot be done.

This willingness to give ground on especially this issue is why the Republicans will always lose. When you can't stand up for your own principles no one else will.

I can make a libertarian argument that has NO religious basis against abortion and have for years. Personally, this is not something I compromise on at all. How can I when it relates equal application of the law and the rights of all living people?

Posted by: lightning at May 03, 2016 04:47 PM (AP+SF)

400 Rectification of So-Called Names

http://politicalhat.com/?p=11672
-------------

Thanks for the link. I agree completely.

Posted by: Masturbatin' Pete at May 03, 2016 04:47 PM (A6sW3)

401 It's all about that four letter word: jobs.

Yesterday on tv they were talking, all excited, about how the middle class in China is expanding at an amazing rate. New markets yay!
@-holes.

The country that lets it people work and produce benefits. So simple even the ChiComs get it.

Americans want jobs. Desperately.
Posted by: @votermom at May 03, 2016 04:40 PM (nbrY/)


There are plenty of jobs out there. Nobody's stopping you from working, although I'd be happy if my taxes and regulations were drastically reduced.

If you think I'm going to pay more for stuff just so some lazy, stupid, fat, white trash piece of shit screams "dey took mah jerb!" you can go kill yourself.

I'm strongly conservative, but if Trump is the nominee I'm voting third party and donating money to Clinton. If the GOP (which I no longer belong to) is now the party of Dumb Shit White Welfare Trailer Trash, then fuck them.

I prefer small gov't, but I'm doing great financially right now and will happily team up with the Dems to destroy what's left of the poor white trash in this country if it makes me a few more bucks. That's the price you pay for trying to use my own government against me to line your pockets.

If the GOP is now anti-free trade, then the GOP is dead and I look forward to working with the Dems to further destroy you and your kind.

Posted by: Ugh at May 03, 2016 04:47 PM (AxklU)

402

no clue what little green footballs even means

Posted by: artisanal 'ette mun 2 - 1 atl - insane at May 03, 2016 04:47 PM (qCMvj)

403 This is a little off topic, but does it bother anyone that Trump this morning said Cruz's dad shouldn't be ''allowed" to say things?

I don't vote for anyone who says that. Hillary has said that, and now so has Trump.

Link in my name.


Posted by: stace at May 03, 2016 04:47 PM (ozZau)

404 Trump somewhere down the line has been pro Planned non Parenthood

Posted by: Skip at May 03, 2016 04:48 PM (PFZvJ)

405 409

no clue what little green footballs even means

Posted by: artisanal 'ette mun 2 - 1 atl - insane at May 03, 2016 04:47 PM (qCMvj)


And your life will be happier and longer for it.

Posted by: Iblis at May 03, 2016 04:48 PM (9221z)

406 no clue what little green footballs even means

Posted by: artisanal 'ette mun 2 - 1 atl - insane at May 03, 2016 04:47 PM (qCMvj)

----

count your blessings

Posted by: fixerupper at May 03, 2016 04:48 PM (8XRCm)

407 hundred bucks says we find out before the general that abortion hasn't been quite irrelevant to his life up to now
Posted by: ace at May 03, 2016 04:44 PM (dciA+)

I wouldn't be surprised if he moved to the left of Hillary in a number of issues.

Also, I did not know about his history with women. I don't care how loudmouthed he gets, it's going to take a big chunk out of his behind,big time.

Posted by: chique d'afrique at May 03, 2016 04:48 PM (iynDC)

408 Pointed out something earlier in the day and in the ONT that no one has picked up on: Obamacare prices are set to go up double digits starting in the fall.

The markets open November 1st, a week before the elections.

Don't tell me that double digit price increases for insurance that the working poor/ middle class already can't afford is going to benefit Queen Hillary.

Posted by: shibumi who is awaiting SMOD at May 03, 2016 04:48 PM (AHDxb)

409 Well, Trump has gone from "very pro choice", even so far as wanting to keeping *partial birth abortion* legal, all the way to "very pro life", even so far as wanting to throw women in jail for getting an abortion. So yes he's flip-flopped, but the only question is, no one knows which is the "flip" and which is the "flop".
Posted by: chemjeff at May 03, 2016 04:32 PM (dpnZC)

Chemjeff, at least lets's have an honest conversation about this. Trump was asked IF abortion was declared illegal, should women who had abortions be given jail time.
In what used to be the USA, we had laws that stated what could and couldn't be done and what was the penalty for violating those laws . Most violations of the law result in either a fine, jail time, or both.
So please don't try to convince us that Trump said women who currently obtain an abortion, which is legal to obtain in this country, should be jailed.

Also, once upon a time I was a female college student. I also thought at the time that abortion should be legal because anyone my age who forgot the birth control or messed up it's use, should be able to go in and have this clump of cells swept out. I gave no more thought to what that actually meant, or would emotionally entail than nothing.

As I got older, had experience with children, pregnancies, etc. I began to understand the sanctity of life and what choices we make can do to that life and to ourselves.

I fault NO ONE for being pro abortion and then later coming to a realization of what it is and becoming anti abortion. And I don't care how late in life this happens.

What I find disturbing is someone like Obama, age 54 ,who has two daughters, and who still believes that abortion, including partial birth abortion, is acceptable and a "good' choice.

Posted by: Jen the original at May 03, 2016 04:48 PM (391wI)

410 Not fighting the social conservative limited government fight has led to this, and I place the blame squarely at the feet of the GOP.


FIFY

Posted by: MTF at May 03, 2016 04:48 PM (/m8T6)

411 It is much simpler to me. Four of the candidates are pulling towards government as a solution for whatever demons exist in reality or that they erect. One is offering to go the other direction - let you solve your own problems and shrink the government wherever possible.

So other than Cruz, we're really just talking about how fast we want to race off the cliff.

Posted by: blankminde at May 03, 2016 04:49 PM (Nkx08)

412 Though Giuliani was one of my favorite politicians (and I had been a fan of his since he was mob-busting US Attorney), I couldn't really support him for President in 2008.

Ditto. Rudy is a great guy and was a great mayor.

His pro-choice position would crack the party, I thought.

It was Rudy's softness on illegals that was the big problem.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at May 03, 2016 04:49 PM (zc3Db)

413 "I really do believe SoCons have made the abortion laws worse in this country. Had a more centrist position been the agreed upon, we would have been much better off."

-----------

Not in Roe World. There's no room for a "centrist" position on abortion unless you clear out Roe. Because what Roe and its progeny stand for is that you can get an abortion at any time as long as you need it for your "health," including mental health, as determined by the guy who stands to profit from performing the abortion.

That's no restriction at all.

Posted by: Masturbatin' Pete at May 03, 2016 04:49 PM (26zxJ)

414 Shibumi who is awaiting SMOD at May 03, 2016 04:35 PM (AHDxb)

I shall refer to your friend as a 10 percenter.

Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at May 03, 2016 04:49 PM (6qmBU)

415 Social conservatism shouldn't be defined by abortion.

Abortion is a behavior that affects someone who isn't able to choose the behavior.

Gay rights, legalizing substances, etc. are different because they involve grown ups living the way they want.

Posted by: Gizzard at May 03, 2016 04:49 PM (Ts+GO)

416 There are plenty of jobs out there. Nobody's stopping you from working,

---

THIS blindness is why Trump is getting the votes.
In some enclaves, most notably DC, there are jobs, good jobs.
But screw the rest of the country.

Posted by: @votermom at May 03, 2016 04:50 PM (nbrY/)

417 That being said, is it better to not vote and let
Hillary and the army of Muslims/Mexicans/Others take over our country
and change it for us and our children forever?

Or is it better to
consider accepting Trump to stop the flow of immigrants that could turn
us into the land of Rape and Coverups, like Europe?

To put it
another way... the Muslim invasion could be seen an an existential
threat to Western Europe. Do we want to elect a president that openly
supports creating an existential threat to our way of life in the U.S?


Posted by: shibumi who is awaiting SMOD at May 03, 2016 04:43 PM (AHDxb)

You're begging the question.
Why do you believe that Trump will do the things he says, when he has implied the exact opposite on almost every topic? Thats exactly what Obama does. I guess the tactic works....they both seem to have attracted the same cultish blind devotion in their supporters.

Posted by: Mimzey at May 03, 2016 04:50 PM (aRUb8)

418 We fixed all of society's problems here yet?

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at May 03, 2016 04:50 PM (AbFmZ)

419 Heard Dave Brat on a podcast the other day.

My angle has always been whatever is "morally wrong".

He switched it to ace's soft form. Ask the person, what is "morally right"? That would send send us down some interesting paths.

Brilliant guy.

Posted by: Golfman at May 03, 2016 04:50 PM (48QDY)

420 It does seem as though quite a big contingent in the comments section has gone off the rails. There's an ugly anti-Christian element here that I was never aware of+

====

Not seeing it. Truly.

Posted by: Bigby's Hobo Gloves at May 03, 2016 04:50 PM (3ZtZW)

421 B) Evangelical voters never really cared all that much about it anyway.





Posted by: Bally at May 03, 2016 04:32 PM (C6cBW)



Nonsense. They care. They just know that you don't, and believe you're going to hell for it. While still praying for your pitiful soul anyway.
Posted by: BurtTC
___________



You think if someone isn't politically pro-life, they go to Hell?

great belief system you have there.

Posted by: Bally at May 03, 2016 04:50 PM (C6cBW)

422 If you could honestly disconnect the tenets of social conservatism from government and the law, it would probably be less of an issue. But the problem is that liberal obfuscate the law in order to push their social issues.

Why is that "right" or perhaps "more acceptable"?

They've used subterfuge such as Roe v. Wade, one of the most arguably worst decisions in our history to push abortion as a state sanctioned "right". But my "Jesusy" belief that abortion is murder and wrong is somehow now an anathema to the party because "people in Washington" feel differently?

Ultimately I don't obviously believe in abortion. But I also believe that's a personal decision for someone to make and I don't believe government should have any role, pro or con. But that's not the case.

And by the way, I could go on with the social issues corruption using the law as a cudgel with things like the Civil Rights Act, Title 18, etc. But you know, fighting against that tide somehow makes social conservatives a quaint pariah's or something...

Posted by: Marcus T at May 03, 2016 04:51 PM (O0lVq)

423 >>hundred bucks says we find out before the general that abortion hasn't been quite irrelevant to his life up to now

I wonder how many times we are going to see that interview he gave to Howard Stern comparing his sexual conquests and dodging STDs to serving in Vietnam.

Nah, the Dems would never do that. It would be mean.

Posted by: JackStraw at May 03, 2016 04:51 PM (/tuJf)

424 well, I'll just leave this funny post tearing up David Brooks again, to cheer some up


David Brooks should stay in his little bourgeois strata

If in the Land of the Blind, the one-eyed man is king, then columnist David Brooks of the New York Times is blind, deaf and dumb inside the Beltway.

In an election year where all the experts have been exactly wrong about absolutely everything, it really is something of a feat to be as spectacularly and enthusiastically wrong as Mr. Brooks.


http://bit.ly/21t3Pwf

the washington times

time to take a break

Posted by: artisanal 'ette mun 2 - 1 atl - insane at May 03, 2016 04:51 PM (qCMvj)

425 The markets open November 1st, a week before the elections.

Don't tell me that double digit price increases for insurance that the working poor/ middle class already can't afford is going to benefit Queen Hillary.
Posted by: shibumi who is awaiting SMOD at May 03, 2016 04:48 PM (AHDxb

Rules are for suckas
Posted by: Ba-rock Obama

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at May 03, 2016 04:51 PM (voOPb)

426 If Trump's liberalism can be accepted, why can't the liberalism of Giuliani (or a Giuliani type to be named later) be accepted?

It continues to amaze me that the party who said, while settling for Johnny McMaverick, that Rudy! was simply far, far too liberal to represent the GOP, is now a mere 8-years later going to endorse another NY Liberal who, to the extent any of his positions can be understood or believed, is to the left of Rudy! on virtually every social issue.

Then again, as a pro-lifer (and yeah, a pro-life libertarian Christian - I must be the rarest of ALL species) I have to come to terms with the fact that as we cannot guarantee the right to life even of a living, breathing abortion survivor in every hamlet in this nation we are simply not going to see an end to the daily sacrifice of upwards of 4000-babies to Molech for the unforgivable crime of being conceived at an inconvenient time in their creators' lives.

Posted by: DocJ at May 03, 2016 04:51 PM (zrsn3)

427 It's true, I've been responsible for more unplanned pregnancies than Woodstock. Condoms feel weird! Not classy! But at least I like chicks, unlike Lyin' Ted.

Posted by: Donald Trump, hetero at large at May 03, 2016 04:51 PM (tWE9w)

428 Works for me, your blog. If you went nuts and reversed yourself on every topic, it would be a hell of a lot more obvious than just frustration and exasperation with voters. I can't work out why on earth more people who like Trump aren't supporting Cruz either.

I'm just not as close to things as you are any longer. I wrote the nation off in 2012. Saves on Tums and helps me sleep at night.



Ding ding ding!

Posted by: rickb223 at May 03, 2016 04:51 PM (cWLG9)

429 "Don't tell me that double digit price increases for insurance that the working poor/ middle class already can't afford is going to benefit Queen Hillary. "

-----

The double digit price increases for insurance that the working poor/ middle class already can't afford won't affect Queen Hillary one bit, for the working poor/ middle class is where the Free Shit Army resides, and the Free Shit Army votes for the Party of Free Shit whether the Party of Free Shit delivers the Free Shit or not.

Posted by: Masturbatin' Pete at May 03, 2016 04:51 PM (A6sW3)

430 I never went to little green footballs & this is your blog Ace, I'm not sure what I'd do. But if you're writing about something I'm not interested in, I skip it & come back later.

Posted by: Carol at May 03, 2016 04:51 PM (sj3Ax)

431 "hundred bucks says we find out before the general that abortion hasn't been quite irrelevant to his life up to now"
_______________________________

That's entirely possible and I've thought about it - in which case he'd probably have been pro-getridofit and leave me alone. That said, it's also possible that being a man of some means he would have taken some extra precautions to avoid the trap.

Posted by: Alec Leamas at May 03, 2016 04:51 PM (RfZaB)

432 I really do believe SoCons have made the abortion
laws worse in this country. Had a more centrist position been the
agreed upon, we would have been much better off.

Posted by: Bally at May 03, 2016 04:47 PM (C6cBW)


Kill FEWER babies. Got it. You're one of those.

I don't believe you attend an Evangelical Church.

Posted by: BurtTC at May 03, 2016 04:52 PM (TOk1P)

433 I would never challenge anyone to a I.Q. test on this blog. Jeepers. Ala comment 318, I would sit and cry.

Posted by: washrivergal at May 03, 2016 04:52 PM (CFc5L)

434 Mwxican immigrants are quite religious, yet they vote overwhelmingly for pro-abortion Democrats without a single thought

Posted by: La Frontera at May 03, 2016 04:52 PM (H6mA6)

435 Not in Roe World. There's no room for a "centrist" position on abortion unless you clear out Roe. Because what Roe and its progeny stand for is that you can get an abortion at any time as long as you need it for your "health," including mental health, as determined by the guy who stands to profit from performing the abortion.

That's no restriction at all.

Posted by: Masturbatin' Pete at May 03, 2016 04:49 PM (26zxJ)


Bingo.

And anyone who has any respect for the Rule of Law should be against Roe for being such a totally insane piece of shit decision with no basis in language, law, or reality.

One doesn't have to be a social conservative to be against Roe, just a thinking person.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at May 03, 2016 04:52 PM (zc3Db)

436 "not true. self-declared "evangelicals" support Trump by a majority in most states -- now, I don't think they're really evangelical"
posted by ace

---

I believe this statement is misguided. I'm from heart of the Bible Belt and I got to tell you, a lot of very strong Christians I know (and I believe this is true all across the south) are voting trump. The reason for this is because "evangelical" is exists very strongly as a cultural force. You see this with the mega churches and events such as Catalyst. What it is not, is a political force. They actively choose not to be a political force because they believe to do so add politics to religion is even worse than adding religion to politics.

There is an evangelical movement that's very strong, and not just people identifying as Christians. They just don't want politics involved in that.

Posted by: Connor at May 03, 2016 04:52 PM (yYKwt)

437 I'm prolife and I will never compromise on the issue. Ever.

Posted by: Lauren at May 03, 2016 04:52 PM (pEHSp)

438 295
sorry, but if you won't defend the right to life of an innocent baby.....you already have ceded the entire country to the left





Posted by: phoenixgirl at May 03, 2016 04:24 PM (0O7c5)





Then you better get started on that Amendment banning abortion
because short of that you will not be able to do so. And that means you
are going to have to change the culture.



The president is, for the most part, irrelevant to the entire question.

Posted by: *Mikey NTH - The Outrage Outlet is Sense and Censorship Free! at May 03, 2016 04:32 PM (hLRSq)
the pro lifers i know don't want an amendment all we want is ZERO of our tax dollars state or federal going to fund the murder of innocent children....and subsequent sale of their body parts for profit.......

Posted by: phoenixgirl at May 03, 2016 04:52 PM (0O7c5)

439 Posted by: Masturbatin' Pete at May 03, 2016 04:49 PM (26zxJ)
=============================================


What is so bittersweet is the woman known as "Jane Roe" is now a prominant pro-life advocate and a Christian.

Posted by: grammie winger at May 03, 2016 04:52 PM (dFi94)

440 Trump is Mitt Romney without the Chamber of Commerce.

If Trump loses, it will be for the same reason that Romney lost (less the Chamber).

Posted by: Karl Marx at May 03, 2016 04:52 PM (e8kgV)

441
Not in Roe World. There's no room for a "centrist" position on abortion unless you clear out Roe.


I agree, that court decision rammed the entire topic far to the left. The centrist position is 'state issue, you decide.' The conservative position is 'you may not deprive a human being of their life without due process, even when they are very small and helpless.'

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at May 03, 2016 04:52 PM (39g3+)

442 You were never mentioned at all. And no one used the word "fag." Though I hear "cuck" is a popular one among Trumpites...
Either you're confused, or you lost me.
Posted by: Apostate at May 03, 2016 04:49 PM (HYy1S)

Yeah I know I was never mentioned at all. I just weighed in anyway, because it's a comment section. Just don't insult people.

Insinuating I'm confused and call people the c-word and calling me a trumpite is insulting.

Just be cool man. Just chill out.

Posted by: Ghost of kari - certified sidebar at May 03, 2016 04:53 PM (xuouz)

443 It is not a manicean choice between jettisoning "So-cons" and having a 24/7 pro-life-apalooza.

Did the Dems run on trannies in womens restroom ten years ago? Did the Dems run on Gay marriage and forcing bakers to bake the cake twenty years ago?

No.

They pushed the topics that allowed them to win, and then pushed through their agenda once in power with little public fanfare.

If you want to not emphasize social issues, that's one thing, but telling people to take a flying leap is probably not a good idea.

Posted by: The Political Hat at May 03, 2016 04:53 PM (vBeA5)

444 Abortion is a behavior that affects someone who isn't able to choose the behavior.

Gay rights, legalizing substances, etc. are different because they involve grown ups living the way they want.

Posted by: Gizzard


Whole lotta equivocation in that.

You may want to read up on the issues. Or not.

Posted by: weft cut-loop at May 03, 2016 04:53 PM (OcD4G)

445 Why would I want to support this just because the guy spewing it has an R behind his name?

Because the alternative is a detailed lawyerly technocratic solution that loses in November? (I did just vote for Ted warts and all today).

Posted by: DaveA at May 03, 2016 04:53 PM (DL2i+)

446 >>THIS blindness is why Trump is getting the votes.
In some enclaves, most notably DC, there are jobs, good jobs.
But screw the rest of the country.

And Trumps raging against Carrier and promising to use the power of the government to punish them for the heresy of moving to Mexico to avoid the crushing taxes and regulations coming out of DC is why you aren't getting any relief from Trump.

Posted by: JackStraw at May 03, 2016 04:53 PM (/tuJf)

447 Nonsense. They care. They just know that you don't,
and believe you're going to hell for it. While still praying for your
pitiful soul anyway.

Posted by: BurtTC

___________







You think if someone isn't politically pro-life, they go to Hell?



great belief system you have there.

Posted by: Bally at May 03, 2016 04:50 PM (C6cBW)


You're also lying. Which is also a sin.

Posted by: BurtTC at May 03, 2016 04:53 PM (TOk1P)

448 Fact is, there currently isn't a Social Conservative in the GOP, hasn't been that way for decades. We are constantly promised a social conservative but they are ALWAYS liberal on the issues once they get in office. Not going to play their game any more.

Posted by: Walknot at May 03, 2016 04:53 PM (FnHBZ)

449
Kill FEWER babies. Got it. You're one of those.

I don't believe you attend an Evangelical Church.
Posted by: BurtTC


I'm sure Christ would have something to say about how judgmental you are.

So you've now said I'm going to Hell and don't attend church.

Got it. My, you really are a wonderful Christian brother.

Posted by: Bally at May 03, 2016 04:54 PM (C6cBW)

450 I saw Little Green Footballs open up for Blue Oyster Cult at the Kowbell Arena on 1977.

Posted by: Chris Walken at May 03, 2016 04:54 PM (yn6XZ)

451 "I really do believe SoCons have made the abortion laws worse in this
country. Had a more centrist position been the agreed upon, we would
have been much better off."
________________________________________

Sir, I only wish that you serve as my slave half of your life.

This is a much more reasonable position than full chattel slavery, yes?

Posted by: Alec Leamas at May 03, 2016 04:54 PM (RfZaB)

452 I don't know--I think people are not considering that Trump is a unique "celebrity " candidate that advertised for cross over voting from Democrats, Cruz is a particularly strident social conservative--and that the Republican field was divided amongst sixteen candidates -all of which makes it hard to believe any fast and hard conclusions.

Old Republican friend of mine announced it was over to me as soon as he realized how many candidates were allowed to run.

Posted by: Biden Is In The Ball Pit at May 03, 2016 04:54 PM (mcm0N)

453 You have not persuaded me, you can not convert me, you can not 'turn' me into one of your agents. Your brilliant logic has no effect on my convictions.

It's best if we don't talk about it any further. Don't push me.
Posted by: Skandia Recluse at May 03, 2016 04:37 PM (QjabV)


???

And yet you came here voluntarily. If you're unhappy, then perhaps another blog is a better fit for you.

Posted by: Maetenloch at May 03, 2016 04:54 PM (pAlYe)

454 I am seeing a No True Scotsmen ultimatum though.

Posted by: Bigby's Hobo Gloves at May 03, 2016 04:54 PM (3ZtZW)

455 The thing is that the economy is on the verge of collapse. Europe and Japan are for pushing negative interest rates, we are losing 30-50k businesses a year, and male employee is the worst ever and heading south. Plus, internationally we are on the verge of WWIII on several fronts.

So a majority of apparently brain dead GOP nitwits wants to elect a lying, swindler /con artist who has bankrupted multiple businesses, has no serious plans or insights on how to turn the economy around and who wants a "light footprint" to deal the numerous flash points around the globe. WTF?

I am religious but not an ultra conservative on social issues. What is important there is keeping our Constitutional Rights. But above all else, we must deal with that fact that the world is falling apart as we speak.

So the response of millions of Republicans is to nominate a ridiculously self centered spoiled brat Neo Nazi Crony Socialist Man Child who has only thought of himself since he was an adult? Are you kidding me?

If that happens, I am done forever with the Pubs and will do everything possible to destroy all but the most conservative Republicans. The rest of Pub Weasels are traitorously despicable.



Posted by: Unsk at May 03, 2016 04:54 PM (Jt8Pi)

456 Have a good night everyone

Posted by: Bigby's Hobo Gloves at May 03, 2016 04:54 PM (3ZtZW)

457 I would never challenge anyone to a I.Q. test on this blog.

Me am smart gudder.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at May 03, 2016 04:55 PM (39g3+)

458 Trump is Mitt Romney without the Chamber of Commerce.
If Trump loses, it will be for the same reason that Romney lost (less the Chamber).
Posted by: Karl Marx at May 03, 2016 04:52 PM (e8kgV)

Romney didn't have a single issue that I can even remember. We were supposed to vote for him because he was a nice man.

Trump has stances. People on this blog think he's either lying about them or that he lacks the mental capacity to implement them, but they're right-wing stances nonetheless.

Posted by: Ghost of kari - certified sidebar at May 03, 2016 04:55 PM (xuouz)

459 A election between the corrupt politician and the enabler of corruption isn't really a choice.

If we can't close the market at least we can have a buyer in front.

Posted by: DaveA at May 03, 2016 04:55 PM (DL2i+)

460 You overturn Roe and have a different president roll back some of the soical overreach and watch how many people on both sides lose their sine qua non.

Posted by: Marcus T at May 03, 2016 04:56 PM (O0lVq)

461 " really do believe SoCons have made the abortion laws worse in this
country. Had a more centrist position been the agreed upon, we would
have been much better off."
______________________"

How do you figure? SCOTUS decreed abortion til birth without any input from anyone.

Posted by: Lauren at May 03, 2016 04:56 PM (pEHSp)

462 I'm prolife and I will never compromise on the issue. Ever.

Posted by: Lauren at May 03, 2016 04:52 PM (pEHSp)
========================================

I'm right next to you, Lauren. I've seen so much damage done to women. Years of regret and pain. I could have been one of them. Two occasions - doctors told me to kill my own children. My own mother urged me to kill them. I cut her some slack because she's my mom and she was afraid I was going to die. So I let that go. But where would I be today if I had killed them? It's unthinkable.

Posted by: grammie winger at May 03, 2016 04:56 PM (dFi94)

463 DaveA: Trump IS the exception to the This Only Applies to Trump Rule.
That's how "No, Fuck You" works. Then the fight starts.


Agreed. So much of this has little at all to do with Trump, and I'm what one could pigeonhole as a "Trumpster". This is an anti-vote. The more the entrenched wail, the more confident I am that Trump is the contemporary solution.

SMOD personified. Creative destruction of an utterly corrupt Federal and Party system.

Uniparty delenda est.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at May 03, 2016 04:56 PM (1CroS)

464 nood

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at May 03, 2016 04:56 PM (vvmPQ)

465 I will say this: most of the AoS Trump supporters don't just fling insults around. But that's partially because most of the really assholeish ones got culled in the past few months in one of the waves of banning

And of course, the most toxic, derogatory and caustic anti-Trumpers were also banned, as they should have been.

Posted by: broseidon on his magic glowing square at May 03, 2016 04:56 PM (tWE9w)

466 424 There are plenty of jobs out there. Nobody's stopping you from working,

---

THIS blindness is why Trump is getting the votes.
In some enclaves, most notably DC, there are jobs, good jobs.
But screw the rest of the country.
Posted by: @votermom at May 03, 2016 04:50 PM (nbrY/)


I don't live anywhere near DC. In fact, I live in one of the poorest areas of the country, and yet everywhere here is hiring.

Oh, I see, you don't want to do honest work for honest pay. You expect to be able to walk out of high school with a diploma and get a job screwing widgets together with great pay and full benefits to support your brood of white trash, just like the old union days.

The unions are dead, the free market killed them. Here are your options, you can:

- Work at Walmart for minimum wage and just accept that you contribute almost nothing to the world and praise God every day that you live in a society so rich that someone like you can make a living restocking shelves.

- Do what I did and develop some actual skills which people are willing to pay for.

- Go back to your trailer park and die in a puddle of your own filth, EBT cards, reality TV shows and SSI checks while your daughter sells her body for oxycodone.

I don't really care which you do, so long as I can stop paying your way soon. Trump is not going to be your white trash savior. He despises people like you, as do all decent human beings.

Posted by: Ugh at May 03, 2016 04:56 PM (AxklU)

467 "I'm strongly conservative, but if Trump is the nominee I'm voting third
party and donating money to Clinton. If the GOP (which I no longer
belong to) is now the party of Dumb Shit White Welfare Trailer Trash,
then fuck them."

Kevin Williamson, is that you?

Posted by: torquewrench at May 03, 2016 04:56 PM (noWW6)

468 That's a big takeaway for me: How very much part of the part seems to dislike "Jesusy" candidates like Ted Cruz. Who isn't really all that Jesusy. He's not Sam Brownback, for crying out loud.

*******

Have you heard Cruz's father? Plus Cruz has a clean toga the personality. I liked Santorum better at least he seemed more authentic.

Posted by: Biden Is In The Ball Pit at May 03, 2016 04:57 PM (mcm0N)

469 the more "someone" posts the more it becomes apparent that they are more into moral relativism than Jesus.....sometimes "church" is just another place to be able to say they belong to something instead of being an active participant.....and actually believing in the church's core beliefs.....

Posted by: phoenixgirl at May 03, 2016 04:57 PM (0O7c5)

470 198 Listening to Trump rant on CNN right now about Carrier moving to Mexico. He has the exact same position as Bernie fucking Sanders, punish Carrier by raising taxes on any products they try to import.

Posted by: JackStraw at May 03, 2016 04:19 PM (/tuJf)

Carrier was a big employer in Indiana so Trump's rant about them resonates with a lot of rust belt workers than talking about the Constitution, Putin, or Target's Potty Policies.

The GOP attitude which mirrored NRO's "Move or Die, White Losers" (oh, and donate money because we're a not making a lot of money here) turned away far more voters than regulation wonkery. You don't like Trump's demagoguery if you're a well heeled "Company Man" but it sure resonates with the guy working for Carrier who not only lost his job to Mexico, he's being told he has to pay for the unskilled Mexicans invading America.

Posted by: kbdabear at May 03, 2016 04:57 PM (u1t0Z)

471 I think this debate about conservatism is overshadowed by the reality of people's lives. When you can no longer find employment or support your family, the priorities in your life are reshuffled dramatically. Its easier to argue principles when one can pay the bills and feed the kids.

People are hurting and they want the candidate who is focusing on the most important issues in their lives today. They don't want more debates. They want action. And it is Trump that is projecting that action
whether you agree with his positions or not.

Posted by: Hector at May 03, 2016 04:57 PM (pY6mC)

472
458 I saw Little Green Footballs open up for Blue Oyster Cult at the Kowbell Arena on 1977.
Posted by: Chris Walken at May 03, 2016 04:54 PM (yn6XZ

Thanks for that.

Posted by: Golfman at May 03, 2016 04:57 PM (48QDY)

473 Got it. My, you really are a wonderful Christian brother.

You're getting straw everywhere

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at May 03, 2016 04:58 PM (39g3+)

474 Nice weather today...


Posted by: Sven10077 at May 03, 2016 04:58 PM (g8Hfr)

475 481 Got it. My, you really are a wonderful Christian brother.

You're getting straw everywhere
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at May 03, 2016 04:58 PM (39g3+)

Put that back in my manger.

Posted by: Baby Jesus at May 03, 2016 04:59 PM (0mRoj)

476 I read an article a while back that the party had four main groupings: moderates/liberals, about 30% of the party; moderately conservative voters, about 30%; very conservative and religious voters, 30%; and a last category, very conservative and very secular voters, about 10%. (Which I guess is my own category.)

******

You forget--national security voters. Something like 80% of field grade officers in the military vote Republican.

Posted by: Biden Is In The Ball Pit at May 03, 2016 04:59 PM (mcm0N)

477 Why do you believe that Trump will do the things he says, when he has
implied the exact opposite on almost every topic? Thats exactly what
Obama does. I guess the tactic works....they both seem to have attracted
the same cultish blind devotion in their supporters.
---

I never said I believe Trump will do any of the things he says. LOL. I don't believe any politician, especially the career type.

However... if Hillary gets elected, the Democrats will resoundingly support her. And so will 75% or more of the Republicans. Whatever she wants WILL get done. Just like with King O.

The political class and the media hate Trump. If he gets in, I think he will have a harder time doing anything-- especially anything DAMAGING-- since he'll have the media and politicians screaming at him. So, in the big picture, America might stand a better chance under Trump than under Hillary.

But I could be wrong. Hillary could be the best thing since white sliced bread and vacuum cleaners.


Posted by: shibumi who is awaiting SMOD at May 03, 2016 04:59 PM (AHDxb)

478 Got it. My, you really are a wonderful Christian brother.
---------------
You're getting straw everywhere
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at May 03, 2016 04:58 PM (39g3+)


Someone using "Christian brother" as a club is no "Christian brother".

Posted by: HopefulMonster Bravely supporting kittens at May 03, 2016 04:59 PM (uURQL)

479 I'm sure Christ would have something to say about how judgmental you are.



Posted by: Bally at May 03, 2016 04:54 PM (C6cBW)


You would know what Jesus says about this, if you were not lying about attending Church.


But you are. I'm not judging you. God is.

Posted by: BurtTC at May 03, 2016 04:59 PM (TOk1P)

480 478...

Well said...

Posted by: Hector at May 03, 2016 04:59 PM (pY6mC)

481 And yet you came here voluntarily. If you're unhappy, then perhaps another blog is a better fit for you.
Posted by: Maetenloch at May 03, 2016 04:54 PM


I refer you to the one or five comments higher up in the thread who accuse those who will not fight for their principles as being unprincipled and weak.

I'm trying to avoid the fight that Ace is intent on bringing.

Posted by: Skandia Recluse at May 03, 2016 04:59 PM (QjabV)

482 Exactly my sentiments, Ace.

Posted by: Harun at May 03, 2016 04:59 PM (UBBWX)

483
Most Pro-"Choice" arguments I see revolve around fictions that they tell themselves.
------------------------

It's strange that the public arguments made by the left are so different from those as presented by the pro-lifers who came out against Trump's declaration that women having abortions should be prosecuted: private, personal, moments of terror, despair, and shame. Ironically, I think pro-lifers thus provided the reason abortion will never be eradicated.

Posted by: iforgot at May 03, 2016 04:59 PM (pC96u)

484 It's simple.
Killing babies in the womb is moral and laudable.
Killing babies in the womb is a social good.
The Government must perform social goods.
If you oppose abortion, you are immoral and anti-social.
Death is Life.

Posted by: Lincolntf at May 03, 2016 05:00 PM (2cS/G)

485 "I'm strongly conservative, but..."
Posted by: torquewrench at May 03, 2016 04:56 PM (noWW6)


Heh. Yeah, seeing this phrase preceding an indictment of conservatism makes me trust the speaker about as much as seeing "I voted for Cruz but..." followed by a pro-Trump screed makes me think that person is definitely trust worth.

Posted by: Ghost of kari - certified sidebar at May 03, 2016 05:00 PM (xuouz)

486 >>Romney didn't have a single issue that I can even remember. We were supposed to vote for him because he was a nice man.

Yea, the fact that he ran on reforming entitlements, overturning Obamacare, lowering corporate tax rates and a number of other very prominent issues including deporting illegals, a plan which The Donald called mean, were really below the radar.

I'm beginning to think your support for Trump is just aesthetic and not based on any real issues.

Posted by: JackStraw at May 03, 2016 05:00 PM (/tuJf)

487 Posted by: kbdabear at May 03, 2016 04:57 PM (u1t0Z)

a friend in indiana said the carrier example is not a good one. if i remember correctly, carrier is not keeping up with better new technology and losing market share in their industry. while they are moving....new places are moving in that can actually use the talent of the laid off workers.... i could be wrong.....but this i think is what i was told.......

Posted by: phoenixgirl at May 03, 2016 05:00 PM (0O7c5)

488 478 KBdaBear,

KD "tough love" Williamson Esquire

I never see Bronk giving the Goreons or NAACP tough love...

Posted by: Sven10077 at May 03, 2016 05:00 PM (g8Hfr)

489 Someone previously noted that Mexican's are "religious" but vote Democrat.

Look at black people. If you listed most Republican or conservative "planks" individually, it would look like blacks were the biggest conservatives in the country.

Strong defense?
Lower taxes?
Abortion?
Death penalty?
Gun rights?

Blacks generally come down on the conservative side on every single one of those issues. But you can't tear them away from the Democrats. Why? They are essentially paid to vote Democrat and so they do. It's the same with Mexicans, Muslims and every other minority. But it's not just minorities.
White teachers, cops, firemen, union guys--they are all "paid" in some way to pull the Democrat lever. So are the young college kids.
And so they do.

Posted by: JoeF. at May 03, 2016 05:00 PM (dbf76)

490 But you are. I'm not judging you. God is.
Posted by: BurtTC



You said I'm going to Hell.
I'd call that pretty judgmental. And stupid. And wrong.

But it's a nice little religion you've created for yourself. Too bad it's not Biblical.

Posted by: Bally at May 03, 2016 05:01 PM (C6cBW)

491 I really do believe SoCons have made the abortion laws worse in this country. Had a more centrist position been the agreed upon, we would have been much better off.

Posted by: Bally at May 03, 2016 04:47 PM (C6cBW)


But the right has been pushing centrist positions such as no partial birth abortion, viability as a dividing line, and requiring abortion mills adher to the same standards that other medical facilities.

Posted by: The Political Hat at May 03, 2016 05:01 PM (vBeA5)

492 Cellphone footage shows Precious Enyioko, 30, (pictured left, hanging out the window, and bottom right after the ordeal with two of her children) who was trapped on the fourth story of the burning building with her three children. US airmen, from the nearby Osan Airbase, in Pyeongtaek county, South Korea, had spotted the commotion and assembled a rescue team of locals and military on the ground below (inset). As thick black smoke billowed out the windows of the building, which was gutted by the fire, the desperate mother-of-three was finally persuaded to drop her baby (center) by members of the US military. Video captured the screams of the horrified crowd as the children plummeted down four stories to the crowd below. Incredibly, neither Enyioko nor her three young children were seriously injured in the incident.

http://goo.gl/s7odxD
===========

USA! USA! USA!

Posted by: Bruce With a Wang! at May 03, 2016 05:01 PM (iQIUe)

493 Romney didn't have a single issue that I can even remember. We were supposed to vote for him because he was a nice man.

Trump has stances. People on this blog think he's either lying about them or that he lacks the mental capacity to implement them, but they're right-wing stances nonetheless.
Posted by: Ghost of kari - certified sidebar at May 03, 2016 04:55 PM (xuouz)

You make a great point. The Dems disregarded issues ultimately and just attacked Romney's likability until even this reputation as a decent man was in question across the country...which is pretty incredible considering the man.

My only solace in this election will be that if Trump is the Republican we will all watch as the media and dems throw torches on him while Nick Cage screams from the basket on top of his head. Or something like that. It isn't going to be pretty, but it will be very much deserved.

Posted by: blankminde at May 03, 2016 05:02 PM (Nkx08)

494 Abortion is a behavior that affects someone who isn't able to choose the behavior.

That's not quite complete: Abortion is a behavior that intrinsically forces the will of one individual upon another.

In other words, a perfect match for the 'gressives.

Posted by: Brother Cavil at May 03, 2016 05:02 PM (9krrF)

495 "The GOP attitude which mirrored NRO's "Move or Die, White Losers" (oh, and donate money because we're a not making a lot of money here) "

Ah, I see, welfare is only bad when black people get it. Gotcha.

I love NR for speaking the truth to garbage humans. I think I'm gonna go donate another $250 to them just because it hurts people like you.

Posted by: Ugh at May 03, 2016 05:02 PM (AxklU)

496 If there are good jobs everywhere, why does ShadowStats have the unemployment level at 26%?

And hasn't the largest growth been in service industries, like retail and restaurant workers, which aren't the best paying?

Posted by: shibumi who is awaiting SMOD at May 03, 2016 05:02 PM (AHDxb)

497 478
Thread winner.

Posted by: JoeF. at May 03, 2016 05:02 PM (dbf76)

498 >>>I've read that evangelicals who actually regularly attend church aren't going for Trump for the most part.

well i've speculated that, without numbers -- you might have just read me speculating it.

Posted by: ace at May 03, 2016 05:02 PM (dciA+)

499 though if you have numbers, Chique, I'd like to see my speculation confirmed.

Posted by: ace at May 03, 2016 05:03 PM (dciA+)

500
- Do what I did and develop some actual skills which people are willing to pay for.

--

How nice for you, Ugh. I am sure no illegal immigrant or H1-B immigrant is ever going to replace you.

But half the country is below average in IQ. (Look it up) And we are telling them - develop some skills, go to $college$, so you get a job. Because the irreversible Hand of NAFTA, and TPP, and the EPA, has decreed that manufacturing is forever banned in America.

*wallows in trailer filth*

Posted by: @votermom at May 03, 2016 05:03 PM (nbrY/)

501 ugh, restrain yourself. you are insulting people left and right. ban warning.

Posted by: ace at May 03, 2016 05:04 PM (dciA+)

502
>>Carrier was a big employer in Indiana so Trump's rant about them resonates with a lot of rust belt workers than talking about the Constitution, Putin, or Target's Potty Policies.

So what? So does free healthcare, free college, free everything. If Trump is going to run on liberal positions, the exact same position as Bernie Sanders, then why should I support him?

It's not my fault that people in Indiana don't understand the issues. It is the responsibility of people who want my vote to point out why problems exist and the best way to solve them. I don't want big government solutions and if I did there is a whole party built on the premise.

Posted by: JackStraw at May 03, 2016 05:04 PM (/tuJf)

503 497 Posted by: JoeF. at May 03, 2016 05:00 PM (dbf76)


Correct, the donks buy their voters with federal dollars and the GOP has geniuses like KD "Dr Phil" Williamson who berate their voters for being pissed off they have been betrayed and not protected by their political class....

ie

"why we lose" chapter 666

Posted by: sven10077 at May 03, 2016 05:04 PM (g8Hfr)

504 "I've read that evangelicals who actually regularly attend church aren't going for Trump for the most part. "

But how does that explain South Carolina?

Interesting but I don't buy it.

Posted by: Hector at May 03, 2016 05:05 PM (pY6mC)

505 I just googled David Frum to learn that he was (and is) a strident NeoCon who served in the Bush White House that got us into Iraq. If I'm reading this right, he was against the Tea Party. He signed an amicus brief in favor of SCOTUS ruling for gay marriage.

I could go on.

This guy seems to have been on the wrong side of every important issue since the dawn of his career.

Another useless DC pundit. Why are we using him as a lede.

Posted by: Ignoramus at May 03, 2016 05:05 PM (r1fLd)

506 If you really want a dick wagging IQ contest, I'm legally allowed to administer both the S-B and the WAIS (though only in person, not over the computer, but hey, who's checking?), and I could probably borrow them from my Alma mater's Psych department. Got 5 or 6 hours to spare?

Posted by: broseidon on his magic glowing square at May 03, 2016 05:05 PM (tWE9w)

507 Yea, the fact that he ran on reforming entitlements, overturning Obamacare, lowering corporate tax rates and a number of other very prominent issues including deporting illegals

Yeah... I don't remember any of that. I'm not saying its not true, just that if he did push for any of that it was either so ineffective or such a minor part of the campaign that it didn't resonate or even connect.

Blacks generally come down on the conservative side on every single one of those issues. But you can't tear them away from the Democrats. Why? They are essentially paid to vote Democrat and so they do. It's the same with Mexicans, Muslims and every other minority.

Well, most of them. Most Asians are pretty Republican as I understand it.

But this is why people mocking Bush's 'natural conservative' statement about Mexicans annoys me. They are natural conservatives, they just don't realize that voting for Dems opposes that. The GOP and conservatives in America have done such a shoddy and incompetent job of making that case that voters don't even realize when they're voting against their core beliefs. Having popular culture and media lie constantly about conservatism doesn't help.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at May 03, 2016 05:05 PM (39g3+)

508 This is engaging in myth making. There are many data points being ignored, as usual. How many Americans want abortion outlawed? The millions in the majority of US states that have restricted abortion to the point that PPA must engage in blackmarket body parts. Religious conservatives have turned up to put Reagan in office, twice. Bush-41 once, and Bush-43 twice. Social and Religious conservatives turned out to give the GOPe control of House and Senate in 2010 and 2014. And in 1994 and 1998, and 2000. Each time, win or lose, the Social and Religious Conservatives take the blame. We know every country and nation that shut out its religious conservatives has ceased to be.

Posted by: DaveO at May 03, 2016 05:05 PM (qXtgU)

509 503 Posted by: Ugh at May 03, 2016 05:02 PM (AxklU)


No friend, NRO is rat feces b/c they have gotten quite skilled at berating their base while allowing Ogabe to never berate his.

Posted by: sven10077 at May 03, 2016 05:05 PM (g8Hfr)

510 well i've speculated that, without numbers -- you might have just read me speculating it.
Posted by: ace at May 03, 2016 05:02 PM (dciA+)

507 though if you have numbers, Chique, I'd like to see my speculation confirmed.
Posted by: ace at May 03, 2016 05:03 PM (dciA+)

No, not just you. But I don't have any numbers, unfortunately.

Posted by: chique d'afrique at May 03, 2016 05:06 PM (iynDC)

511 Yea, the fact that he ran on reforming entitlements, overturning Obamacare, lowering corporate tax rates and a number of other very prominent issues including deporting illegals, a plan which The Donald called mean, were really below the radar.
I'm beginning to think your support for Trump is just aesthetic and not based on any real issues.
Posted by: JackStraw at May 03, 2016 05:00 PM (/tuJf)

That's right Jack, the man who engineered the model for Obamacare in Mass, who was sunk by an attack about "women in binders", who failed to take the administration to task on Benghazi, and who picked future GOPe defector Paul "can't beat Joe effing Biden in a debate" Ryan as his running mate was going to cut the corporate tax rate and deport illegals while in office.

Excuse me, I have to see a doctor for the ribs I broke laughing.

It's all moot, by the way, because he didn't win.

Posted by: Ghost of kari - certified sidebar at May 03, 2016 05:06 PM (xuouz)

512 493 "I'm strongly conservative, but..."
Posted by: torquewrench at May 03, 2016 04:56 PM (noWW6)

Heh. Yeah, seeing this phrase preceding an indictment of conservatism makes me trust the speaker about as much as seeing "I voted for Cruz but..." followed by a pro-Trump screed makes me think that person is definitely trust worth.
Posted by: Ghost of kari - certified sidebar at May 03, 2016 05:00 PM (xuouz)


Heh, what did I say that was not conservative? Look, I prefer a small government and decent, conservative society. Cruz might have delivered on those things, which is why I support him.

Donald Trump is a big government authoritarian who is doing a Stephen Colbert "appeal to the dumb hicks" routine. He isn't going to give me a single thing I want.

Choosing between Trump and Hillary sucks, because they are both terrible, but if you think I'm going to support Stupid, Pissed-off White Welfare Trailer Trash over Wealthy, Urban Liberals you're delusional. The latter I can make money on. The former are worthless and undeserving of life.

Posted by: Ugh at May 03, 2016 05:07 PM (AxklU)

513 You think if someone isn't politically pro-life, they go to Hell?



great belief system you have there.

Posted by: Bally at May 03, 2016 04:50 PM (C6cBW)

What does that mean? Can you explain it more?

Posted by: Mimzey at May 03, 2016 05:07 PM (aRUb8)

514 I could probably borrow them from my Alma mater's Psych department. Got 5 or 6 hours to spare?

Is that the one that asks about me flipping over a turtle in the desert? *Fingering blaster*

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at May 03, 2016 05:07 PM (39g3+)

515 478
Thread winner.
Posted by: JoeF. at May 03, 2016 05:02 PM (dbf76)

Second that. Getting elected is different than actually implementing policy.

The workers at Carrier who have lost their job to Mexico aren't sympathizing with Carrier's tax bill or regulation issues. They watch their taxes being used to pay for illegals waving the flag in California and stomping on cop cars, are told that they are evil because they don't want them streaming over the border to the welcome arms of welfare benefits, housing, etc. and Glen Beck's teddy bears, and now Jose's brother in Mexico will be building air conditioners and laughing.

Posted by: Jen the original at May 03, 2016 05:08 PM (391wI)

516 Trump or Cruz doesn't really matter in the end because after the GOPe betrayals of 2010 and 2014, the eventual nominee was doomed before the first GOP candidate announced.

There was a very narrow window toward's a GOP winner in the general and it was shut in early 2015.

So the GOPe fucked us one time too many, leaving them scrambling between a carnival barker or a little liked lawyer who looks like a cross between LBJ and Grandpa Munster and talks like Ned Flanders.

The house was built on a rotted foundation and Trump is the tornado blowing it away

Posted by: kbdabear at May 03, 2016 05:08 PM (u1t0Z)

517 "It's not my fault that people in Indiana don't understand the issues."

Here we go...the self righteousness starts to exude more and more.

You're just so much smarter...the good folks of Indiana just don't know whats best for them. But you do. Exactly what the left thinks.

Posted by: Hector at May 03, 2016 05:08 PM (pY6mC)

518 Priorities.

Ted miscalculated that SoCons would put "their" issues ahead of everything else like they'd typically done before. His advisors planned for the last war.

Voters who see existential level threats change their priorities. Ted himself helped ratchet up the sense of existential threats, but didn't present voters with existential level solutions or much in the way of radical departures from past pieties (social or fiscal). He fell into the trap of his proposals not living up to his rhetoric.

If this really is the End Times Last Chance oh God Glenn Beck Save Us, saying that a Muslim ban is too radical, anti-immigrant rhetoric is too spiteful and mean, no trade wars, lets get back to good ol' Reagan days, etc... doesn't convince me you actually believe what you're selling.

Reap the "extremist" wind, sow the Trump whirlwind. I'll take the chance on radical solutions and breaking with the Bush neocon catechism over the usual fear smear fire brimstone words once again being deployed to justify the same-old tepid half measures.

Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at May 03, 2016 05:08 PM (otoQ3)

519 I think Ace is missing a big point here.

Many of the "social issues" only even exist as issues because the Left conjured them out of thin air and demanded that everyone had an opinion on this-or-that suddenly pressing topic.

I think the majority of people are neither "socially conservative" nor "socially liberal" on these issues, but instead are firmly in the "WTF is the matter with you, talking about this irrelevant balderdash?" camp.

What such people like about Trump is that he tends to (not always, but tends to) sweep aside a lot of these bullshit issues, and in so doing reveal them to be the stupid non-issues that they are.

And I'm not even talking about the self-evidently idiotic and meaningless non-issues which obsess the Left in modern times -- transgender bathrooms, Is drunken sex rape?, and whether Muslims can wear hijabs in the pig slaughterhouse, etc. -- but even longstanding social "issues" which have bored everyone for decades are themselves not even really issues that matter.

Trump symbolizes the freedom to ignore that which you don't really care about either way.

Posted by: zombie at May 03, 2016 05:08 PM (jBuUi)

520 What does that mean? Can you explain it more?

He's just trolling.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at May 03, 2016 05:09 PM (39g3+)

521 Who cares about social issues? Control spending, control immigration, secure the border and strengthen the military. We lost that fight long ago.

Posted by: Hill Country Texan at May 03, 2016 05:10 PM (iQChX)

522 "Ted miscalculated that SoCons would put "their" issues ahead of everything else like they'd typically done before. His advisors planned for the last war."

------------

Ted miscalculated that people would see Trump for what he is. If they did, he'd be the nominee.

Posted by: Masturbatin' Pete at May 03, 2016 05:10 PM (A6sW3)

523 But you are. I'm not judging you. God is.

Posted by: BurtTC







You said I'm going to Hell.

I'd call that pretty judgmental. And stupid. And wrong.



But it's a nice little religion you've created for yourself. Too bad it's not Biblical.



Posted by: Bally at May 03, 2016 05:01 PM (C6cBW)


Actually, you tried starting out by saying Evangelicals don't care about abortion. I corrected you on that point, saying they care, and they think people who DON'T care about it are going to hell. Which, you are making quite clear, you don't.


But then you tried to backtrack, and started tossing around words like "socons." You outed yourself.


You really have no idea what the Bible says, do you.

Posted by: BurtTC at May 03, 2016 05:10 PM (TOk1P)

524 "And hasn't the largest growth been in service industries, like retail and restaurant workers, which aren't the best paying?"

Waiter and bartender jobs, versus manufacturing jobs, in the Obama "recovery":

http://tinyurl.com/go8svpp

Posted by: torquewrench at May 03, 2016 05:10 PM (noWW6)

525 This thread smells like... tarbaby. I am NOT touching it.

Posted by: Bre'r Rabbit at May 03, 2016 05:10 PM (9mTYi)

526 >>Here we go...the self righteousness starts to exude more and more.

>>You're just so much smarter...the good folks of Indiana just don't know whats best for them. But you do. Exactly what the left thinks.

Reading appears not to be a strong suit for you. I clearly said it is the responsibility of the candidates to explain the issue and it most definitely is not the responsibility of the GOP nominee to adopt the economic position of a Democrat Socialist.

And yes, I am smarter than people who think the solution to a company fleeing the US because of high taxes and crushing regulations is to punish the company. If I was dumber and believed this I would be a liberal.

Posted by: JackStraw at May 03, 2016 05:11 PM (/tuJf)

527
I think the GOP killed abortion as a political issue when they refused to even try to defund PP after the "parts for sale" videos came out.

If that didn't get them to do anything then nothing they ever say about abortion can be believed.
Posted by: @votermom at May 03, 2016 04:45 PM (nbrY/)
------------------------

For me, it signaled that they're simply not small government. Why are my wages going to Planned Parenthood, Unplanned Parenthood, Planned Childlessness, or any damned organization that should be fully supported by donations and fees? Why didn't Republicans ever once make THAT argument?

No, instead they showed yet again that the GOPe simply picks a different group of winners than the Dems do.

Posted by: iforgot at May 03, 2016 05:12 PM (pC96u)

528 496 If there are good jobs everywhere, why does ShadowStats have the unemployment level at 26%?

And hasn't the largest growth been in service industries, like retail and restaurant workers, which aren't the best paying?
Posted by: shibumi who is awaiting SMOD at May 03, 2016 05:02 PM (AHDxb)


Because people would rather sit and collect welfare and watch reality TV than work? Duh?

I don't care if they're good-paying jobs or not. It's not my duty to supply anyone with a good-paying job. If a person can't create value and earn their pay, then they'll get minimum wage and like it. It's not like these people are at risk of starving when they can't even waddle through Walmart and have to use a Rascal scooter.

Is it now the position of "conservatives" that "Every white person deserves a high-paying job, without having to learn anything or expend any effort?"

Because that sounds precisely like the crap the Lefties pull. Which explains why so many Trumpkins I've seen also love Bernie.

Posted by: Ugh at May 03, 2016 05:12 PM (AxklU)

529 "Trump or Cruz doesn't really matter in the end because after the GOPe
betrayals of 2010 and 2014, the eventual nominee was doomed before the
first GOP candidate announced."

I tend to view it more through the lens of the GOPe betrayals of 1988, 1990, 1992, 1994, 1996, 1998, 2000, 2002, 2004, 2006, 2008, 2010, 2012, and 2014.

But who's counting?

Posted by: torquewrench at May 03, 2016 05:12 PM (noWW6)

530 Many of the "social issues" only even exist as issues because the Left conjured them out of thin air and demanded that everyone had an opinion on this-or-that suddenly pressing topic.

Yeah most social conservative outrage and yelling is basically "wait! Stop! This is too far!" Its the moderate voice, while radical extremists are screaming that keeping a guy from showering next to your 10 year old daughter is the same as separate drinking fountains for coloreds in 1950.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at May 03, 2016 05:13 PM (39g3+)

531 "I'm sure Christ would have something to say about how judgmental you are.


So you've now said I'm going to Hell and don't attend church.


Got it. My, you really are a wonderful Christian brother."
_____________________________

Did he mention anything about requiring that his followers be credulous dupes?

Posted by: Alec Leamas at May 03, 2016 05:13 PM (RfZaB)

532 Bill Whittle has a totally Jesus-free argument on abortion.

Why can no one in the GOP talk like this?

http://preview.tinyurl.com/h32pdyw

Posted by: Lizzy at May 03, 2016 05:13 PM (NOIQH)

533 Yes, you'll break your ribs laughing at the thought that a flip-flopper who spent most of his life as a left-centrist at best and a liberal at worst will implement any conservative policies. The preceding sentence describes both Mitt Romney and Donald Trump.

Posted by: broseidon on his magic glowing square at May 03, 2016 05:14 PM (tWE9w)

534 Did he mention anything about requiring that his followers be credulous dupes?


Posted by: Alec Leamas at May 03, 2016 05:13 PM (RfZaB)
===========================================

Well, Peter.

Posted by: grammie winger at May 03, 2016 05:15 PM (dFi94)

535
Many of the "social issues" only even exist as issues because the Left conjured them out of thin air and demanded that everyone had an opinion on this-or-that suddenly pressing topic.

--------------------------

Dunno about that. There are a few "hill to die on" people in this very thread.

Posted by: iforgot at May 03, 2016 05:15 PM (pC96u)

536 You really have no idea what the Bible says, do you.

Posted by: BurtTC




Apparently a Christian can't say SoCon? Is that the new rule? Will I got to Hell for that also.

I stand by my assertion that Evangelicals don't care much about the abortion issue anymore. Trump is the proof of that.

It doesn't mean they support abortion, only that they no longer view it in the political context.

I'm glad to see the change. It was a losing issue for Republicans.



Posted by: Bally at May 03, 2016 05:16 PM (C6cBW)

537 I've wondered if it would be helpful to sort of divorce the pro-life movement from the GOP and try to use the NRA model. Obviously, the NRA had great success being a single-issue organization and not really caring about which party you belonged to. But that may only work for guns or 2nd A has more general support than pro-life.

That being said, being pro-life is sort of a threshold issue for me. It is the most pressing issue in this country - for me.

More than that, being pro-life is a proxy for the type of judges you will appoint. If someone is not pro-life, there is no reason for me to believe that they will appoint conservative justices.

And I know the rejoinder will be, well it hasn't worked anyway. But it is still there.

Posted by: SH at May 03, 2016 05:16 PM (gmeXX)

538 "I don't care if they're good-paying jobs or not. It's not my duty to
supply anyone with a good-paying job. If a person can't create value and
earn their pay, then they'll get minimum wage and like it."

This spiel would work a lot better if in between loudly harrumphing, you stopped to light cigars with hundred-dollar bills.

Posted by: torquewrench at May 03, 2016 05:16 PM (noWW6)

539 Yeah I'm pretty hard-line on , hey let's not dismember babies. One of my hills. I have a couple others.

Posted by: grammie winger at May 03, 2016 05:16 PM (dFi94)

540 526...

You clearly stated, "It's not my fault that people in Indiana don't understand the issues."

But you go ahead and backtrack all you want....we all know what you really meant.

Posted by: Hector at May 03, 2016 05:17 PM (pY6mC)

541 Obama's economic recovery is glorious, comrades!
Jobs everywhere!

Posted by: @votermom at May 03, 2016 05:17 PM (nbrY/)

542 >>It is the responsibility of people who want my vote to point out why problems exist and the best way to solve them.

>But you go ahead and backtrack all you want....we all know what you really meant.

You from Indiana?

Posted by: JackStraw at May 03, 2016 05:18 PM (/tuJf)

543 I don't care if they're good-paying jobs or not. It's not my duty to supply anyone with a good-paying job. If a person can't create value and earn their pay, then they'll get minimum wage and like it. It's not like these people are at risk of starving when they can't even waddle through Walmart and have to use a Rascal scooter.

While I understand and to some extent share your frustration, there are not as many jobs out there as you seem to believe. Every time I go out into town (couple times a month) there are more businesses CLOSED. That's a real reduction in the number of jobs. Further, many if not most businesses are still very reluctant and slow to expand in this economy and this administration.

There are jobs, but not as many as you seem to believe. And many of those jobs aren't work someone with low or no skills can get. Its an employer's market. They're not gonna take a risk on someone if they don't have to.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at May 03, 2016 05:19 PM (39g3+)

544 I support Cruz, but when Trump becomes the nominee, what you're saying is, pro-life voters should vote for Hillary, to punish the GOP for selecting Trump?

I would not have expected you to endorse Hillary, Ace, but since you have I guess I'm going to vote for her.

Posted by: Zack at May 03, 2016 05:19 PM (rEXZX)

545 Why the arguments against Trump don't work:

a) Trump wasn't against Iraq war: It doesn't matter what he said then, it matters what he says now

b) Trump isn't for 2nd A: It doesn't matter what he said then, it matters what he says now

c) Trump isn't pro-life: It doesn't matter what he said then, it matters what he says now

d) Trump isn't against amnesty: It doesn't matter what he said then, it matters what he says now

e) Trump said he was for higher taxes: It doesn't matter what he said then, it matters what he says now

Posted by: bjk at May 03, 2016 05:19 PM (x2rNW)

546 hundred bucks says we find out before the general that abortion hasn't been quite irrelevant to his life up to now

I'll go 5$. Not that he mightn't have, but I don't think the GOP professional weasel squad wouldn't have already nailed him with it if it existed or could be reasonably fabricated.

I don't buy the media will turn on him effectively thesis. They throw shit, he Trumps on.

Posted by: DaveA at May 03, 2016 05:19 PM (DL2i+)

547 "Ace, the GOPe pretty much threw socons under the bus and fully funded PP."

So, you vote Cruz.

some did. many preferred "other" issues.

Posted by: Harun at May 03, 2016 05:19 PM (UBBWX)

548 How nice for you, Ugh. I am sure no illegal immigrant or H1-B immigrant is ever going to replace you.

But half the country is below average in IQ. (Look it up) And we are telling them - develop some skills, go to $college$, so you get a job. Because the irreversible Hand of NAFTA, and TPP, and the EPA, has decreed that manufacturing is forever banned in America.

*wallows in trailer filth*
Posted by: @votermom at May 03, 2016 05:03 PM (nbrY/)


No, no illegal or H-1B is ever going to replace me. Do you know why? Because I'm extremely good at what I do and I have no doubt I can beat 99% of all comers. I welcome the competition, because I know I can win and earn good money doing it.

Yes, how horrible of us to tell Americans to develop skills or learn something so they can get a job. America was built by people who didn't develop skills or did anything to better themselves. We're great because we got lucky, huh?

Do you want to know what killed America? Your attitude. "I don't have to better myself or learn anything. I'm entitled to the best of everything without having to actually work for it. The government should protect me from competition and my own inability to make good decisions! That's what government is for: taking care of people."

Congratulations, you're a Marxist.

Posted by: Ugh at May 03, 2016 05:19 PM (AxklU)

549
Posted by: Ignoramus at May 03, 2016 05:05 PM (r1fLd)


---------------------------

Frum wrote my favorite explanation of Jeb Bush.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/02/is-jeb-bush-a-republican-obama/385168/

Posted by: iforgot at May 03, 2016 05:20 PM (pC96u)

550 I'm very much pro-life, but it is not in my top four concerns. But I understand why it is for many people. But here's the thing--every conservative and evangelical that is willing to pull the lever for Trump is a hypocrite. And there naive to believe him--he's a serial liar without a core belief in his bloviating body. And I really wish people would stop prioritizing charisma in politicians--it's not a good trait. It just means the ability to get people to not evaluate you rationally but only emotionally. Hitler was charismatic as was Jerry Jones. I don't trust charismatics. Wouldn't it be nice to have super president who actually understands and believes in the Constitution and can think and act strategically? Just sayin...

Posted by: IanDeal at May 03, 2016 05:21 PM (teGBX)

551 Great. Now I'm a white trailer trash Marxist.

Posted by: @votermom at May 03, 2016 05:21 PM (nbrY/)

552 Dunno about that. There are a few "hill to die on" people in this very thread.

Which of those hills came about as the result of anything except the radical left pushing an issue?

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at May 03, 2016 05:22 PM (39g3+)

553 *Looks around*

*Wonders what stock one buys when many nervous breakdowns appear imminent.*

*REITs that own sanitariums?*

Posted by: Meremortal at May 03, 2016 05:22 PM (3myMJ)

554 Well, the Acela GOP got its New Non-Conservative Base. It may not exactly speak Spanish like they wanted, but they succeeded in driving conservatives out.

Posted by: steveegg at May 03, 2016 05:22 PM (v6+HN)

555 Great. Now I'm a white trailer trash Marxist.

Posted by: @votermom at May 03, 2016 05:21 PM (nbrY/)
==========================================

I knew there was something kinda fishy about you.

Posted by: grammie winger at May 03, 2016 05:23 PM (dFi94)

556 It was Rudy's softness on illegals that was the big problem.

It was the Milken affair that soured me forever on His Honor.

Posted by: Grump928(c) muses at May 03, 2016 05:24 PM (evdj2)

557 I knew there was something kinda fishy about you.
Posted by: grammie winger at May 03, 2016 05:23 PM (dFi94)

*sniffs armpit*
I swear I showered just last week!

Posted by: @votermom at May 03, 2016 05:24 PM (nbrY/)

558 Congratulations, you're a Marxist.
Posted by: Ugh at May 03, 2016

And you sir, are an asshole. You just have an ugly way about you. Even if you have a point to make, you say it in the most assholish way possible.

Posted by: TX ette, resigned to accept the fresh hell at May 03, 2016 05:25 PM (A22Ea)

559 Congratulations, you're a Marxist.

Dude. You must chill. I don't know what you're all amped up on but you're reading things into what people are typing that have no relationship to their statements or history.

Here's a suggestion: dial it back. Listen and read more than you speak and type. Learn who people are and what they believe before pontificating. Relax. Try to be amiable and friendly. Your stomach lining will thank you.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at May 03, 2016 05:25 PM (39g3+)

560 Seems to me we saw this circular firing squad here in 2012, when everyone was sure right after the election that those darned socons had stayed home and that's why Romney lost. I wondered then, when some of the same sort were making the argument for jettisoning pro-life people from the GOP, why we weren't talking about jettisoning small government people, because FREE STUFF ALL THE TIME is objectively even more popular than pro-choice policies are. Some people said back then, no way the GOP can keep up with the Dems when it comes to giving stuff away, but they hadn't bargained with Donald J. effin' Trump.

I won't vote for pro-choice candidates, which is why I won't vote for Trump; he is, at heart and soul, a salesman, and he'll believe and say whatever he needs to in order to close a sale and drop it right after. So all these supposed pro-life principles he has are getting dropped the moment Senate Majority Leader Schumer and House Speaker Hoyer come to him with a great "deal". I can't support that.

It looks like there are fewer of us than I thought. But I think there are fewer socially liberal, fiscally conservative people than we thought, too, and it looks like the Trumpians and the GOPe will gladly screw you over, too.

Posted by: Cody's Feed Bag at May 03, 2016 05:25 PM (sPO/s)

561 The way I see it:

Socially liberal / Fiscally conservative = Health care for everyone / Death panels

As others have stated above, there is a cost associated with liberal social policies and that cost is not only monetary.

Posted by: Talon at May 03, 2016 05:26 PM (sNHB4)

562 Ted miscalculated that people would see Trump for what he is. If they did, he'd be the nominee.
Posted by: Masturbatin' Pete at May 03, 2016 05:10 PM (A6sW3)

**********

Ted miscalculated by failing to differentiate himself from Trump earlier. Cruz even echoed Trump's "wisdom" in regards to Putin.

Another thing Frum doesn't mention--many of Trump's voters are voting for him because they think he is "managing the media". Trump and his voters might be in for a rude awakening once the media no longer shares an enemy in common with Trump--Republicans.

Posted by: Biden Is In The Ball Pit at May 03, 2016 05:26 PM (mcm0N)

563 I wonder how many times we are going to see that interview he gave to
Howard Stern comparing his sexual conquests and dodging STDs to serving
in Vietnam.


As many as we'll see Hillary barking while dodging sniper fire.
By October everyone will shoot their TV, the hole will be YUUGE

Posted by: DaveA at May 03, 2016 05:26 PM (DL2i+)

564 Donald trump has inaugurated Civil War in the Republican Party. After Cruz loses tonight, those who have been hanging on to the slender thread of salvation that Cruz was trying to accomplish will lose hope and start to openly go to war.

Trump supporters have no one to blame for the coming conflagration and subsequent presidency of a Democrat but themselves and their irrational need to assuage their fear and anger by forcing upon us man who is as far from small r republicanism as his left wing friends and destined to be electorally destroyed.

Good luck, fools.

Posted by: Malachi45 at May 03, 2016 05:26 PM (Y9zAG)

565
Bill Whittle has a totally Jesus-free argument on abortion.

Why can no one in the GOP talk like this?

http://preview.tinyurl.com/h32pdyw
Posted by: Lizzy at May 03, 2016 05:13 PM (NOIQH)
------------------------

He's pro-choice if it's early enough in the pregnancy. No one in the GOP talks like that.

Posted by: iforgot at May 03, 2016 05:26 PM (pC96u)

566 Maybe they're not that popular. It's hard to tell. But small government doesn't appear to be all that popular, either.

------------

There is no doubt about it. Typically I found that the two went hand in hand - those who were seriously pro-life tended to actually see the government shrink.

But that's just me.

Posted by: SH at May 03, 2016 05:26 PM (gmeXX)

567 541 Obama's economic recovery is glorious, comrades!
Jobs everywhere!
Posted by: @votermom at May 03, 2016 05:17 PM (nbrY/)


No, it's actually not very good. High taxes, too much regulations, etc..

But this isn't the Great Depression. You live in the richest country in the history of mankind, where you can earn more wealth from going out and stacking boxes at Walmart or putting fries into bags at McDonald's than the hardest-working people could have earned a couple of centuries ago. And all you do is complain about how you're not getting enough welfares.

And, yes, raising my taxes to force jobs to "come back" (which shows you have no idea how manufacturing or economics actually work, because those jobs didn't go overseas, they were automated away by engineers like me) is welfare for the working class, and I won't stand for it.

All this time I thought all conservatives were against welfare, but what many were really against was welfare for blacks and Mexicans. Well, guess what: there are more whites on welfare than blacks or Mexicans combined.

I know, I know: you were lucky enough to be born in the same country as me so you think you're entitled to taking half of my earnings because it's not fair that you're expected to compete for a living and that people like me have so much more than you.

Posted by: Ugh at May 03, 2016 05:27 PM (AxklU)

568 "*REITs that own sanitariums?*

Posted by: Meremortal at May 03, 2016 05:22 PM (3myMJ) "

Pfizer and Eli Lilly? I predict many three valium lunches by the time this election is over.

Posted by: broseidon king of the brocean at May 03, 2016 05:27 PM (kumBu)

569 The Empress explained in one tweet what David Frum and the other flustered Perfumed Princes of the GOPe can't figure out in long opinion pieces...

https://twitter.com/alexthechick/status/725738316704964609

Here. Lemme 'splain Trump. When polite requests to address valid concerns are ignored and mocked, you're left with genital kicking.

Posted by: kbdabear at May 03, 2016 05:27 PM (FPTwJ)

570 Read Henry Olsen's article in the current (May 9) National Review--it'll open you eyes about a lot of things.

Posted by: mhjhnsn at May 03, 2016 05:27 PM (FZdvr)

571 Wonders what stock one buys when many nervous breakdowns appear imminent.

Go long on Pepto Bismol and tums. What are they made from, aluminum silicate? Might be something to look into...

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at May 03, 2016 05:28 PM (39g3+)

572 at an inconvenient time in their creators' sperm donor/recipient lives.

Posted by: DaveA at May 03, 2016 05:28 PM (DL2i+)

573 "Frum wrote my favorite explanation of Jeb Bush."

Absolutely amazing. Frum wrote a fawning puff piece on Jeb in Feb 2015 in particular praising his stance on immigration that was 180 degrees off from where Republican voters were (are). It's like a time capsule of political ineptitude. "falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus"

Why do we give any credence to shithead pundits? Frum, George Will, I could go on.

Posted by: Ignoramus at May 03, 2016 05:28 PM (r1fLd)

574 Posted by: TX ette, resigned to accept the fresh hell at May 03, 2016 05:25 PM (A22Ea)

There seem to be many around lately with a desperate need to feel superior to others.

Posted by: Meremortal at May 03, 2016 05:29 PM (3myMJ)

575 So much written in this post but so little said.
Ace has been one of this season's biggest disappointments.

Posted by: Levi at May 03, 2016 05:29 PM (DEJix)

576 Bill Whittle is very good at what he does.

Posted by: Skip at May 03, 2016 05:29 PM (PFZvJ)

577 Pfizer and Eli Lilly? I predict many three valium lunches by the time this election is over.

Posted by: broseidon king of the brocean at May 03, 2016 05:27 PM (kumBu)

Good picks!

Posted by: Meremortal at May 03, 2016 05:29 PM (3myMJ)

578 There seem to be many around lately with a desperate need to feel superior to others.

----

Well yeah - this is the Internet right?

Posted by: SH at May 03, 2016 05:30 PM (gmeXX)

579 Votermom: if he ain't an agent provocateur... I'd suggest the possibility that he's blind to the idea that his refusal to do anything about the Mandarinate's power grabs is what's pushing the rest of the country towards Marxism.

I mean, if we have to choose between a non-free-market economy where we don't have jobs, and a non-free-market economy with tariffs where we do have jobs... well, the latter would win.

As far as I can tell, guys like Ugh have been curiously absent from the battle to end the Carbon Tax and its ilk, otherwise known as the reverse-tariff-on-American goods... that is, if they're not agent provocateurs to begin with. IF he isn't... he's been damn incompetent about bothering to pick battles to fight, sitting back and waiting for people to get blackmailed into voting for one socialist or another so he can act morally superior while he loses.

Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain at May 03, 2016 05:30 PM (kCfMX)

580 558 Congratulations, you're a Marxist.
Posted by: Ugh at May 03, 2016

And you sir, are an asshole. You just have an ugly way about you. Even if you have a point to make, you say it in the most assholish way possible.
Posted by: TX ette, resigned to accept the fresh hell at May 03, 2016 05:25 PM (A22Ea)


The truth is ugly, hon. I'm just the messenger.

Facts do not care about your feelings.

Posted by: Ugh at May 03, 2016 05:30 PM (AxklU)

581 Congratulations, you're a Marxist.

#ZeppoLivesMatter

Posted by: Zeppo Marx at May 03, 2016 05:30 PM (vBeA5)

582 Ace has been one of this season's biggest disappointments.

And yet you remain, like a cold sore.

Posted by: Grump928(c) says Free Soothie!, with purchase of commentor of equal or greater value at May 03, 2016 05:31 PM (evdj2)

583 And, yes, raising my taxes to force jobs to "come back" (which shows you have no idea how manufacturing or economics actually work, because those jobs didn't go overseas, they were automated away by engineers like me) is welfare for the working class, and I won't stand for it.

Posted by: Ugh at May 03, 2016 05:27 PM (AxklU)

Until your employer decides that H1-B engineers can code and design away jobs much cheaper than you can.

Posted by: kbdabear at May 03, 2016 05:31 PM (FPTwJ)

584 Go long on Pepto Bismol and tums. What are they made from, aluminum silicate? Might be something to look into...

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at May 03, 2016


Not bad, I'm good on ammo stocks.

Posted by: Meremortal at May 03, 2016 05:31 PM (3myMJ)

585 "Go long on Pepto Bismol and tums. What are they made from, aluminum silicate? Might be something to look into...

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at May 03, 2016 05:28 PM (39g3+) "

Pepto is bismuth salicyclate, hence the name.

Posted by: broseidon king of the brocean at May 03, 2016 05:31 PM (kumBu)

586 Frum is a conservative like Ace is a conservative like Obama is a constitutional scholar. LOL jk!

Posted by: Doc D at May 03, 2016 05:31 PM (Js91Q)

587 #ZeppoLivesMatter

*honk honk*

Posted by: Harpo Marx at May 03, 2016 05:32 PM (39g3+)

588 Religious values voters tend to take religion seriously. The snake oil vibe emanating from Beck and Rafael is off-putting.

Posted by: Crazy Jane at May 03, 2016 05:32 PM (6X/vg)

589 "Well yeah - this is the Internet right?"

D'oh!!

Posted by: Meremortal at May 03, 2016 05:32 PM (3myMJ)

590 Hang tough, Marky-Marxist.

Posted by: Lincolntf at May 03, 2016 05:32 PM (2cS/G)

591 567 541 Obama's economic recovery is glorious, comrades!
Jobs everywhere!
Posted by: @votermom at May 03, 2016 05:17 PM (nbrY/)


No, it's actually not very good. High taxes, too much regulations, etc..

But this isn't the Great Depression. You live in the richest country in the history of mankind, where you can earn more wealth from going out and stacking boxes at Walmart or putting fries into bags at McDonald's than the hardest-working people could have earned a couple of centuries ago. And all you do is complain about how you're not getting enough welfares.

And, yes, raising my taxes to force jobs to "come back" (which shows you have no idea how manufacturing or economics actually work, because those jobs didn't go overseas, they were automated away by engineers like me) is welfare for the working class, and I won't stand for it.

All this time I thought all conservatives were against welfare, but what many were really against was welfare for blacks and Mexicans. Well, guess what: there are more whites on welfare than blacks or Mexicans combined.

I know, I know: you were lucky enough to be born in the same country as me so you think you're entitled to taking half of my earnings because it's not fair that you're expected to compete for a living and that people like me have so much more than you.
Posted by: Ugh at May 03, 2016 05:27 PM (AxklU)

Where did you get *anything* at all about welfare from that post?? You are a half a bubble off plumb. You are not the *only* successful person in America. Quit with the braggart horseshit.

Posted by: TX ette, resigned to accept the fresh hell at May 03, 2016 05:32 PM (A22Ea)

592 Only part way through this thread. (Impossible to keep up with any of them today.)

But to Ugg (and others) - is it possible we could quit all this name-calling? Y'all sound just like a bunch of leftists. You know, I can get that level of discourse from them any time I want any.

And "trailer park" - if THAT'S not the quintessential leftist slur, I don't know what is.

Posted by: Alana at May 03, 2016 05:33 PM (W58Yj)

593 Until your employer decides that H1-B engineers can code and design away jobs much cheaper than you can.

I'm getting the impression that he is one of those Chamber of Commerce type employers.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at May 03, 2016 05:33 PM (39g3+)

594 It's true, Ace goes on and on in this post discussing issues that have no relevance in this election.

Posted by: Levi at May 03, 2016 05:33 PM (DEJix)

595 at an inconvenient time in their creators' sperm donor/recipient lives.
Posted by: DaveA at May 03, 2016 05:28 PM (DL2i+)


Their creator hears their blood crying from the land.

Posted by: HopefulMonster Bravely supporting kittens at May 03, 2016 05:34 PM (uURQL)

596
Why do we give any credence to shithead pundits? Frum, George Will, I could go on.
Posted by: Ignoramus at May 03, 2016 05:28 PM (r1fLd)
---------------------

Read my link. I never expected Frum to be the guy to say those things, but he was.

Posted by: iforgot at May 03, 2016 05:34 PM (pC96u)

597 Until your employer decides that H1-B engineers can code and design away jobs much cheaper than you can.

---------

A couple points.

1. Who's to say that will happen? And if it does, why won't he be able to get another job.

2. Also if it does, why would he change his tune. I'm in a sort of protected class that benefits from existing laws - changing those laws would arguably put me out of work. But that would be ok with me, because I think those laws are wrong.

Posted by: SH at May 03, 2016 05:34 PM (gmeXX)

598 Here's the deal.

GOP was a coalition.

I'm for free trade and okay with immigrants, but pro-choice. But I'll be pro-life if you vote for my issues, and vice versa. (You can switch around issues to other things.)

But, let's say you drop your demand: your not pro-life, and your okay with 45% tariffs.

Immediately, the free trader person will drop the pro-life position. (or vice versa.)

This is what is happening now. It will be interesting to see what comes out of it.

What's funny is that we were tantalizingly close to getting all 3 branches, where maybe something could be done for everyone.

But...and we'll all agree here, the GOPe in Congress managed to instill massive distrust in them!

Posted by: Harun at May 03, 2016 05:35 PM (UBBWX)

599 539 Yeah I'm pretty hard-line on , hey let's not dismember babies. One of my hills. I have a couple others.
Posted by: grammie winger at May 03, 2016 05:16 PM (dFi94)

*********

Yet it is your hill Frum decides needs to go even though both Trump and Cruz are expressing pro-life positions.

Awhile back Frum tried to start a new website and it's primary point was--"hey let's start a news party because the pro-life position is a loser!" His website failed, but he is still looking for validation. He might even be right --but the rise of Trump doesn't prove his position. Frum's confirmation bias is showing.

Posted by: Biden Is In The Ball Pit at May 03, 2016 05:35 PM (mcm0N)

600 Posted by: TX ette, resigned to accept the fresh hell at May 03, 2016 05:32 PM (A22Ea)

Trolls gonna troll. It doesn't matter how much truth is in the post, they feed on your reaction.

Posted by: HopefulMonster Bravely supporting kittens at May 03, 2016 05:35 PM (uURQL)

601 569 The Empress explained in one tweet what David Frum and the other flustered Perfumed Princes of the GOPe can't figure out in long opinion pieces...

https://twitter.com/alexthechick/status/725738316704964609

Here. Lemme 'splain Trump. When polite requests to address valid concerns are ignored and mocked, you're left with genital kicking.
Posted by: kbdabear at May 03, 2016 05:27 PM (FPTwJ)


Awesome.

Posted by: rickl at May 03, 2016 05:35 PM (zoehZ)

602 Trump has mapped out the most electable position on abortion. He's pro-life, but no one believes him. He's for the good part of PP that does women's health care, but not for the icky part that sells baby parts, hence not vulnerable on WarOnWomyn.

This may be cynical, but it's what works.

We've made saying that your Pro-Life a meaningless shibboleth for R Presidential candidates.

Roe ain't going away. You'd need a Constitutional amendment or a radical change in who's on SCOTUS. Not gonna happen.

Thanks to Breitbart's disciples, the GOP and the Right to Lifers had the opening to reframe the question to be "when does infanticide begin." They blew it. The GOP caved and financed PP. Carly Fiorina made this her singular issue and got run out of the race. Breitbart's disciples got charged with felonies -- in Texas!

Posted by: Ignoramus at May 03, 2016 05:35 PM (r1fLd)

603 The professional Republicans were very vocal about wanting the issue, not a win.
And they repeatedly priced this.

Under a Republican President who was an avowed evangelical, a majority in both houses of Congress, and a majority in the Supreme Court, exactly nothing was done.

When Planned Parenthood was caught red handed selling the parts of murdered babies, a Republican House voted to continue funding them.

On the issues of gay marriage, individual consciounce, the basic reality of binary genders, and too many others to name, the Republicans have been no more faithful.

Since the so-cons are doomed to "get nothing and like it", what exactly are they losing by upsetting the table they aren't allowed at?
Vengence is the theme of this election cycle. Religion limits the impulse, but most certainly does not do away with it.

Posted by: Luke at May 03, 2016 05:35 PM (69cmB)

604 Congratulations, you're a Marxist.

Posted by: Ugh at May 03, 2016 05:19 PM (AxklU)
_____________________________Can you explain why they should make steel in first-world industrialized nations like Germany or Japan, with which we have trade deficits, and why we should import steel but not make it here?
Your position is that shitty autistic needlessly austere conservatism - nasty and privative for its own sake - that loses elections.There are men who are not lazy and who have strong backs and who want to work but don't have the aptitude or temperament to sit in front of a computer for ten hours a day. Interestingly, your message of "haha luuzers get a job and buy bootstraps so you can pull yourselvz up like me" is not reaching them.

Posted by: Alec Leamas at May 03, 2016 05:36 PM (RfZaB)

605 *its* primary point

Posted by: Biden Is In The Ball Pit at May 03, 2016 05:36 PM (mcm0N)

606 Well, it's an interesting conundrum, at least. I had been looking at some of these results, like in my home state of CT and my current home in NY and seeing Trump not only win, and win big, but crush Ted Cruz into third place status.

And I was thinking... what gives ?

Now, this may be all a matter of that icky jesus freak turning off "moderate republicans", but I simply don't buy that people are actually that informed. If tehy were, they could figure out that, all kinds of politicians say things during campaigns that are throwaway lines, like "NY values" and don't take it personally, for instance.

If people were intellectually curious and actually understood issues and positions, and whatnot, there would certainly be enough Republicans in even CT and NY to make Trump vs. Cruz competitive.

But I think, frankly, that at least 80% - and probably more - of all the electorate is just poorly informed and pays way, way, WAY too much attention not only to what the mainstream media says about Republicans, but also just tolerates their bullshit even if they aren't lapping it up and agreeing with them. Just put the evening news on in the background and you can't help but end up hopelessly biased to the liberal end of the spectrum.

And that isn't to knock Trump fans. Honestly. They have absolutely legitimate concerns that are pushing them to Trump. In fact, they may be portrayed as dummies, but I don't think most are. I'm talking about the non-die hard Trump voters that may have even considered themselves "undecided" until they stepped into the voting booth. THEY are the idiots that only remember the lead from last night's news and think - ick, I can't vote for that evil Ted Cruz. If that describes you, then you are definitely a moron of epic proportions. Leave the GOP now and go register as a Democrat, because effectively, you already are.

Posted by: deadrody at May 03, 2016 05:36 PM (q72NU)

607 H1-B visas are bad because the immigrant is tied to one job. That's a license for lower than market wages and oppression.

Beyond the American worker being replaced.

Which for a firm like Disney or ConEd is ridiculous anyways. ConEd is a utility. Disney is a monopoly.

Disney every year gets its copyright extended like clockwork, and the least it could do would be to hire Americans.

There is no Indian Disney or Chinese Disney competing with it.

Posted by: Harun at May 03, 2016 05:36 PM (UBBWX)

608 "Religious values voters tend to take religion seriously. The snake oil vibe emanating from Beck and Rafael is off-putting.

Posted by: Crazy Jane at May 03, 2016 05:32 PM (6X/vg) "

What we really need is Trump brand Snake Oil. For sale at classy establishments everywhere. Half off when bundled with Trump Wine, Trump Steaks, or one semester of tuition at Trump University.

Posted by: broseidon king of the brocean at May 03, 2016 05:37 PM (kumBu)

609 As far as I can tell, guys like Ugh have been curiously absent from the battle to end the Carbon Tax and its ilk, otherwise known as the reverse-tariff-on-American goods... that is, if they're not agent provocateurs to begin with. IF he isn't... he's been damn incompetent about bothering to pick battles to fight, sitting back and waiting for people to get blackmailed into voting for one socialist or another so he can act morally superior while he loses.
Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain at May 03, 2016 05:30 PM (kCfMX)


I'm not even sure what this word-salad is supposed to mean. I've been fighting expansion of government since the GWB days, back when lots on the Right wanted to tell me that I "hated America" because I was opposed to No Child Left Behind, Medicare Part D and the Iraq War.

I'm a principled person, but the time for principled voting is nearly passed. Cruz was the last chance for that, and I'm afraid he is done for. Trump is the harbinger that this election is now every-man-for-himself, smash-and-grab, defend-your-economic-status class warfare.

If I have to choose between two big-government Democrats in the form of Trump and Clinton, I'm going with the one who will best help my bottom line. That will be Clinton. Yes, she's awful, but at least she's not saying stupid shit like "I'm going to put a 45% tax on all goods from China and send Seal Team Six to Mexico to drag Carrier back..."

Posted by: Ugh at May 03, 2016 05:37 PM (AxklU)

610 He's pro-life, but no one believes him.

*******

I think Obama had the same gift --just on other subjects.

Posted by: Biden Is In The Ball Pit at May 03, 2016 05:37 PM (mcm0N)

611 "But this isn't the Great Depression."

No, this is the "Pretend It's Not A Depression".

In about 20 years economists will admit to this Depression.

That said, the FED has done a good job of ameliorating it. That makes it last longer though. Look for the actual recovery around 2022-2025.

It wasn't avoidable. Demographics saw to that. Been waiting for it since 1992 and it showed up right on time in 2007.

Posted by: Meremortal at May 03, 2016 05:37 PM (3myMJ)

612 Apparently a Christian can't say SoCon? Is that the new rule? Will I got to Hell for that also.

I stand by my assertion that Evangelicals don't care much about the abortion issue anymore. Trump is the proof of that.

It doesn't mean they support abortion, only that they no longer view it in the political context.

I'm glad to see the change. It was a losing issue for Republicans.





Posted by: Bally at May 03, 2016 05:16 PM (C6cBW)

I think "Evangelical" as a term has been pretty thoroughly expanded all out of shape. Now you've got lots of people who are basically Morally Therapeutic Deists- 'there's a god, he's awesome and thinks I'm awesome, and it's pretty cool that others have awesome ideas about god too' who call themselves, or have been lumped in with, what we used to call evangelicals. Russell Moore spoke about this very thing:

http://religionnews.com/2016/02/29/russell-moore-dont-call-me-an-evangelical/

So yes, I believe that people who buy Joel Osteen's books and shop for Christian plaques at hobby lobby and go to church when it doesn't conflict with football or kids sports are evangelicals who don't care about abortion anymore.

Posted by: Cody's Feed Bag at May 03, 2016 05:37 PM (sPO/s)

613 Who knew murder and death were negotiable? Ah, to be pro-life and pro-murder at the same time. That may be the most expensive pretzel Christian's will have to untwist from when they meet their maker.

Posted by: Whippet at May 03, 2016 05:38 PM (l/Pix)

614 594-It 's true, Ace goes on and on in this post discussing issues that have no relevance in this election.

Everything has relevance in this election, when government is so big it can run or ruin everything in your life.

Posted by: Skip at May 03, 2016 05:38 PM (PFZvJ)

615 This is what is happening now. It will be interesting to see what comes out of it.

What's funny is that we were tantalizingly close to getting all 3 branches, where maybe something could be done for everyone.

But...and we'll all agree here, the GOPe in Congress managed to instill massive distrust in them!

------------

Agree, the GOPe found a way to not deliver a victory to any part of the party - or at least give that impression. I think progress was being made at the state level - and from where I would expect a conservative revolution. We are probably in the middle of a realignment that started with the fall of the Soviet Union (which may have been the glue holding the coalition together) and will continue past this election.

Withou

Posted by: SH at May 03, 2016 05:38 PM (gmeXX)

616 607 H1-B visas are bad because the immigrant is tied to one job. That's a license for lower than market wages and oppression.

Beyond the American worker being replaced.

Which for a firm like Disney or ConEd is ridiculous anyways. ConEd is a utility. Disney is a monopoly.

Disney every year gets its copyright extended like clockwork, and the least it could do would be to hire Americans.

There is no Indian Disney or Chinese Disney competing with it.
Posted by: Harun at May 03, 2016 05:36 PM (UBBWX)


All good points, and I agree 100%. I'm not pro-H1B, but I don't fear them, either.

None of that is an argument to support an unprincipled con man who is anti-free trade, pro-Planned Parenthood and anti-gun. If I have to support an unprincipled con man, Hillary is only 2 of those things.

Posted by: Ugh at May 03, 2016 05:39 PM (AxklU)

617 And Malachi, with the name calling. Direct it at your real enemies.

Posted by: Alana at May 03, 2016 05:39 PM (W58Yj)

618 "Can you explain why they should make steel in first-world industrialized nations like Germany or Japan, with which we have trade deficits, and why we should import steel but not make it here?"

America does make steel. Expensive specialist steel.

But Japan and Germany have been eclipsed by China, too. Its not "just America."

p.s. China just laid off 500,000 steel workers. 500,000!

Its not as if they don't feel pain either.

Posted by: Harun at May 03, 2016 05:39 PM (UBBWX)

619 "I'm not even sure what this word-salad is supposed to mean. I've been fighting expansion of government since the GWB days"
_________________________________


Wow! Tell me about the good old days, Gramps.

Posted by: Alec Leamas at May 03, 2016 05:39 PM (RfZaB)

620
Which of those hills came about as the result of anything except the radical left pushing an issue?
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at May 03, 2016 05:22 PM (39g3+)
----------------------

So you agree with zombie?

>>I think the majority of people are neither "socially conservative" nor "socially liberal" on these issues, but instead are firmly in the "WTF is the matter with you, talking about this irrelevant balderdash?" camp.

Irrelevant balderdash?

Or maybe I'm misunderstanding zombie, or you, or both.

Posted by: iforgot at May 03, 2016 05:40 PM (pC96u)

621 Trump is the real world equivalent of "The Mule" in Isaac Asimov 's Foundation Trilogy. I am not sure you can generalize from a one of a kind black swan type of example.

Posted by: obnoxious ahole at May 03, 2016 05:41 PM (MpvuV)

622 "None of that is an argument to support an unprincipled con man who is anti-free trade, pro-Planned Parenthood and anti-gun. If I have to support an unprincipled con man, Hillary is only 2 of those things."

I'm also anti-Trump. I think there can be a good middle ground on these issues that satisfies most people, but GOPe has been so horrible its hard to achieve.

On that Disney issue, for example. I trust the GOP 900% to extend copyright for Disney. How about enforcing the border? Or not funding PP. Or cutting government?

I have far less trust on that. This is why GOPe is having trouble: do much for donors not enough for the base.

Posted by: Harun at May 03, 2016 05:42 PM (UBBWX)

623 Just a few more hours and this crap can mercifully end.

This whole article is premised on the idea that DJT is some rabid partial birth abortion loving, planned parenthood funding baby murdering maniac. The premise is a lie. Like many Republican politicians he was/is pro-choice, but for electoral reasons is claiming to be pro-life and says he plans to defund PP as long as they do abortions. So, he is giving the pro-life crew the lip service you would expect him to give if they were still a potent force in the party. This whole thing is nonsense.

Maybe once ace goes through the 5 stages, he will emerge and make sense again.

Posted by: tommylotto at May 03, 2016 05:42 PM (A3a8d)

624 621 Trump is the real world equivalent of "The Mule" in Isaac Asimov 's Foundation Trilogy.

--
I agree. Made that same comparison late last year, iirc.

Posted by: @votermom at May 03, 2016 05:42 PM (nbrY/)

625
No, this is the "Pretend It's Not A Depression".

In about 20 years economists will admit to this Depression.

That said, the FED has done a good job of ameliorating it. That makes it last longer though. Look for the actual recovery around 2022-2025.

It wasn't avoidable. Demographics saw to that. Been waiting for it since 1992 and it showed up right on time in 2007.
Posted by: Meremortal at May 03, 2016 05:37 PM (3myMJ)


Sure, it's a depression. But it's a depression where the "poor" are morbidly obese and have smartphones and a couple of big screen TVs and 500 channels of cable. It's not even comparable to the GD.

It's also a depression where, if you are willing to work for minimum wage or a bit above, there are lots of jobs. Again: I live in a poor area where welfare abuse is rampant, and nearly every retailer has signs up saying they are hiring.

Obama is a disaster economically, but Trump would be worse. At least Obama is somewhat pro-free trade.

Posted by: Ugh at May 03, 2016 05:42 PM (AxklU)

626 Ahh yes david half-right frum

Posted by: Shiggz at May 03, 2016 05:43 PM (G7wcY)

627 Not funding PP may have been the worst sin by the feckless GOP congress. If ever there was an opportunity with proof to defund it - it should have been taken. And that sent a terrible signal to both the socons and fiscons.

Posted by: SH at May 03, 2016 05:43 PM (gmeXX)

628 Wrong! Social issues are way down on the list of voter concerns. I say this as a social conservative.

Posted by: Levi at May 03, 2016 05:44 PM (DEJix)

629 I think the majority of people are neither "socially conservative" nor "socially liberal" on these issues, but instead are firmly in the "WTF is the matter with you, talking about this irrelevant balderdash?" camp.

I think the majority of America is in this camp, until they are compelled to care about it by the radical left. For example, until governments started to compel businesses to allow demented trannies into bathrooms they don't belong, nobody cared about the issue and didn't want to think about it. Now that they're being forced to, its an issue that annoys people.

And unlike many previous things the left has pushed, they are way, way out of fashion on this one. The only people that are for it are the really hard left types. Everyone else is "what the hell is wrong with you???" on having a dude shower next to little girls in the locker room just because he claims he's a woman inside.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at May 03, 2016 05:44 PM (39g3+)

630 Here's my compromises trade plan:

3% import tarriff on all imports. All duties to be spent on labor-intensive infrastructure such as replacing lead pipes or burying powerlines.

Tariff phases out over 20-30 years letting workers transition better.

(I think in 30 years a lot of low wage arbitrage will be gone.)

the problem is this idea needed to be done in 1986.

Posted by: Harun at May 03, 2016 05:44 PM (UBBWX)

631 China has been propping up their economy as much as ours has. Cities have been built as nothing but make work jobs.
Steel has been priced right out of our country, the area I live in eastern Pennsylvania was a very big steel production area when I was a kid, there is hardly any now.

Posted by: Skip at May 03, 2016 05:45 PM (PFZvJ)

632 I disagree, Ace. The Trumpkinheads, that roiling mass of crossover Dems (and let's see how many stay for the general if Trump.gets the nom), "independents" who can't be bothered to examine their own beliefs, let alone a party platform, and Enquirer-reading, chemtrail-sniffing "silent majorities" who believe a badly photoshopped photo of Ted Cruz hugging Fidel Castro is hard documentary evidence -- all these marks are at that stage of the con where they have to desperately defend their bad choices at all costs or admit they've thrown away everything.

ANYTHING Trump says or does now will be defended, no matter what he may have said, done or promised before. They are the mob the Founding Fathers feared, that handed France and Germany over to murderous tyrants. They are back, and it may be a question now not of defeating them but simply of surviving their ruin.

Posted by: Richard McEnroe at May 03, 2016 05:45 PM (uNXNj)

633 "Not funding PP may have been the worst sin by the feckless GOP congress. If ever there was an opportunity with proof to defund it - it should have been taken. And that sent a terrible signal to both the socons and fiscons."

A two-fer!

Literally both fiscons and socons could have been happy!

Posted by: Harun at May 03, 2016 05:45 PM (UBBWX)

634 "It's also a depression where, if you are willing to work for minimum
wage or a bit above, there are lots of jobs. Again: I live in a poor
area where welfare abuse is rampant, and nearly every retailer has signs
up saying they are hiring"
_______________________

The traditional route to prosperity: competing for wages with illegal Salvadoran bachelors who sleep five to a room.

Why didn't the lazy dummies think of this before?

Posted by: Alec Leamas at May 03, 2016 05:47 PM (RfZaB)

635 China just laid off 500,000 steel workers. 500,000!

Its not as if they don't feel pain either.

Posted by: Harun at May 03, 2016 05:39 PM (UBBWX)


They don't feel pain. They have accupuncture and secret stuff. The women squat in the rice terraces and have their babies. They don't even stop working. Saw it on the internet.

Posted by: Meremortal at May 03, 2016 05:47 PM (3myMJ)

636 I know a lot of pro life voters who will not cast a ballot in a Hillary v. Trump contest. Myself included.

Posted by: NC Mountainl Girl at May 03, 2016 05:51 PM (NMhD6)

637 I've been on this thread exclusively today, haven't even gone back to earlier threads to see what I missed.
So long thread

Posted by: Skip at May 03, 2016 05:51 PM (PFZvJ)

638 None of that is an argument to support an unprincipled con man who is anti-free trade, pro-Planned Parenthood and anti-gun. If I have to support an unprincipled con man, Hillary is only 2 of those things.
Posted by: Ugh at May 03, 2016 05:39 PM (AxklU)

********

Do you actually go out and vote for Hillary?

Or do you simply stay home?

Posted by: Biden Is In The Ball Pit at May 03, 2016 05:53 PM (mcm0N)

639 Or not, I'm so close to #Never, if I was more convinced Pa. was going to Hillery I will vote of course but would not vote Trump

Posted by: Skip at May 03, 2016 05:53 PM (PFZvJ)

640 I still am voting for the undercard no matter what.

Posted by: Skip at May 03, 2016 05:54 PM (PFZvJ)

641 Social issues are way down on the list of voter concerns.

That would depend on the voter.

Posted by: Grump928(c) says Free Soothie!, with purchase of commentor of equal or greater value at May 03, 2016 05:55 PM (evdj2)

642 If David half right frum and what's her name juggz mccain had a baby it would be lindsay graham

Posted by: Shiggz at May 03, 2016 05:56 PM (G7wcY)

643 639 Or not, I'm so close to #Never, if I was more convinced Pa. was going to Hillery I will vote of course but would not vote Trump
Posted by: Skip at May 03, 2016 05:53 PM (PFZvJ)

*****

Ah ha. Pennsylvania--CAC's favorite state.

Posted by: Biden Is In The Ball Pit at May 03, 2016 05:56 PM (mcm0N)

644 163. Amen brother. Know that there's at least one more out there who thinks the way you do.

Posted by: The Cookie Man at May 03, 2016 05:57 PM (LxP4S)

645 I know a lot of pro life voters who will not cast a ballot in a Hillary v. Trump contest. Myself included.

---------

Same - we may be as big of a voting block as we hope, but I do believe there are many pro-lifers who will not vote for a pro-choice president - no matter what. Perhaps, that nominee can gain in other areas for our losses, but I doubt it.

Posted by: SH at May 03, 2016 05:57 PM (gmeXX)

646 640 I still am voting for the undercard no matter what.
Posted by: Skip at May 03, 2016 05:54 PM (PFZvJ)

********
Same here--California.

Posted by: Biden Is In The Ball Pit at May 03, 2016 05:57 PM (mcm0N)

647 The traditional route to prosperity: competing for wages with illegal Salvadoran bachelors who sleep five to a room.

Why didn't the lazy dummies think of this before?

Posted by: Alec Leamas at May 03, 2016 05:47 PM (RfZaB)


Yes, because the economy is a limited size, and there are only a set number of jobs. It's zero-sum Marxism all the way down, folks.

Truthfully, though, you're actually competing with robots more than you are with Hispanics or Chinamen. Automation is what hollowed out American manufacturing employment. We make substantially more stuff in America now than we did in the 80s. Our manufacturing output is gangbusters, but we need far fewer people to do the work.

Whine and cry all you like, but easy blue collar jobs are being automated away and won't ever come back. A conservative would accept that this is reality and adapt.

Lefties and Trumpkins--who are one and the same--demand we punish successful people to make life more "fair" for the displaced blue collar workers. If that's your choice, so be it, but my choice will be to bring the white working class to heel and remind them of their place in this world.

Posted by: Ugh at May 03, 2016 06:00 PM (AxklU)

648 Cruz continually played the Jesus card.

Posted by: pointsnfigures at May 03, 2016 06:01 PM (oPFsu)

649 --inserts primary vs single issue voter disclaimer--

Joe Sorban, jew hating ass though he turned out to be, made an interesting distinction between Single-Issue Voters and Primary Issue Voters. A Single Issue Pro-Life voter would never vote for a Pro-Abortion candidate, even if that means another Pro-Abortion candidate will win anyway. The Single Issue voter takes the issue as a reflection on themselves. A Primary Issue Pro-Lifer might vote for the better of the two Pro-Abortion candidates.

I think, as in my example, I'm Single Issue on Abortion, though forgiving, and Primary Issue on other Constitutional and Policy matters.

I'll take half a loaf, as long as it's not buttered with rendered children, as it were.

Posted by: Grump928(c) says Free Soothie!, with purchase of commentor of equal or greater value at May 03, 2016 06:01 PM (evdj2)

650 The only difference with the lefts tyranny trannies play is that they didn't take the time to lay the ground work with LIVS like they did with gayz. Thee left needs half hearted republican opposition to 1. slow down the crusader left. 2. Be the uncool face of opposition.

If Gay stuff had gone 0-100 like this livs would have balked also.

Posted by: Shiggz at May 03, 2016 06:02 PM (G7wcY)

651
I get a kick out of posters like chemjeff and jackstraw....



Sorry guys, Trump supporters didn't suddenly move the GOP away from small government, a sane border policy and sticking to core principles as their default position instead of caving to leftists as their default position....



People are fed up with the GOP because it's gotten AWAY from those things.....for a LONG time now...



You two sound like the MSM talking heads when they declare that Muslims will become radicalized now that some meany mcmeans are calling Muslims out for committing beheadings, rapes and explody terrorist acts.... as if the terrorists were made to do it because of the people noticing they were doing it all along....


Your reasoning seems to be a bit off center.

Posted by: Some Guy in Wisconsin...trolling the end of the thread at May 03, 2016 06:03 PM (Qj6zv)

652 Do you actually go out and vote for Hillary?

Or do you simply stay home?
Posted by: Biden Is In The Ball Pit at May 03, 2016 05:53 PM (mcm0N)

I vote third party conservative. If it looked even close, I might vote Hillary just to be sure Trump does not win, but it won't be close. Anyone who can do basic math and reasoning knows that.

However, I do have to be *seen* supporting Hillary. If there's no principled conservative against her, then I will have to make sure people know I'm pro-Hillary. I'm willing to let my bottom line suffer for supporting a principled conservative, but I'm not going to lose out on opportunities to make a buck by letting people think I might be pro-Trump. No way.

Posted by: Ugh at May 03, 2016 06:03 PM (AxklU)

653
Given how many so-called "evangelicals" have endorsed Trumpster...

Of course, I haven't been a registered Republican since 1989, so what do I know?

Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie at May 03, 2016 06:04 PM (wPVDQ)

654 Ace...

How can you write a blog post about Frum's article OR anything else about this election without the words, "immigration", "borders", "Islam", and "trade"?

Let me give you my explanation for 2016:

Immigration + Borders + Trade + Islam > Fiscal Conservatism + Religious Conservatism

Sort of like the expansion of slavery was a big deal in the 1860 election. It divided a political party, divided Christians from the same church, etc.

What we have today is a battle between nationalism vs. internationalism which has trumped conservatism vs. liberalism. Trump supporters feel like the country is being destroyed because our leaders in both parties always put international matters above America.

For example some republicans are economic conservatives, but they have chained their conservative economic views to increasing immigration, are for amnesty in some form, and push for intervention into the Middle East to rebuild Muslim countries, etc. In other words they are radical internationalists who think international capitalism is more important than loyalty to the nation.

National Review is the poster child for this view of the world. Americans who who don't tow the line of free trade forever no matter what are labelled "socialists" and "lazy bums". These people stand in the way of utopia where there is no wars and no nations, just free markets and free movement of people.

Worse we have some libertarians and those that wrap themselves in the constitution saying we are not allowed to ban Muslim immigration into America. These same people are loath to do anything about the border, or anything else that looks mean and cruel.

So someone thumping their chest about their love of the constitution, or economic conservatism, or their love of Jesus does not answer the critical questions of our age:

1. Are you willing to go there (like building a wall or starting a trade war) to protect the republic from further losses in national sovereignty?

2. Do you think America must not discriminate on immigration, and that a Nazi, or Communist, or Jihadist has the same right to becoming a American citizen as a Christian family escaping genocide in the Middle East?

3. Do you think America should do trade deals with any country, even those who will break the trade deal, or who are potential enemies of the Republic?

4. Do you think America must save other nations and peoples even if it hurts Americans more than benefits them?

5. Do you think allies that support groups and organizations that actively call for the destruction of America, and kill Americans, should remain allies of America?

I could add more, but what would be the point. This was the same complaints I had with the folks who run Hotair. It has nothing to do with conservatism anymore, it has to do with American sovereignty.

Complaining about Trump linking his entire political campaign to American sovereignty is a stupid way to stop Trump. Cruz going on about biblical scripture is not going to solve it. Saying Trump is a "scam artist" is not going to do it either, because none of the other candidates, including Cruz, were willing to "go there", and say it loud and proud.

Trump was willing to ride the bull and has been rewarded. You would think the "conservatives" would figure all this out...American First is better than Davos First.

Posted by: William Eaton at May 03, 2016 06:05 PM (KhJh8)

655 # 608
Trump doesn't pretend to take his faith seriously like the Cruz camp does. 2 Corinthians should give us a clue. Meanwhile, Glenn Beck is flirting with idolatry with his prayer and fasting for Cruz (simultaneously rolling his face in a bowl of Cheeto dust), the Holy Spirit of Goldman Sachs has whispered in Heidi' s ear and Rafael's Dominionism is unorthodox, to put it kindly. And we're supposed to take that seriously?

Posted by: Crazy Jane at May 03, 2016 06:05 PM (z/B/W)

656 "Whine and cry all you like, but easy blue collar jobs are being
automated away and won't ever come back. A conservative would accept
that this is reality and adapt."
___________________________________

Oh yes - I saw a bunch of robots framing houses just the other day.

++++

"Lefties and Trumpkins--who are one and the same--demand we punish
successful people to make life more "fair" for the displaced blue collar
workers."
____________________________________

It'd be "punishing you" to expect that a seller who wants access to the largest consumer market in the world not fire all of its American workers and fuck off to China or Mexico increase the margin per item sold. Better compensate that "global capital" while your fellow man lies confused and humiliated. Let's don't get between you and acquiring more foreign-made consumer junk - that's the proof that you're better than all of those losers!

+++++

"but my choice will be to bring the white working class to heel and remind them of their place in this world."
____________________________

Your self-aggrandizement to the contrary, someone who writes such a thing is not himself speaking from a very high place.

Tell me - when you have discussions with these people how well does your calling them life's losers persuade them to your point of view?


Posted by: Alec Leamas at May 03, 2016 06:09 PM (RfZaB)

657 Let's take Texas and go home!

Posted by: Rob in Katy at May 03, 2016 06:09 PM (uaYXs)

658 Trump took the standard pro-life position on abortion and was pilloried out of the movement by feminists masquerading as pro-lifers who have apparently taken over the movement.

It's strange that Ace doesn't mention this at all in his analysis. In fact he took Trump taking the obvious, rational pro-life position on abortion as evidence that Trump never gave the issue any thought. Well I have, and have spent years crafting rational arguments for the pro-life movement when I was younger. I had no idea its public leaders oppose punishing women at all. There was no difference between me and Trump on this. As I said at the time, pro-lifers killed the pro-life movement in that moment. Nobody is gonna take the "abortion is murder" claim seriously when you wanna let off the prime instigator.

The bottom line is that Trump was willing to play ball (and still is, to some extent), regardless of whether he really is pro life or not. Meanwhile Ted Cruz took the standard feminist masquerading to be pro life position and claimed he held it all along. At this point if you are pro life there is no reason to take Cruz over Trump. There is reason to take Trump over Cruz though, because unlike Trump, Cruz actively contributed to letting the feminist infiltrators kill the pro-life movement just to score points for his own election bid (and this was also the main problem with Cruz, not his unlikability: he's a ruthless career climber, like Hillary Clinton, with no actual principles, whether Ace acknowledges it or not). I don't care much about tax rates or balanced budgets. Trump is now more pro-life than Cruz, and less likely to start another stupid war on the other side of the world. He has also staked his legacy on the issues that matter most, like immigration. There is no reason for someone like me who, like Ace, isn't actually invested in the entire GOP platform and just played along for the sake of a coalition to take Cruz over Trump at this point. And I suspect i'm not the only one. Indiana is the type of state who should go to cruz. I guess we'll find out tonight just how over it is for Ted Clinton tonight.

Posted by: Johnny at May 03, 2016 06:10 PM (Ypf1L)

659 "Yes, because the economy is a limited size, and there are only a set
number of jobs. It's zero-sum Marxism all the way down, folks."
________

You really don't know what the hell that goddamned word means and you really ought to stop using it. You're embarrassing yourself, M8.

Posted by: Alec Leamas at May 03, 2016 06:11 PM (RfZaB)

660 A lot of politics is tone. I tend to agree that what a lot of Trump supporters want is welfare of some sort. And while not all welfare is the same, welfare is welfare. Social Security is welfare - but I would not say it is exactly the same as what we commonly say is welfare - primarily because of how it is sold and the taxes associated with it.

Asking people to move from areas with no jobs to areas with jobs seems reasonable to me - even accounting for other costs associated with moving, such as leaving friends/family, uplifting family, etc. But the history of the world has always been such. But being smug about it will probably not help you make the argument.

Posted by: SH at May 03, 2016 06:18 PM (gmeXX)

661 324 Village Idiot (Cunt),

How about a little deal: I won't try to moderate YOUR comments and thoughts if you, motherfucker, stop trying to moderate MINE?

How about that, Cunt?

How about as the proprietor of this blog I get to say the things I'm thinking without a stupid faggity cunt like you accusing me of "going little green footballs" every five minutes?

How's that sound, cunt?

Posted by: ace at May 03, 2016 04:36 PM (dciA+)

---

*almost two hours laters*

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Posted by: SMFH while circling the drain... at May 03, 2016 06:18 PM (rlfds)

662 "Oh yes - I saw a bunch of robots framing houses just the other day."

Ah, so the fact that not every blue collar job has been automated away yet proves that automation isn't the primary reason for the collapse. Are you normally this bad at reasoning?


"It'd be "punishing you" to expect that a seller who wants access to the largest consumer market in the world not fire all of its American workers and fuck off to China or Mexico increase the margin per item sold. Better compensate that "global capital" while your fellow man lies confused and humiliated. Let's don't get between you and acquiring more foreign-made consumer junk - that's the proof that you're better than all of those losers!"

Yes, it's called "free trade" and the "free market", and it's the cornerstone of right-wing economics. Opposition to the free market is the cornerstone of leftist economics. Guess which side you're on.

I don't care about my "fellow man" lying confused and humiliated. If he can't get off his ass and improve himself, that's his fault. Save me your pathetic sobbing for the poor, poor white working man.

By the way, owning more--and better--stuff than you isn't proof of my superiority. It's the *reward* for my superiority. Try to keep up.


"Your self-aggrandizement to the contrary, someone who writes such a thing is not himself speaking from a very high place.

Tell me - when you have discussions with these people how well does your calling them life's losers persuade them to your point of view?"

What makes you think I'm here to persuade? I'm here to remind you of what is coming (President Hillary Rodham Clinton) and mock you for bringing it onto yourself.

As for how I deal with the help, I'm usually quite pleasant. However, I'm not above calling them "Boy" or berating them in front of their peers to remind them of their place.


The reality of this world, Alec, is that there are superior people and inferior people. The beauty of capitalism is that the superior succeed and take control of capital while the inferior handle the drudgery of manual labor.

I can tell you don't like that, because you embrace the Marxist ethic that all men are equal--not before the law, but in their value to society--and that all men deserve respect. I assure you, you are not my equal and you do not deserve my respect.

Posted by: Ugh at May 03, 2016 06:24 PM (AxklU)

663

ace,

You (and Frum) are misreading the situation.
It's a matter of prioritization given a specific context.

A serious crisis has emerged: a flood of Illegal Immigration has been
massively undermining the rule of law and has been swiftly eroding our
culture / national identity and will eventually destroy our borders
altogether.

That doesn't make Pro-Lifers flexible on the issue of being Pro-Life.

Whether you believe him and whether he's telling the truth, Trump claims to be
Pro-Life. That turns out to be enough for Pro-Lifers like me to accept
that he's at best soft on the issue.
Because the EMERGENCY priority right NOW is: Illegal Immigration.

But, as you will see, in future presidential elections being Pro-Life will
remain a make or break issue for winning the GOP nomination. (Assuming,
that is, there still is a GOP in future election cycles.)

PS: Mega Dittos to comment # 518.



Posted by: Testy Stoic Trumpublican at May 03, 2016 06:25 PM (AhiRu)

664 659 "Yes, because the economy is a limited size, and there are only a set
number of jobs. It's zero-sum Marxism all the way down, folks."
________

You really don't know what the hell that goddamned word means and you really ought to stop using it. You're embarrassing yourself, M8.
Posted by: Alec Leamas at May 03, 2016 06:11 PM (RfZaB)


"M8"? What the fuck? Have I been wasting my time talking to some Limey who can't even vote?

And yes, demanding equal economic outcomes for both the inferior and superior humans is the very definition of Marxism. As I said: the beauty of capitalism is that the superior human rules and--for all practical matters--owns the inferior human. Both the owner and owned benefit from this relationship.

Posted by: Ugh at May 03, 2016 06:27 PM (AxklU)

665 98
That's pretty good, where did it come from?


Mine. I wrote the extended version in response to Russell Kirks 10 Conservative Principles.

Posted by: Tracy Coyle at May 03, 2016 06:28 PM (SXT9g)

666 The reality of this world, Alec, is that there are superior people and inferior people. The beauty of capitalism is that the superior succeed and take control of capital while the inferior handle the drudgery of manual labor.

I can tell you don't like that, because you embrace the Marxist ethic that all men are equal--not before the law, but in their value to society--and that all men deserve respect. I assure you, you are not my equal and you do not deserve my respect.
Posted by: Ugh at May 03, 2016 06:24 PM (AxklU)

You really are a peach, huh? I bet you don't have a friend in the world, what with your superiority and all. Who could possibly keep up?? I'll bet your children are above average, too!

Posted by: TX ette, resigned to accept the fresh hell at May 03, 2016 06:30 PM (A22Ea)

667 "A serious crisis has emerged: a flood of Illegal Immigration has been
massively undermining the rule of law and has been swiftly eroding our
culture / national identity and will eventually destroy our borders
altogether. "

Ha ha, that's not true at all. While I agree illegal immigration is sub-optimal and should be dealt with and the offenders deported, it's hardly a crisis. You clearly don't have the first idea of what's going on.

Regardless, you could have fixed the issue by electing someone who might have done something about immigration, like Cruz. Instead you threw a temper tantrum and detonated your suicide vest and guaranteed us a President HRC.

Do you think HRC is going to do anything about the illegals problem? Hardly.

Your own strategic incompetence and inability to think rationally have doomed the very issue you are so overly-emotional about. Congrats.

Personally, I've already adapted and I now reluctantly accept that the illegals are here to stay, due to your failures as a voter and a human being. I think the illegals will be a better underclass than your kind--they seem more obedient and when you buy them off with welfare they stay bought off, unlike the white underclass who dare to think they are equal to their masters.

Posted by: Ugh at May 03, 2016 06:32 PM (AxklU)

668 You really are a peach, huh? I bet you don't have a friend in the world, what with your superiority and all. Who could possibly keep up?? I'll bet your children are above average, too!
Posted by: TX ette, resigned to accept the fresh hell at May 03, 2016 06:30 PM (A22Ea)

I have true friends, but I prefer money. Money buys more loyalty. (I know, you've been brainwashed by Hollywood to believe otherwise, but it's true. Money will make a man kill and die for you.)

I have no children and no interest in having children. They are an expense. It's far easier to co-opt and control your children through the public institutions than it is to have my own.

You will spend your life trying instill your values into your children, even while the greater culture changes your own values right before you. And ultimately it will be meaningless, because your children will be taught the values that the media and ruling class want them to be taught, and they will internalize little else.

This is what happened to you and your parents, and it's what happened to them and your grandparents.

Posted by: Ugh at May 03, 2016 06:37 PM (AxklU)

669 Trump is about 1) illegal immigration, 2) Islamic immigration, 3) destroying the treasonous Republican Party, 4) making America great again (restoring a sense of pride and power on the world stage)

Anyone who attempts to dissect it as more than that is a god damned hand-wringing, autistic nerd (er, in other words, Ted Cruz).

Posted by: Pastorius at May 03, 2016 06:38 PM (gMAUH)

670
Ugh,

When you say strange things like "due to your failure as a voter and as a human being", it becomes obvious just how clueless and out of touch you really are.

And are you also completely unaware that it is YOUR comments which sound like bizarro temper tantrums?

And you want to talk about strategic incompetence? You'd happily nominate a candidate born in Canada whose Constitutional eligibility Hillary and the DNC would immediately challenge.
Yeah, that's a REAL strategic stroke of genius you got going for you, there Patton!





Posted by: Testy Stoic Trumpublican at May 03, 2016 06:41 PM (AhiRu)

671 669 Trump is about 1) illegal immigration, 2) Islamic immigration, 3) destroying the treasonous Republican Party, 4) making America great again (restoring a sense of pride and power on the world stage)

Anyone who attempts to dissect it as more than that is a god damned hand-wringing, autistic nerd (er, in other words, Ted Cruz).
Posted by: Pastorius at May 03, 2016 06:38 PM (gMAUH)


No, Trump is an elite who is playing a part. He is pretending to care about your silly little values, because he knows he can lead you to your ruin that way.

His job is not to win, it is to divert your anger from its true causes and thus leave you weakened and vulnerable. Any competent leader knows you must keep the proles at one another's throats, lest they turn on you.

Trump will lose and you will wake up the the day after and you will still be the angry failure you were the day before. However, you will also be a *powerless* angry failure, your silly rage having been misdirected towards your own defeat.

And I will be here to mock you and remind you of your failings.

Posted by: Ugh at May 03, 2016 06:44 PM (AxklU)

672
And, Ugh, your inability to recognize the Illegal Immigration Crisis as a very serious crisis says as much about your weirdo judgment as does your worship of money over friends.

You're simply not to be taken seriously. (And don't worry... you're not.)



Posted by: Testy Stoic Trumpublican at May 03, 2016 06:45 PM (AhiRu)

673 112 Maybe, Ace, people have just taken it for granted that NONE of the candidates will do anything about abortion. Supposedly pro-life Bush 43 didn't, Bush 41 didn't, and even Reagan didn't. Trump offers victory on other issues, and Cruz doesn't offer anything Trump doesn't. Has Cruz done more than say he's pro-life? Like: has he promised to end abortion? If not, why do you think he has a right to the support of pro-lifers?

Posted by: joeclark77 at May 03, 2016 04:07 PM (yypjm)

This is false:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partial-Birth_Abortion_Ban_Act

Trump advocates, please learn about this thing called the public record. It will blow your mind.

Posted by: reform highlander at May 03, 2016 06:45 PM (jCH/T)

674 671 Ugh,

Win or lose the GOP has proven itself totally incompetent at protecting the rights of Americans from leftist destruction and a cuckold on the front of protecting the jobs and economy of the average American.

Trump or the lack of Trump is unrelated to the ineffective idiocy of the GOP as anything other than the Democrats' chief enabler.

Posted by: sven10077 at May 03, 2016 06:47 PM (g8Hfr)

675 "When you say strange things like "due to your failure as a voter and as a human being", it becomes obvious just how clueless and out of touch you really are."


I'm not sure Cruz would have fixed anything, but he was the only plausible path to fixing anything. Your failure will become increasingly evident over the coming months, and you will resort to anger and delusion to ignore it, believing until the last minute that Trump Might Win.

And when he loses you will learn nothing, and will fall into either depression or rationalization, concluding that he must have been cheated.



"And you want to talk about strategic incompetence? You'd happily nominate a candidate born in Canada whose Constitutional eligibility Hillary and the DNC would immediately challenge.
Yeah, that's a REAL strategic stroke of genius you got going for you, there Patton!"

This is all the proof I need that you are an imbecile. Trump has challenged Cruz in court repeatedly and lost. There is not one serious legal scholar who thinks Cruz is ineligible, just as there was not one serious legal scholar who thought Obama was ineligible.

I look forward to President Hillary defeating you. I really do. I will make out very well from that scenario.

Posted by: Ugh at May 03, 2016 06:48 PM (AxklU)

676
Uhhh.... Ugh, do you remember that part where I pointed out that you need not worry about being taken seriously?

Study that.


Posted by: Testy Stoic Trumpublican at May 03, 2016 06:51 PM (AhiRu)

677 "You really are a peach, huh? I bet you don't have a friend in the
world, what with your superiority and all. Who could possibly keep up??
I'll bet your children are above average, too!"
___________________________

Our Autist Ubermensch (he's ultra-super successful, just ask him) is apparently unaware that "A Modest Proposal" was intended as a Satire. It seems that he's never read all the way to the end of A Christmas Carol, satisfied with the moral of the whole thing when he was assured by the Ghost of Christmas Future that Tiny Tim would indeed succumb to his condition. Nature made him so. It's the true meaning of Christmas - the suffering of your fellow man aggrandizes you by comparison.

About the only classically Marxist aspect about our conversation is that he's insistent upon importing the rope that will be used to hang him, rather than paying the extra nickle a yard so that some lazy American worker won't suffer appropriately to his low position in life. By his definition, all of the United States' trading partners are "Marxists all the way down" but he doesn't seem to have a problem trading with them. It's too remote and just not as sweet as seeing your own countrymen suffer right in your own hometown and knowing that you're so much better than them. Sometimes, just for shits and giggles, he asks to "borrow your Gray Poupon."


Posted by: Alec Leamas at May 03, 2016 06:53 PM (RfZaB)

678 672
And, Ugh, your inability to recognize the Illegal Immigration Crisis as a very serious crisis says as much about your weirdo judgment as does your worship of money over friends.

You're simply not to be taken seriously. (And don't worry... you're not.)



Posted by: Testy Stoic Trumpublican at May 03, 2016 06:45 PM (AhiRu)


It's a crisis for your kind, perhaps, because the illegals are a higher-quality person than you. They are obedient, hard-working and cheap. I look forward to them replacing you and yours fully.

It's not a crisis for me or for America. America is far greater than you and yours. You are an insignificant cog whose existence is wholly irrelevant to America's greatness. Your replacement will not be noted and nobody of any importance will care.

Posted by: Ugh at May 03, 2016 06:53 PM (AxklU)

679 So someone on the list here says he/she never wants a President who would say "God told me." I guess it's okay, though for someone to say.."The science is settled," when it is not. Pretty easy to put science in the place of God and call it more reasonable. Except that science has been wrong over and over again, especially in the last fifty years..remember the Great Ice Age of the 1970's? I do.

Most of the people who founded and established this nation, who survived starvation, Indian attacks, fevers, early childhood deaths and no medical attention looked to God..and you know what? They survived.

Posted by: Trump's Stubby Fingers at May 03, 2016 06:53 PM (SJ184)

680 672

And, Ugh, your inability to recognize the Illegal Immigration Crisis
as a very serious crisis says as much about your weirdo judgment as
does your worship of money over friends.

You're simply not to be taken seriously. (And don't worry... you're not.)


Posted by: Testy Stoic Trumpublican at May 03, 2016 06:45 PM (AhiRu)


I agree with you that immigration is a serious problem for conservatives, and should be taken more seriously. I disagree that Trump is the one to fix this problem, given that all of his positions are applause lines that he retracts when pressed on, and given that he told the NYT that he does not actually hold this hardline position. I also think that having your political coalition unite behind a cult of personality centered on a sociopath with a middling intellect who is universally loathed outside (and to a large extent, inside) of your political coalition and the occasional aspiring trophy wife from the former Soviet Bloc is a pretty damn serious problem for conservatives.

Posted by: reform highlander at May 03, 2016 06:58 PM (jCH/T)

681 674 671 Ugh,

Win or lose the GOP has proven itself totally incompetent at protecting the rights of Americans from leftist destruction and a cuckold on the front of protecting the jobs and economy of the average American.

Trump or the lack of Trump is unrelated to the ineffective idiocy of the GOP as anything other than the Democrats' chief enabler.
Posted by: sven10077 at May 03, 2016 06:47 PM (g8Hfr)


LOL, okay. I'm not GOP, so I don't know why you think I would care.

But sven, you have already lost. You are already paying for the education and training of your replacements. You will whine and cry, but it will amount to nothing. Trump will never be President.

Ultimately, your daughters or granddaughters will be married off to your replacements, and your seed will be diluted.

Don't you see, sven? You are the cuckold and you have utterly failed to stop it. You had a chance, but you chose the Northeastern liberal playing a role over any actual opportunity at reform.

Hillary will be President and this Trumpertantrum has made it obvious to anyone in a position of power that your kind must now be aggressively replaced. I will support that 100%, because it's good for me.

Posted by: Ugh at May 03, 2016 06:59 PM (AxklU)

682 "It's not a crisis for me or for America. America is far greater than you
and yours. You are an insignificant cog whose existence is wholly
irrelevant to America's greatness. Your replacement will not be noted
and nobody of any importance will care."
________________________

I somehow doubt that making mid-level manager at Enterprise will install you in the annals of great titans of American industry either, Jack.

Posted by: Alec Leamas at May 03, 2016 07:01 PM (RfZaB)

683 "About the only classically Marxist aspect about our conversation is that he's insistent upon importing the rope that will be used to hang him, rather than paying the extra nickle a yard so that some lazy American worker won't suffer appropriately to his low position in life. By his definition, all of the United States' trading partners are "Marxists all the way down" but he doesn't seem to have a problem trading with them."


Oh, darling, that rope is not for us. You will realize it too late to make a difference, but you will realize it all the same.

And, no, I don't care about trading with foreign Marxists. They can out-produce your kind, which shows how inferior and worthless your kind have become. Why should society keep investing in the evolutionary dead end that is the white working class? Nature knows when to give up, Alec.

Posted by: Ugh at May 03, 2016 07:03 PM (AxklU)

684 681 Posted by: Ugh at May 03, 2016 06:59 PM (AxklU)

You labor under the impression I am a Duh Donald fan.

It is also telling that your wank queen has precisely no more worthiness for the the office than Duh Donald other than her time in the Senate doing damn little.

America is sick to its core and insane.

I am durable, my family was here before America and we'll be here after.

Posted by: sven10077 at May 03, 2016 07:06 PM (g8Hfr)

685
highlander @ #680,

You'll have to forgive me for knowing better than to believe a rumor floated by "someone" at the NYT. - Absolutely no reason has been given to believe that Trump made off-the-record comments that he would reverse his position on Illegal Immigration. Again, this was an unsubstantiated rumor. And again, it came from the New Your Slimes.

Your other criticisms are just boilerplate Trump Hate.
You really can't stand Trump. I get it.
So what?

I will admit that I find Trump's and Stone's comments about Oswald unsettling.
In all honesty, that's the first gaffe he's made that actually worries me.
Here's praying he doesn't go full-blown Oliver Stone!



Posted by: Testy Stoic Trumpublican at May 03, 2016 07:10 PM (AhiRu)

686 682 "It's not a crisis for me or for America. America is far greater than you
and yours. You are an insignificant cog whose existence is wholly
irrelevant to America's greatness. Your replacement will not be noted
and nobody of any importance will care."
________________________

I somehow doubt that making mid-level manager at Enterprise will install you in the annals of great titans of American industry either, Jack.
Posted by: Alec Leamas at May 03, 2016 07:01 PM (RfZaB)


I am not--yet, at least--a titan of industry. I know my position in society, I know my value and I am comfortable with it.

Unlike you, I am happy to fight and compete for what I want, because I know I can get it. Unlike you, I don't expect the government to give me a handout because I'm too lazy and weak to succeed.

Will I end up being at the top? I don't know, I'm young and have a lot of time to get there. But even if I don't, I'm comfortable with my position and I don't think I deserve more than I can earn. Unlike you.

As I said, you and yours will not matter. The Trumpertantrum will be but a footnote in the history of this great nation, noted only because it was the point at which the elites realized the lowest levels of filth were getting out of line and the project of replacing them became urgent.

I look forward to joining the project of replacing you. My hope is that, in some small way, I can increase the agonies of the disobedient white working class while accelerating their demise.

Posted by: Ugh at May 03, 2016 07:12 PM (AxklU)

687 Perhaps the TEA party will re-emerge after Chump raises everyone's taxes...he is a NY liberal after all. Worse yet would be if he never gets the chance, as any Dem will clean his clock....

Posted by: Stosh at May 03, 2016 07:15 PM (bVP4o)

688 You labor under the impression I am a Duh Donald fan.

It is also telling that your wank queen has precisely no more worthiness for the the office than Duh Donald other than her time in the Senate doing damn little.

America is sick to its core and insane.

I am durable, my family was here before America and we'll be here after.
Posted by: sven10077 at May 03, 2016 07:06 PM (g8Hfr)


She's not my wank queen and she is no more suitable for leadership than he is. But she will reign all the same. Only a fool can look at this mess and not see which way the winds are blowing.

I used to think there was a large conservative core to this country that was worth saving from the sickness. Trump showed it was much, much smaller than I thought. A shame, but if there's no hope of a conservative future then I see no reason that I should keep resisting the sickness. HRC will be President, I might as well profit from it.

I admire your resolve. You have the right attitude for outlasting this sickness and insanity.

Posted by: Ugh at May 03, 2016 07:16 PM (AxklU)

689 I've been saying this all over for a decade.
For 30 years the Republican Party has told SoCons to 'wait our turn'; that after taxes, and guns, etc. they would "get to" social issues.
They never did.
The majority of SoCons checked out a decade ago, guys. We know FOR A FACT that the Republicans, Libertarians, etc. simply don't care for us so we quit voting and supporting before Obama.

Posted by: Deep Thought at May 03, 2016 07:16 PM (oUYog)

690 I haven't read the piece at the link yet so it is not clear exactly to me how much of this angle is Ace's and how much Frum's.

But it is an excellent post and I think this is a valid take on what Trump has changed, or rather picked up on because say what you like about Trump his support is from the ground up.

As a dedicated social conservative (but never a single issue voter) I still think this might be a good thing, but in the back of my mind I'm fearing that thinking ANYTHING ANYONE, pol or citizen, does about politics is probably pretty bad, I'm not sure we should be optimistic.

Posted by: jocon307 at May 03, 2016 07:28 PM (4WPdG)

691 "I am not--yet, at least--a titan of industry."
____________________

Color me shocked at the revelation of this fact.

++++

"Will I end up being at the top? I don't know"
_______________________

Outlook not so good. Success in industry and business requires a skill set that includes networking and leadership, both of which require a healthy dose of emotional intelligence, empathy, self-awareness and charisma. It's obvious you have none of these qualities - in any event you'd probably consider them weaknesses rather than strengths because you're an anxious and insecure simpleton who believes that false bravado will obscure your shortcomings.

Posted by: Alec Leamas at May 03, 2016 07:52 PM (RfZaB)

692 Um, Ace, I think you and Frum are wishcasting here. I voted for Cruz precisely because the pro-life thing was the one issue I couldn't bend on; if Trump were more believably pro-life he'd have had the nomination sewn up already.

Why you're wishcasting is this: Trump proved, by taking the most extreme position possible on one big contentious issue the base and 'elite' disagreed on, where the elite has been doing the gotta compromise, gotta get along, can't scare the left thing for, what, ten years now, maybe more... and just get away with shooting them in the face on 5th Avenue and yanking the nomination right out of their hands...

Yeah, the amount of willingness to give I have on the issue actually went *down* in the future.

Posted by: Locarno at May 03, 2016 08:09 PM (HhYvn)

693 A generation has been brainwashed by the left to think only fools believe in God. Not a far step from there and the current narcissistic attitudes to believe only your life and opinion matters.

Disgusting.

I will never support an abortionist or an anti-religious bigot.

Posted by: NJRob at May 03, 2016 08:23 PM (JSzbC)

694 My preferences are cascading. I can care about putting the Ten Commandments in courthouses, manger scenes on the town square, keeping Christian prayer in public schools, shutting down abortionists and doing whatever with teh gays. That really hasn't abated.

My problem is with the politicians who claimed to be with me on all these things while doing very little to advance the ball for the last 40 years.

The fact is we social conservatives were never all that strong in the party. We were good at electing politicians who claimed to be with us on the issues, but who actually cared for very little except advancing the size of government and the increase of their wallets.

Posted by: Jack Squat Bupkis at May 03, 2016 09:23 PM (QlLpF)

695 The reality is the Reagan coalition only worked because religious conservatives brought electoral victory in the South. Without that, the GOP loses every presidential election to the heat death of the universe.

Ace, you're right - the SoCons no longer have any clout in the Republican party. But look at what the party has become - a rump party with no unifying principles trying to to be a little less "free stuff" than the "free stuff" party.

Posted by: Ace's liver at May 03, 2016 10:24 PM (XIXhw)

696 Well, thank God that a willingness to kill human infants in the womb is no longer a litmus test for the Presidency or basic human values any longer. Now, the size and thickness of a man's dick means much more, as does the shape and feel of a woman's breast.

Ah, civilizations' progress.

Posted by: Trump's Stubby Fingers at May 03, 2016 10:46 PM (SJ184)

697 Frum has always been a crap weasel.

Posted by: Trump's Stubby Fingers at May 03, 2016 10:46 PM (SJ184)

698 You are correct when you say if pro-lifers take this now, it will be the position everyone will take moving forward. That's basically the case with gay marriage, there's still some fight trying to allow pizzerias to not bake cakes. My point is that everyone that was running for president this year didn't put the topic on the table, because they knew it wasn't a battle that would win votes, even if nobody inside the party ever ran openly with the idea. I know this isn't a decision taken directly by the president, but this is how the game works and why the conservative angle doesn't work. You have a side pulling to the left and another one trying to keep the rope exactly where it is, guess what happens. If things continue this way, in 30 years opposing baby murder will be a similar position to fascism today. The only solution I see happening by voting is for things to get really bad and a 3rd "crazy radical extreme" party appearing and mattering. But think how bad things would have to get before that.

Posted by: Potatoer at May 03, 2016 10:52 PM (MgMcJ)

699 Ace, I'll say this as a social conservative who also considers himself firmly limited-government. Many of us are absurd, and our own worst enemies. But libertarians and social liberal Republicans often fail to fully appreciate that as traditional institutions wither, the average person reliably turns to the modern state, and its (if you will) religion of what "government must do for you," in Obama's words. People want an existential backstop besides their own agency. Clownish as much social conservative activism is, it embodied a preservative impulse that was a bulwark against the state. Trump indeed heralds the death of it, in its current form (and maybe that's a good thing). But look for no flowering of sturdy individualism in its place. Look for the opposite.

Posted by: drycreekboy at May 03, 2016 11:16 PM (45sd4)

700 Compared to this Drumpfkoff clown, how exactly was Goldwater dangerous and unstatesman-like?

I can'r think of a more qualified 'true conservative' candidate for the Republican party presidential nomination than Barry Goldwater (I don't leave out Reagan, either), nor a less qualified presidential candidate - for EITHER major party - in my lifetime, or that of my parents.

Very soon, the Donald is going to demand total control over the RNC. He'll be bringing in his own little army of Wharton School graduates and cut-rate wannabe Roy Cohns to run the thing, according to his whims, and relayed from inside Trump corporate boardrooms, by phone calls, emails and of course Twitter. He's going to have his reality TV producers produce the RNC in Cleveland. He's going to exercise total control of all fund raising, not just for this year's presidential election but for any and all campaign funding that goes thru the RNC or that the RNC has any interest in, legitimate or otherwise. He's going to have Mannafort and Stone and Charlie Black terrorize the entire infrastructure between Heritage to the state and local Republican party organizations.

Then he'll lose - bad. He'll lose badly to Hillary Clinton, but he'll also lose the Republicans control over the Senate, and therefore the Supreme Court. There's not only a vacancy there now, there are 4 more coming, including Kennedy and Thomas, so most likely Hillary will be picking at least 4 Supreme Court justices before 2000. I really don't think there's any serious threat that the Dems will take the House, but they'll sure as fuck make gains, and the Republican majority that'll technically remain will be fractured and vulnerable to be wagged by the Dem minority tail.

That'll all be due to Drumpf. But to make matters worse, he's going to treat the RNC as an asset within his constellation of several hundred corporations, and just like he's done for decades in the context of business failures and bankruptcies and hostile takeovers, he's going to make demands before he agrees to leave. And those demands are going to include a LOT of money - easily a billion dollars - plus the party will agree - because it'll be under his control - to provide him a lifetime sinecure to go anywhere and say anything he wants to whoever he chooses, speaking AS "former Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump".

Getting rid of this monster is going to require some, shall we say, out of the box thinking.

Posted by: Radicchio Allassurdo at May 04, 2016 12:21 AM (lqeGC)

701 Maybe social conservatives finally figured out that the GOP uses them like the Democrats use blacks. What has the GOP done for social conservatives lately? Social issues are taking a back seat to the more important issues of national sovereignty and jobs. The GOP should blame themselves for making social issue irrelevant.

Posted by: Mortimer Snerd at May 04, 2016 07:41 AM (i7PoZ)

702 Ace,

Your responses to arguments why pro-lifers are accepting Trump is really just emotionalism. You say:

"But once again, this just is a reason why the rest of the party
doesn't have to adopt this issue as their own any more. It's not a
disputation of the fact that the party no longer has to be pro-life."

Again, that's fine, you can try that, but it isn't going to work out well. As I said in another comment - 1) being pro-choice wouldn't work for Ted Cruz or Jeb or some other standard politician. It ONLY works for Trump because a) he is pretending NOT TO BE PRO-CHOICE and b) the voters are so angry/disgusted with the GOP.

Your argument boils down to: "you should never make a strategic decision at any time and if you do, it is evidence that your issue isn't important and we can ignore it". That's silly. Particularly coming from a guy who admits to being pro-choice but making the STRATEGIC decision to support pro-lifers for the good of the party. So, YOU can make strategic decisions, but others can't?

The GOP itself can make strategic decisions (always bad ones that piss off its base - such as amnesty support), but the voters cannot?

Your anti-Trump emotionalism is getting the better of your logic. It has for some time.

Trump isn't perfect. He's not a conservative. But, the GOP brought Trump on themselves by being deceitful and anti-conservative for so long, for colluding with the DNC for so long, that the GOP voters want nothing to do with any traditional GOP politicians. That is what this ultimately comes down to. Why your anger isn't directed at the GOP instead of the voters is a mystery. That is who you should be angry at. That is who you should be taking to task. That is who you should be trying to change.

But, you are falling into the very trap the rest of the "establishment" and other #nevertrump pundits are falling into. Blaming the victim. The GOP voters have been victimized by the GOP for decades because the GOP pretends to be something it is not - a right-of-center party - to get money, volunteers, and votes but then governs as an arm of the DNC, with failure theater and other nonsense. The voters finally had enough, rose up, and selected someone they think is a push-back against the GOP (whether or not that ends up being true remains to be seen).

And your anger is against the voters? Not the GOP? As long as the GOP apologists continue apologizing for the GOP and forgiving their every betrayal, the GOP isn't going to learn and change.

Posted by: Golden at May 04, 2016 07:58 AM (3ZtZW)

703 I don't vote for baby killers. That is the only reasonable stance to take. It is a single issue that taints a persons beliefs on all other issues.

It is unreasonable to be for killing babies.

There is no compromise to be had here.

Do we really have more important things to worry about? How many people, babies are people, have been murdered by abortive measures in the world? How many have been murdered in the West, in America? More babies have been murdered than people have died in WW I, WW II, Lenin, Stalin, and Pol Pot combined.

Posted by: Dave at May 04, 2016 10:21 AM (hm8tW)

704 It all this political opinion depends on what one thinks Conservative or Liberal means. That can range anywhere between Scalia and Sanders.

Posted by: Bully at May 04, 2016 07:50 PM (6NjvM)

(Jump to top of page)






Processing 0.09, elapsed 0.0999 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0227 seconds, 713 records returned.
Page size 498 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.7 alpha.



MuNuvians
MeeNuvians
Polls! Polls! Polls!
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
News/Chat