Gulfstream4 said:
Civilized said:
Gulfstream4 said:
Civilized said:
Gulfstream4 said:
Civilized said:
Gulfstream4 said:
Werewolf said:
Liberal white women have a sickness, completely brainwashed.
They have had life so good for so long they actively look for anything to rail against. They will vote for the devil himself if means they can ho around and get an abortion if they become pregnant. Ironically, when the Muslims out breed the rest of us liberal white women will be some of the first to suffer. Their days of hoing around are over.
Have you noticed how righties on here rail against edge-case left-wing social media accounts that aren't representative of the party, much less its leadership, and the lefties on here rail against Republican leadership including the President?
Why are y'all wasting your time railing against social media randos that don't have electorally viable much less mainstream leftist views, and not party leadership?
Don't you think it's more germane to talk about the actual elected reps, appointed judges, and mainstream party views that actually drive and dictate policy?
Maybe because you know these corner-case weirdo online strawmen you find don't represent 95%+ of the left, but they sure make for easy targets of faux-righteous indignation?
ETA: Especially weird given all the "TDS's" that get thrown around on here. Clearly you'd rather us obssess over hyper-online right-wing weirdos than care about what our actual President says and does. Makes total sense!
With my very own eyes I see what decades of voting liberal have done to Western Europe. Maybe you have been living under a rock or maybe you simply refuse to acknowledge the damage done?
Now, liberals are doing the same thing here with the American hating "squad" and more recently that fruitcake running for Mayor of NYC. Liberals hate western culture and have opened the door for the third world invasion.
Again, you're railing against ideas that aren't electorally viable. You hate a strawman, not a real, substantive component of the American left.
Name several mainstream, electorally viable liberals that "hate America." You can't name one.
The Squad is a fringe component of the party for a reason. Most of their ideas aren't electorally viable for a reason.
America is a country of immigrants but importantly, voters have again reminded leaders that being weak on immigration is a loser electorally.
Maybe you and Packgrad can get together and write a book report on all these imaginary America-hating mainstream lefties, and all of Trump's hard-hitting election reforms.
ETA: Feel free to list all the catastrophic damage done in Western Europe over several decades that you're just positive will rear its head here.
If the squad is "fringe" how come they keep getting elected again and again? Say what you want but they ARE democrats and they are no friend of this country.
Crime , rape, assault, etc. is up significantly across Europe due to the invasion and it's only a matter of time before it happens here.
You keep your head buried in the sand because you simply can not say anything about your fellow party members.
There are a ton of House reps. A very small handful on both sides will be far-left/right. That doesn't mean their platform is electorally viable for higher offices like Senators in most cases, or certainly the presidency.
MTG keeps getting elected too.
Is she fringe? Or is she mainstream?
"Fringe" means their positions aren't widespread in the party (obviously), and also that their positions aren't going to get them elected likely as Senator and almost certainly as President.
And this "no friend of the country" bit is Hoover-esque. You disagree with them, great. I do too on issues like Israel, relieving college debt, and any number of other things. But they're not "enemies of the state" or "the enemy within" or whatever overly dramatic description you want to use. You just disagree with them and that's fine.
George Bush had very tolerant, humane views on immigration too. Is he an "ememy of the state?" LOL
Sorry amigo. You may disagree with the squad but when you vote democrat you vote for all of it. Own it.
Yeah, no. That's obviously not the way it works in a two party system. You don't have 15 choices. You have two. And many times you're voting for the lesser of two evils.
All we've heard for years is about how many "hold your nose" Trump voters there were, and how most people that voted for Trump disagree with many aspects of the way he leads and does business and the petulant Jan-6'ing, sex-abusing child that he is, but at the end of the day they need someone to take on the radical left, or slow illegal immigration, or whatever.
So now you're saying that in a two-party system if you decide on balance one party's candidate outweighs the benefits and drawbacks of the other, you vote for and own all of it even though you only had two candidates to choose from?
You need to tell that to all the conservative Christians and all the single-issue and hold-your-nose Trump voters then, I'm pretty sure they're operating under a different set of rules and assumptions.
It's so abundantly clear that you can vote for a candidate and not believe in or support everything they believe in and do, much less believe in or support everything that everybody in a hundreds-of-reps-deep party does, that's it's not even worth talking about but here we are.
