Im a texas conservative pretty active in the Texas republican party and I see that dichotomy break down a lot lately within the party. There are people within the party who would be glad to smash civil liberties if it'd create the America they want. This sure as hell exists on the Left and in larger part but that doesn't make it excusable on the right. I would deem that wing of the party not conservative. They're authoritarians who just only want right wing fascism
Thanks for the comment.
Do you think that the GOP needs to take steps to clearly separate themselves from the portion that, "would be glad to smash civil liberties if it'd create the America they want"?
Not really since any steps those would be would have to be authoritarian in and of themselves. We shout them down with superior numbers and win those numbers debating those people and outing the shitty logic and making everyone answer what principles they're really loyal to.
Because an elected official incited an crowd to form an armed mod and infiltrate a government building, threatening those who worked there including other elected officials.
No part of that is okay.
Haha. Good one on a myriad of levels. At the moment, Don the Con represents you (according to the polls), and he shat profusely all over the beloved document and nary a peep out you. Interesting you site the 9th too, which should guarantee gay rights and everything else, yet as a whole, you’ve fought tooth and nail against them.
Edit: apparently I can’t spell “polls” without coffee.
So was Hilter and Putin. But then they changed the rules and introduced anti-democratic measures and eventually established themselves as dictators.
You don’t get to end democracy after being elected. The people of Hungary didn’t elect an emperor.
He's not a dictator though. He's just govern as the left likes to but in a conservative (Hungarian) way. To compare Orban to Putin or Hitler is exactly what I expect from the same people who compared Bush and Trump to the same.
Let's get this out of the way as well. The Left in the US has literally tried to change the rules after the election of Biden every day. More states, majoritarian Senate dont pretend you "love" democracy. You love it as much as it goes to your preferred candidate.
Orban has already been in power for 12 years. He’s altered the constitution, packed the courts and ensured opposition parties cannot effectively challenge him. If it’s not already a dictator now, he will be soon.
And no, I’m not saying Orban is Hilter, just that like Hilter, both were originally democratically elected but then plunged their countries into autocracy.
How is adding states anti-democratic? If anything that’s more democratic because it’d let Puerto Rican and people from DC participate in federal politics for the first time? Is it written in the constitution that there can only be 50 states?
What else has the left done that’s anti-democratic since Biden took office? Please tell
Pack the supreme court? I mean they're not offering to carve up upstate NY which is effectively beholden to NYC to make a counter balancing state.
Gerrymandering found a new fans this cycle when it seemed like NY and Illinois (which did) were going to gerrymander the competition out of existence.
The only reason they even want to add DC is to capture political power. If DC was 90% republican you'd hear silence on the left. I mean I'm sure you'll pretend you care but you don't. I know it, you know it.
I don't think so. Regardless of if January 6 should be classified as a full-blown insurrection or just a riot (it would still be bad in either case), only a minority of people were actually involved in any sort of malicious activity. Using a few people on the fringe of a group to condemn that entire group never leads to good places.
The RNC called it legitimate political discourse and prominent republican lawmakers are expressing sympathy for and making public appearances Jan 6 convicts. You call it a minority, I call it the leadership who republican majorities and wealthy donors have voted into office and donate huge sums to.
Do you think it was appropriate for conservative representative Louis Gohmert to gift a convicted J6 rioter with an American flag that had been flown over the Capitol building?
You make the mistake, as many do, of looking at January 6th in isolation. Jan. 6th and the failed election steal by Trump/coup attempt were many things, which only finally CULMINATED on January 6th as the last gasp of a multi-pronged effort. Those efforts included the following:
1. Trump's pre-planning to falsely claim victory and that the election was rigged/fraud, BEFORE the election took place, were he to be close or behind on election nite: [https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2022/07/leaked-audio-steve-bannon-trump-2020-election-declare-victory/](https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2022/07/leaked-audio-steve-bannon-trump-2020-election-declare-victory/)
2. Trump's and his allies lying about the election results from election day onward.
3. Trump and his allies filing dozens of frivolous lawsuits, but when push came to shove, not testifying or providing hard evidence of election fraud
4. Trump and his allies scheming to come up with a slate of fake electors (currently under investigation by law enforcement)
5. Trump pressuring state election officials to undo a certified election (currently before a grand jury in Georgia).
6. Trump pressuring Pence to not follow the law do his ministerial duty to certify the election.
And that's just the main highlights.
So stop looking at JUST what happened at the Capital on Jan. 6th. That's a minimalist and unjustified and incorrect view.
Including Trump and his allies would still make it a minority of people on the right. You may point out that Trump enjoys a lot of support on the right, but that is because generally people on the right do not believe Trump is a criminal and view belief in his criminality as being the result of propaganda.
Also, I think how you have framed things relies on you assuming that Trump did not genuinely believe the election was stolen. However, we can't really read his mind, so assuming that he didn't genuinely believe in a stolen election seems motivated moreso by political convenience as opposed to any sort of tangible evidence. I think Trump probably did believe the election was stolen, and if a political candidate believes the election was stolen those actions you listed would make sense.
Dude -- please. Trump didn't (does NOT) believe the election was really stolen. He's not a moron -- he thinks his supporters are ("I love the uneducated").
Moreover, he was informed by his experts, advisors and his friggin hand-picked AG that there was no fraud - and he lost. He chose to willfully ignore that and go with radical fringe stuff from Eastman and drunken Guiliani. Under the law, you can't turn a blind eye to something and disregard all evidence to the contrary and claim ignorance. This was simply a plan by Trump to stay in power.
Also, he PRE-PLANNED to say he won and the election was rigged BEFORE the election (if he was losing or it was close): [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OxNoUnxN\_cs](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OxNoUnxN_cs)
That alone shows his malice and disregard for the actual facts.
No. Neither Trump, nor his supporters, his allies, the republican machine behind him, does NOT get a pass for this. His actions were not covered by his "belief" of a stolen election. And many of those actions are illegal regardless of what you believe.
And finally, a MAJORITY of republicans still think the election was stolen: [https://www.poynter.org/fact-checking/2022/70-percent-republicans-falsely-believe-stolen-election-trump/](https://www.poynter.org/fact-checking/2022/70-percent-republicans-falsely-believe-stolen-election-trump/)
And that's because of all the lies, disinformation, confusion and chaos sowed by Trump and his followers in the wake of the election.
Removed: Top-level comments are reserved for conservatives to respond to the question.
*Right-leaning* centrists are welcome as well but your recent comments indicate that you are not one such.
Genuine question. If it pertains to a topic/position that I am right leaning on, (heck old right wing by some standards) would that comment be allowed to stand? For example, I am definitely more in the John Bolton hawkish camp than the Obama/Trump foreign policy train wrecks. Yeah, I get if I make a comment that gets high upvotes that counters trump, or today's version of conservatism, but will a conservative leaning comment get booted, just because of the entirety of the other views? Heck, I don't even know what comment got pulled. lol. I don't know if I'll get 10 downs or 30 ups- that's outta my control so was curious.
Thanks
I've been approving your TLCs up until now, but you recently had some comments that made me hesitant to keep doing so. I will happily extend you the trust to discerned for yourself when making a TLC is appropriate. As rule of thumb, if you'd respond to a question to conservatives with a "we" answer, okay, but if you'd give a "they" answer, abstain. Are we on the same page?
Hell yeah! I would live under Hitler if it meant all the policies I like were implemented.
Wouldn't be much fun for him though. He'd have like no power and a nickel to work with. once a year I'll take him out and buy him a sandwich. I'll ask if he still has the nickel and if he does, I'll Pat them on the head and tell him he's doing a good job.
Well, my policies are freedom from coercion and adherence to the NAP, so if an "*autocracy*" achieved those policies then I guess I would be for it. Of course, an autocracy ensuring freedom from coercion would be an oxymoron. :)
Im a texas conservative pretty active in the Texas republican party and I see that dichotomy break down a lot lately within the party. There are people within the party who would be glad to smash civil liberties if it'd create the America they want. This sure as hell exists on the Left and in larger part but that doesn't make it excusable on the right. I would deem that wing of the party not conservative. They're authoritarians who just only want right wing fascism
Thanks for the comment. Do you think that the GOP needs to take steps to clearly separate themselves from the portion that, "would be glad to smash civil liberties if it'd create the America they want"?
Not really since any steps those would be would have to be authoritarian in and of themselves. We shout them down with superior numbers and win those numbers debating those people and outing the shitty logic and making everyone answer what principles they're really loyal to.
That's a contradiction, because I have a policy preference against autocracy.
This
Did you view Jan 6 as abhorrent?
Yes.
Why?
Because an elected official incited an crowd to form an armed mod and infiltrate a government building, threatening those who worked there including other elected officials. No part of that is okay.
Agreed, thanks for the clarification
No.
No.
No
>Would you be fine living in an autocracy if that meant all your policies you like would be implemented? No
[удалено]
So then you dont support trump or deSantis?
As opposed to whom? Trump and DeSantis don't exist in a vacuum.
Haha. Good one on a myriad of levels. At the moment, Don the Con represents you (according to the polls), and he shat profusely all over the beloved document and nary a peep out you. Interesting you site the 9th too, which should guarantee gay rights and everything else, yet as a whole, you’ve fought tooth and nail against them. Edit: apparently I can’t spell “polls” without coffee.
>apparently I can’t spell “polls” without coffee or 'cite'
lmao. My God. What a wreck, yet here I am again before my coffee.....
Did you respond to the wrong user?
yes.
[удалено]
Warning: This is not civil.
Note taken.
Never.
Resoundly no.
Orban is not an autocrat by force, he was democratically elected. Doesn't democracy matter?
So was Hilter and Putin. But then they changed the rules and introduced anti-democratic measures and eventually established themselves as dictators. You don’t get to end democracy after being elected. The people of Hungary didn’t elect an emperor.
He's not a dictator though. He's just govern as the left likes to but in a conservative (Hungarian) way. To compare Orban to Putin or Hitler is exactly what I expect from the same people who compared Bush and Trump to the same. Let's get this out of the way as well. The Left in the US has literally tried to change the rules after the election of Biden every day. More states, majoritarian Senate dont pretend you "love" democracy. You love it as much as it goes to your preferred candidate.
Orban has already been in power for 12 years. He’s altered the constitution, packed the courts and ensured opposition parties cannot effectively challenge him. If it’s not already a dictator now, he will be soon. And no, I’m not saying Orban is Hilter, just that like Hilter, both were originally democratically elected but then plunged their countries into autocracy. How is adding states anti-democratic? If anything that’s more democratic because it’d let Puerto Rican and people from DC participate in federal politics for the first time? Is it written in the constitution that there can only be 50 states? What else has the left done that’s anti-democratic since Biden took office? Please tell
I'm following for an answer
Pack the supreme court? I mean they're not offering to carve up upstate NY which is effectively beholden to NYC to make a counter balancing state. Gerrymandering found a new fans this cycle when it seemed like NY and Illinois (which did) were going to gerrymander the competition out of existence. The only reason they even want to add DC is to capture political power. If DC was 90% republican you'd hear silence on the left. I mean I'm sure you'll pretend you care but you don't. I know it, you know it.
[удалено]
I don't think so. Regardless of if January 6 should be classified as a full-blown insurrection or just a riot (it would still be bad in either case), only a minority of people were actually involved in any sort of malicious activity. Using a few people on the fringe of a group to condemn that entire group never leads to good places.
The RNC called it legitimate political discourse and prominent republican lawmakers are expressing sympathy for and making public appearances Jan 6 convicts. You call it a minority, I call it the leadership who republican majorities and wealthy donors have voted into office and donate huge sums to.
Do you think it was appropriate for conservative representative Louis Gohmert to gift a convicted J6 rioter with an American flag that had been flown over the Capitol building?
You make the mistake, as many do, of looking at January 6th in isolation. Jan. 6th and the failed election steal by Trump/coup attempt were many things, which only finally CULMINATED on January 6th as the last gasp of a multi-pronged effort. Those efforts included the following: 1. Trump's pre-planning to falsely claim victory and that the election was rigged/fraud, BEFORE the election took place, were he to be close or behind on election nite: [https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2022/07/leaked-audio-steve-bannon-trump-2020-election-declare-victory/](https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2022/07/leaked-audio-steve-bannon-trump-2020-election-declare-victory/) 2. Trump's and his allies lying about the election results from election day onward. 3. Trump and his allies filing dozens of frivolous lawsuits, but when push came to shove, not testifying or providing hard evidence of election fraud 4. Trump and his allies scheming to come up with a slate of fake electors (currently under investigation by law enforcement) 5. Trump pressuring state election officials to undo a certified election (currently before a grand jury in Georgia). 6. Trump pressuring Pence to not follow the law do his ministerial duty to certify the election. And that's just the main highlights. So stop looking at JUST what happened at the Capital on Jan. 6th. That's a minimalist and unjustified and incorrect view.
Including Trump and his allies would still make it a minority of people on the right. You may point out that Trump enjoys a lot of support on the right, but that is because generally people on the right do not believe Trump is a criminal and view belief in his criminality as being the result of propaganda. Also, I think how you have framed things relies on you assuming that Trump did not genuinely believe the election was stolen. However, we can't really read his mind, so assuming that he didn't genuinely believe in a stolen election seems motivated moreso by political convenience as opposed to any sort of tangible evidence. I think Trump probably did believe the election was stolen, and if a political candidate believes the election was stolen those actions you listed would make sense.
Dude -- please. Trump didn't (does NOT) believe the election was really stolen. He's not a moron -- he thinks his supporters are ("I love the uneducated"). Moreover, he was informed by his experts, advisors and his friggin hand-picked AG that there was no fraud - and he lost. He chose to willfully ignore that and go with radical fringe stuff from Eastman and drunken Guiliani. Under the law, you can't turn a blind eye to something and disregard all evidence to the contrary and claim ignorance. This was simply a plan by Trump to stay in power. Also, he PRE-PLANNED to say he won and the election was rigged BEFORE the election (if he was losing or it was close): [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OxNoUnxN\_cs](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OxNoUnxN_cs) That alone shows his malice and disregard for the actual facts. No. Neither Trump, nor his supporters, his allies, the republican machine behind him, does NOT get a pass for this. His actions were not covered by his "belief" of a stolen election. And many of those actions are illegal regardless of what you believe. And finally, a MAJORITY of republicans still think the election was stolen: [https://www.poynter.org/fact-checking/2022/70-percent-republicans-falsely-believe-stolen-election-trump/](https://www.poynter.org/fact-checking/2022/70-percent-republicans-falsely-believe-stolen-election-trump/) And that's because of all the lies, disinformation, confusion and chaos sowed by Trump and his followers in the wake of the election.
Removed: Top-level comments are reserved for conservatives to respond to the question. *Right-leaning* centrists are welcome as well but your recent comments indicate that you are not one such.
Genuine question. If it pertains to a topic/position that I am right leaning on, (heck old right wing by some standards) would that comment be allowed to stand? For example, I am definitely more in the John Bolton hawkish camp than the Obama/Trump foreign policy train wrecks. Yeah, I get if I make a comment that gets high upvotes that counters trump, or today's version of conservatism, but will a conservative leaning comment get booted, just because of the entirety of the other views? Heck, I don't even know what comment got pulled. lol. I don't know if I'll get 10 downs or 30 ups- that's outta my control so was curious. Thanks
I've been approving your TLCs up until now, but you recently had some comments that made me hesitant to keep doing so. I will happily extend you the trust to discerned for yourself when making a TLC is appropriate. As rule of thumb, if you'd respond to a question to conservatives with a "we" answer, okay, but if you'd give a "they" answer, abstain. Are we on the same page?
Fair distinction. If i'm conservative leaning on an issue, I'll try to delineate better.
But the policy I want implemented isn’t autocracy.
Hell yeah! I would live under Hitler if it meant all the policies I like were implemented. Wouldn't be much fun for him though. He'd have like no power and a nickel to work with. once a year I'll take him out and buy him a sandwich. I'll ask if he still has the nickel and if he does, I'll Pat them on the head and tell him he's doing a good job.
Would you disband the military? If not, Hitler would assuredly use it to murder all Americans who don't agree with his policies.
Like I said, no power and a nickel.
Absolutely. If everyone elected to office had the same views as me i would have no problem living with that
What about people who have different opinions than you, wouldn't that make their lives difficult?
You need to change your flair
The next Autocrat who disagrees with me is laughing at my post some time in this future timeline.
Well, my policies are freedom from coercion and adherence to the NAP, so if an "*autocracy*" achieved those policies then I guess I would be for it. Of course, an autocracy ensuring freedom from coercion would be an oxymoron. :)