We Lost the Battle for the Republican Party’s Soul Long Ago

[twocoach]

is farming the interwebz for anything negatively related to the republican party your way of extending the olive branch across the isle.

you are no better than those you like to trash on.

I have no need nor desire to extend the olive branch across the aisle to people like that. Many on that side of the aisle are openly stating that they relate more to Putin's white Christian value than they do Joe Biden's white Christian values so I'd rather they stay over on their side of the aisle. I don't want those people on my side of anything.

[sdoyel]

i wonder if i could find some negative democrat stuff on the interwebz twitters and tweets and articles and the sort if i looked for it. probably not.

You are exhibit A of why the GOP is the way it is.

Keep pretending this shit isn't every-day occurence.

[MICHHAWK]

Keep pretending this shit isn't every-day occurence.

right back at you hypocrite

[Deleted User 863]

Keep pretending this shit isn't every-day occurence.

right back at you hypocrite

It's like the 4 years of celebrating bad things to "own" the right never happened...

It was wrong then and it is wrong now.


Aren't we tired of "winning" yet?

[twocoach]

Keep pretending this shit isn't every-day occurence.

right back at you hypocrite

It's like the 4 years of celebrating bad things to "own" the right never happened...

It was wrong then and it is wrong now.


Aren't we tired of "winning" yet?

It is an incorrect assumption that "to own the right" is why people spent time documenting the disgusting actions taken by the GOP during Trump's term. The only reason anyone would think that was the case is to fit into a silly "both sides do it" claim after the fact.

[Deleted User 863]

right back at you hypocrite

It's like the 4 years of celebrating bad things to "own" the right never happened...

It was wrong then and it is wrong now.


Aren't we tired of "winning" yet?

It is an incorrect assumption that "to own the right" is why people spent time documenting the disgusting actions taken by the GOP during Trump's term. The only reason anyone would think that was the case is to fit into a silly "both sides do it" claim after the fact.

Some of the actions "documented" definitely deserved it. But many of them didn't.

Neither side cheers for the other side to do well. Don't kid yourself.

[PhDhawk]

It's like the 4 years of celebrating bad things to "own" the right never happened...

It was wrong then and it is wrong now.


Aren't we tired of "winning" yet?

It is an incorrect assumption that "to own the right" is why people spent time documenting the disgusting actions taken by the GOP during Trump's term. The only reason anyone would think that was the case is to fit into a silly "both sides do it" claim after the fact.

Some of the actions "documented" definitely deserved it. But many of them didn't.

Neither side cheers for the other side to do well. Don't kid yourself.

Here's a fundamental difference.

We used to wait to react. Meaning, let's say there's a conflict with one country invading another. In a pre-Trump world, we'd wait to see how the current administration reacted and then voice our concern/offer our support. And yes, it almost always was partisan.

But now, we don't even do that. People were blaming Biden for what Putin was doing before there was even something to complain about. I don't remember that happening in history before. Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama, and Trump would not have been blamed for a shit-head dictator attacking his neighbor. They might have been blamed for reacting slowly, or not reacting strongly enough, or overreacting, or whatever, but not blamed in advance like we saw last week.

I was there with you with the 'both sides do it' pre-trump, but this current GOP is an entirely different animal. They've taken it to 11.

I grew up in a very partisan country, but both sides put America first. I no longer think that's the case and MAGA-types put party (Trump) above all else. I Don't remember any democrats siding with Sadam Hussein or Osama Bin-Laden because they thought they were better than Bush or Bush. And the republicans used to not do this kind of shit either before Trump.

[jfish26]

It's like the 4 years of celebrating bad things to "own" the right never happened...

It was wrong then and it is wrong now.


Aren't we tired of "winning" yet?

It is an incorrect assumption that "to own the right" is why people spent time documenting the disgusting actions taken by the GOP during Trump's term. The only reason anyone would think that was the case is to fit into a silly "both sides do it" claim after the fact.

Some of the actions "documented" definitely deserved it. But many of them didn't.

Neither side cheers for the other side to do well. Don't kid yourself.

I mean, in the context of elections, of course "neither side cheers for the other side to do well." Not kidding myself there.

But, more generally? Not only do I think hard-right people carry more ill will toward hard-left people than vice versa, I would suggest that it's simply wrong to say that "the left," generally, does in fact not want a lot of "the right" to do well.

Specifically, the "social welfare" progressive policies supported by "the left" would be especially beneficial to...drum roll...a very substantial percentage - very possibly a majority! - of Trump voters.

[zsn]

When was the last time a leader of one party in one of the legislative chambers had to put out a statement that there is no place for white supremacists in their conference? When was the last time a leader of one of party in one of the legislative chambers refused to do that?

Both happened today!! I’ll give you one guess as to which party.

[Deleted User 863]

It is an incorrect assumption that "to own the right" is why people spent time documenting the disgusting actions taken by the GOP during Trump's term. The only reason anyone would think that was the case is to fit into a silly "both sides do it" claim after the fact.

Some of the actions "documented" definitely deserved it. But many of them didn't.

Neither side cheers for the other side to do well. Don't kid yourself.

Here's a fundamental difference.

We used to wait to react. Meaning, let's say there's a conflict with one country invading another. In a pre-Trump world, we'd wait to see how the current administration reacted and then voice our concern/offer our support. And yes, it almost always was partisan.

But now, we don't even do that. People were blaming Biden for what Putin was doing before there was even something to complain about. I don't remember that happening in history before. Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama, and Trump would not have been blamed for a shit-head dictator attacking his neighbor. They might have been blamed for reacting slowly, or not reacting strongly enough, or overreacting, or whatever, but not blamed in advance like we saw last week.

I was there with you with the 'both sides do it' pre-trump, but this current GOP is an entirely different animal. They've taken it to 11.

I grew up in a very partisan country, but both sides put America first. I no longer think that's the case and MAGA-types put party (Trump) above all else. I Don't remember any democrats siding with Sadam Hussein or Osama Bin-Laden because they thought they were better than Bush or Bush. And the republicans used to not do this kind of shit either before Trump.

Trump definitely changed the "game". And GOP definitely took it to 11. Fully agree. And never have claimed "both sides do it" to equal degree.

....but remember when people here were mad Trump authorized the killing of Qasem Soleimani? I do. Yes, it's different, because things rarely are exactly the same, but similar anti the other side at all costs mentality imo.

When the stock market would go down under trump people ran here to celebrate "all that winning".

All different...but all of the same mentality it seems. Maybe I am wrong. I certainly would like to be wrong.

[Deleted User 863]

I mean, in the context of elections, of course "neither side cheers for the other side to do well." Not kidding myself there.

But, more generally? Not only do I think hard-right people carry more ill will toward hard-left people than vice versa, I would suggest that it's simply wrong to say that "the left," generally, does in fact not want a lot of "the right" to do well.

I just watched posters on this very site almost celebrate every time an unvaxxed GOPer died of covid.

I think both sides hate each other enough for it to be problematic, regardless of who is worse about it or who did it first. It's a problem.

[sdoyel]

[Mjl]

Sigh. Fuck it, I'm with the three crazies on that one. Just to make a point. It's already a hate crime if you kill someone because of their race. How did something like that make it to the top of the priority list. It doesn't affect anyone in any way at all.

This is why we can't break up Microsoft and Google and Amazon, or do a hundred other things, because we're busy with virtue signaling bills?

[sdoyel]

I mean, in the context of elections, of course "neither side cheers for the other side to do well." Not kidding myself there.

But, more generally? Not only do I think hard-right people carry more ill will toward hard-left people than vice versa, I would suggest that it's simply wrong to say that "the left," generally, does in fact not want a lot of "the right" to do well.

I just watched posters on this very site almost celebrate every time an unvaxxed GOPer died of covid.

I think both sides hate each other enough for it to be problematic, regardless of who is worse about it or who did it first. It's a problem.

They died of Covid because they chose to ignore science, as well as a safe and free vaccine.

[Cascadia]

Sigh. Fuck it, I'm with the three crazies on that one. Just to make a point. It's already a hate crime if you kill someone because of their race. How did something like that make it to the top of the priority list. It doesn't affect anyone in any way at all.

This is why we can't break up Microsoft and Google and Amazon, or do a hundred other things, because we're busy with virtue signaling bills?

Quoting before the delete/edit

[japhy]

[
Trump definitely changed the "game". And GOP definitely took it to 11. Fully agree. And never have claimed "both sides do it" to equal degree. ....but

What do you pay your chiropractor to uncoil your spine every day?

[zsn]

Sigh. Fuck it, I'm with the three crazies on that one. Just to make a point. It's already a hate crime if you kill someone because of their race. How did something like that make it to the top of the priority list. It doesn't affect anyone in any way at all.

This is why we can't break up Microsoft and Google and Amazon, or do a hundred other things, because we're busy with virtue signaling bills?

If it’s not a difficult choice why not just vote on the virtue and get it out of the way? Is it because it goes against your bigotry and that of your constituents?

[Deleted User 863]

[
Trump definitely changed the "game". And GOP definitely took it to 11. Fully agree. And never have claimed "both sides do it" to equal degree. ....but

What do you pay your chiropractor to uncoil your spine every day?

Cascadia's mom does it for free thankfully. Otherwise I'd be poor as hell and whining about the rich like Qusdahl.

[twocoach]

I mean, in the context of elections, of course "neither side cheers for the other side to do well." Not kidding myself there.

But, more generally? Not only do I think hard-right people carry more ill will toward hard-left people than vice versa, I would suggest that it's simply wrong to say that "the left," generally, does in fact not want a lot of "the right" to do well.

I just watched posters on this very site almost celebrate every time an unvaxxed GOPer died of covid.

I think both sides hate each other enough for it to be problematic, regardless of who is worse about it or who did it first. It's a problem.

Pointing out the irony of someone dying after spreading antivax bullshit isn't cheering against someone simply for being on the other side. It is an "I told you so" to someone who died taking a political stance against something because they saw it as being for the other side. Do you understand the difference?

[Deleted User 863]

How come i never saw "you"/"they" point that out for unvaxxed dems or unvaxxed minorities who died?

And how are you "i told you so-ing" a dead perso. on a messageboard with 20 people? Hint: you're/they're not.