House GOP fears retirement wave will lead to tsunami

[Maj. Bill Martin]

So if John Kasich were running in 2016 against Hillary, you would not have voted for him?

@musiclady

I honestly don't remember enough about his 2016 campaign to know.  But based on what I remember since then...I absolutely would not vote for him in 2020 regardless of who the Democrat nominee was.  I think his entire "what I want to tell St. Peter when I'm at the pearly gates" schtick is just another version of the detestable "Jesus was a Socialist" argument.

The reason is, that for me, what you call "personal characteristics" trump issues.  Serial adultery and perpetual dishonesty are back breakers...... and Trump is guilty on both counts.

I'll just say that I'd much, much rather have a President who is a moral reprobate in his personal life, but who preserves individual liberty for his 360 million fellow citizens, than a moral saint who wishes to destroy individual liberty, advance the weirdness of the gender wars, and pushes race-baiting and "white privilege".  And I'd happily cast my vote for the former on election to try to make that happen.

I am curious about something.  Let's say it ends up being Elizabeth Warren v Donald Trump.  Though you won't be voting, would you have a preference as to which of them would win?

[Cyber Liberty]

Then you too understand why there are many who are at that same point with Trump......

I certainly do, @musiclady.  This is why I never called people who could not vote for Trump "Hillary supporters."  That was a dishonest crock.

But, there's also truth that a vote is often decided by the opponent.  I've been voting since '76, and only one time was I truly pleased with the Presidential candidate and happily voted for him...1984 and Reagan.  Many times I found myself voting against someone rather than for them.  I have a generally low opinion of all politicians.  My fellow Primary voters ticked me off a few times, sticking me with a lousy choice.

[XenaLee]

I certainly do, @musiclady.  This is why I never called people who could not vote for Trump "Hillary supporters."  That was a dishonest crock.

But, there's also truth that a vote is often decided by the opponent. I've been voting since '76, and only one time was I truly pleased with the Presidential candidate and happily voted for him...1984 and Reagan.  Many times I found myself voting against someone rather than for them.  I have a generally low opinion of all politicians.  My fellow Primary voters ticked me off a few times, sticking me with a lousy choice.

Exactly and ditto.

[Bigun]

I certainly do, @musiclady.  This is why I never called people who could not vote for Trump "Hillary supporters."  That was a dishonest crock.

But, there's also truth that a vote is often decided by the opponent.  I've been voting since '76, and only one time was I truly pleased with the Presidential candidate and happily voted for him...1984 and Reagan.  Many times I found myself voting against someone rather than for them.  I have a generally low opinion of all politicians.  My fellow Primary voters ticked me off a few times, sticking me with a lousy choice.

I'm in that exact same boat and have worked my tail off to try and fix the primary system in the RP so that would be less likely to happen. Unfortunately, the other side won in 2016 and we will never see another conservative nominee from the RP as a result.

But I STILL believe there is some validity to this:

To refuse to vote for the "lesser of two evils" puts one in the position of  support for the greater of the same two evils by the simple act of not standing in the way of the greater evil’s eventually triumph.

[Bigun]

2016 was the first time since Ronald Wilson Reagan that I actually voted for someone I genuinely liked for president and it wasn't Donald J. Trump.

Having said that, unless something drastically changes I will cast my vote for Trump in 2020. Not because I necessarily like him as a person but because he has performed admirably as president IMHO.

[XenaLee]

I'm in that exact same boat and have worked my tail off to try and fix the primary system in the RP so that would be less likely to happen. Unfortunately, the other side won in 2016 and we will never see another conservative nominee from the RP as a result.

But I STILL believe there is some validity to this:

To refuse to vote for the "lesser of two evils" puts one in the position of  support for the greater of the same two evils by the simple act of not standing in the way of the greater evil’s eventually triumph.

 

Evil thrives when good men (and women) do nothing.   And I can't think of a bigger evil right now than the evil that the Democratic Party represents for the future of America.

[roamer_1]

The reason is, that for me, what you call "personal characteristics" trump issues.  Serial adultery and perpetual dishonesty are back breakers...... and Trump is guilty on both counts.

@musiclady
That's probably true for me too - Almost as a matter of mechanics. Foremost: Can I trust this guy? Will he keep his word?

So in that one question, character takes primacy, because if I cannot trust him, I can take no guarantee from his promises, making any promise worthless.

Thereafter, record. If he has a record that reflects conservatism (or at least civil-libertarianism), One can be fairly certain that his motivations, and in that his actions, will continue in that way.

Then general historical stand on issues of the day...

THEN come personality and promises.

[roamer_1]

For me, several times.  Maverick John McCain was my Senator.

There was and is nothing on this planet that would make me cast a vote for John McAin't.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

@musiclady
That's probably true for me too - Almost as a matter of mechanics. Foremost: Can I trust this guy? Will he keep his word?

To be honest, I really don't "trust" any of them to keep their word.  At least, not until they've actually been elected and I can see how closely they are hewing to what they promised.

But I figure I've got a better shot of getting what I want by voting for the person who promises to do things I like, than the person who is promising to do things I don't like.

[roamer_1]

But I STILL believe there is some validity to this:

To refuse to vote for the "lesser of two evils" puts one in the position of  support for the greater of the same two evils by the simple act of not standing in the way of the greater evil’s eventually triumph.

That is a false statement.
Lesser evil is not the enemy of the greater evil. Good is the enemy of evil.

[roamer_1]

To be honest, I really don't "trust" any of them to keep their word.  At least, not until they've actually been elected and I can see how closely they are hewing to what they promised.

But I figure I've got a better shot of getting what I want by voting for the person who promises to do things I like, than the person who is promising to do things I don't like.

@Maj. Bill Martin
They ALL promise what you like. Every single damn one of em turns into a Conservative with a halo on the stump. That's exactly why I hold promises from the stump in such low regard... In fact, without regard, unless the candidate has a record that reflects those promises, lending them credence.

That is why I put so much emphasis on record. If they did the right thing when it didn't matter, then they'll do the right thing now.

[Bigun]

That is a false statement.
Lesser evil is not the enemy of the greater evil. Good is the enemy of evil.

I understand that you genuinely believe that.  And so do I in the final analysis but you cannot turn an aircraft carrier doing forty knots around on a dime.  You have to slow it down first.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

@Maj. Bill Martin
They ALL promise what you like.

@roamer_1

Are you out of your mind????  Bernie isn't promising what I'd like.  Kamala isn't promising what I'd like.  Neither is Warren, Biden, Buttigieg, Beto, or whichever other Democat Trump will be facing in the general election.  They're ALL pretty much promising the exact opposite of what I want.

Which goes back to my point -- the person who is promising to do what I want is more likely to do it than is the person who is promising the exact opposite of what I want.  And that's enough of a reason for me to support the former over the latter.

[Bigun]

@Maj. Bill Martin
They ALL promise what you like. Every single damn one of em turns into a Conservative with a halo on the stump. That's exactly why I hold promises from the stump in such low regard... In fact, without regard, unless the candidate has a record that reflects those promises, lending them credence.

That is why I put so much emphasis on record. If they did the right thing when it didn't matter, then they'll do the right thing now.

@roamer_1

Please see http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,370690.msg2023718.html#msg2023718

[XenaLee]

That is a false statement.
Lesser evil is not the enemy of the greater evil. Good is the enemy of evil.

Strictly for discussion purposes....lololol.....

https://stream.org/mustnt-not-vote-lesser-two-evils/

[roamer_1]

I understand that you genuinely believe that.  And so do I in the final analysis but you cannot turn an aircraft carrier doing forty knots around on a dime.  You have to slow it down first.

We have been 'slowing it down' for more than fifty years. When do you expect the turn to begin?

That statement is false. (No offense meant toward you)

[roamer_1]

Are you out of your mind????  Bernie isn't promising what I'd like.  Kamala isn't promising what I'd like.  Neither is Warren, Biden, Buttigieg, Beto, or any of the rest of them.  They're pretty much promising the exact opposite of what I want.

Of course, I meant Republicans.

Which goes back to my point -- the person who is promising to do what I want is more likely to do it than is the person who is promising the exact opposite of what I want.  And that's enough of a reason for me to support the former over the latter.

Which brings me back to my point, that they all (Republicans) promise the world from the stump. The record tells the tale.

[roamer_1]

@roamer_1

Please see http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,370690.msg2023718.html#msg2023718

Sorry old friend... I  sure as heck don't see it... And no one seems to be able to show me.
Rose colored glasses and garden paths.

[roamer_1]

Strictly for discussion purposes....lololol.....

https://stream.org/mustnt-not-vote-lesser-two-evils/

Do you really want to get me goin? LOL!

Because that article is bullcrap, easily torn to shreds.
But then, you probably knew I'd say that.
 

[Bigun]

Which brings me back to my point, that they all (Republicans) promise the world from the stump. The record tells the tale.

   That is an absolute FACT!  The only politicians I have seen in my 70+ years of life DO in office EXACTLY what they said they would do while campaigning are Ted Cruz and Now Donald J. Trump!  Maybe they are the start of something big.

[aligncare]

2016 was the first time since Ronald Wilson Reagan that I actually voted for someone I genuinely liked for president and it wasn't Donald J. Trump.

Having said that, unless something drastically changes I will cast my vote for Trump in 2020. Not because I necessarily like him as a person but because he has performed admirably as president IMHO.

@Bigun

I submit, however, that it’s the exact other way around, Bigun.

That right. It’s exactly because of the man Donald Trump is that he has performed admirably as president. He’s a tough, self-confident, arrogant, hard working S.O.B. who loves our America and hates what the Left has done, and continues to do to it, on steroids.

But, what do I know? I’m just a sycophant.

[Bigun]

Sorry old friend... I  sure as heck don't see it... And no one seems to be able to show me.
Rose colored glasses and garden paths.

The fact that YOU don't see it does not mean it has not occurred.

 

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Of course, I meant Republicans.

And I was talking about the general election, and the Democrats.

But fair enough -- Trump certainly wasn't my first, fifth, or even tenth choice among the GOP primary candidates in 2016.  I was really worried about what he was going to do on health care in particular, because he made a few noises that sounded to me like single-payer.  Fortunately, he did do his best to kill ObamaCare even if McCain ultimately torpedoed that.  And for me, he came through absolute aces on judicial nominations -- my No. 1 issue -- and has done more on immigration than any Republican President I can recall.

But I really made my point with the 2020 general election in mind.  I can't actually know that Trump will continue using the Federalist Society for guidance on judicial nominees, and I can't be 100% certain he's still going to be pushing hard for border security.  But considering that the Democrats are all promising the exact opposite...I'll cast my vote for horse that might win versus the one that's a guarantee to be running in the wrong direction.

[XenaLee]

Do you really want to get me goin? LOL!

Because that article is bullcrap, easily torn to shreds.
But then, you probably knew I'd say that.
 

As usual.... we can agree to disagree on certain issues. 

And yeah, I tried!  lololol

[roamer_1]

BTW @Maj. Bill Martin :

As a point of order, I have been fencing with you for a couple days now, and because I write like I talk, often I can appear rather terse... When I am bulshalatin' I kinda meander along in a good-hearted way... But when I actually have something to say, I can haul out my 5 dollar words and drill down to a point. I have been told that can be offensive.

I mean no offense toward your person, even in what I consider to be a pleasant opposition.
I respect your mind, even in disagreement, and I appreciate the engagement.