House GOP fears retirement wave will lead to tsunami

[roamer_1]

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

 

LOL!
On an issue or two, perhaps I would agree... But on the whole, no. I have been paying attention, as it turns out. 

 

[Cyber Liberty]

So...this dumpster fire is still going.....

[Sanguine]

So...this dumpster fire is still going.....

No hints of retirement.   

[Maj. Bill Martin]

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.
 

Thanks -- absolutely no hard feelings on my end either.

For the most part, most of us here generally agree as to where we want to end up.  We just argue like hell about how best to get there.

 

[roamer_1]

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.

Now see, I prefer not to look at what the right hand is doing when it is out there waiving around. When that happens, I am always looking at the left hand.

Foremost above all things, strip away all the right hand, and you will see that the beast is still being fed, and fed better than ever. For that reason alone, upon the principles of fiscal conservatism, he does not deserve my vote.

Likewise with immigration. For all the pomp and circumstance, he is not far from meeting Obama's actual deportation numbers (last I looked), and one percent of the promised wall is actually in the ground.

Judges are not something I care to add into the equation - and that works in his defense, as going by the numbers on judges, on actual judgements that reflect conservatism, So far the results are bad. And I am rather spooked by Jim DeMint quietly stepping off from such a momentous duty - Heritage approving the judge list matters, and that he stepped down looks like a signal to me.
 
I am also reticent on Obamacare. I am likely to give him some credit there, but it was designed as an incredible monkey-knot, and I am very uncomfortable with the haphazard deconstruction thereof. In the grand scheme, there are props under the medical and insurance industries that are causing them to be non-competitive, and through the process that has gone on, those props have been strengthened, not knocked out. Root and branch, dammit. And I hold them all to that word.

Again, I will gladly debate these points and others, but with one question to the fore: What has he done that we get to keep?

[musiclady]

@musiclady

WHY would I ever get tired of fighting an evil that wants to enslave me and everyone else while destroying America by turning it into a police state?

BTW,I hate Islam,too. They are nothing more,or less,than the flip side of your card.

I never know whether to laugh or cry when you write idiotic things like this, pete.

Laugh because it's so utterly ridiculous, or cry because you are a very sad person to be filled with such hatred and anger.

Unfortunately, you are at odds with men such as George Washington, John Adams and James Madison, and that makes you at odds with the founding of this Constitutional Republic.......

[musiclady]

@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.

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?

The key question in response to this post is, does what Trump is doing in office actually preserve individual liberty?  At the very least, that is debatable.

I find it interesting that you use the words 'moral saint' to debunk my position, when I have used no such term, nor do I have any such expectation.

What is fundamental, however, is to have a core and to be able to tell the truth.  Those are both missing in our current President.

As for a preference between Warren and Trump, that's a bit tricksy of you.  You are right in that I would not vote for either because neither is an honest human being, but I see that you are trying to force me into some kind of philosophical corner of debate after which you can say, either "SEE!  You should vote for Trump," or "SEE!  You are a liberal,"............ neither of which is a correct response.

I said when Trump was running against Hillary that he would most likely do more things I agree with than she, and that has, in fact, occurred.  But if I could go back in time and get into that voting booth again, I would still vote for a candidate who represented the Constitution and Conservative values, and that didn't included either of them........... nor does it presently include Elizabeth Warren.

[musiclady]

@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.

You make many good points here, @roamer_1 ......... specifically the primacy of character and trustworthiness.

What I see happening with those who argue against us on this point, is that they are conflating and confusing the issue of character with 'personality.'  I could tolerate an icky personality like Trump's if it were in a person of fundamental character.  It's not his ugly, childish tweets that drive my reasoning to vote for a third party candidate.  It's his continuing inability to speak the truth.

That speaks to fundamental character, and that is what supersedes whether or not I get "what I want" from him.

[roamer_1]

You make many good points here, @roamer_1 ......... specifically the primacy of character and trustworthiness.

What I see happening with those who argue against us on this point, is that they are conflating and confusing the issue of character with 'personality.'  I could tolerate an icky personality like Trump's if it were in a person of fundamental character.  It's not his ugly, childish tweets that drive my reasoning to vote for a third party candidate.  It's his continuing inability to speak the truth.

That speaks to fundamental character, and that is what supersedes whether or not I get "what I want" from him.

That's right @musiclady , right as rain, which brings me back to something you debunked upthread - a moral saint, which I would not be so quick to shy away from...

Talk about evil being made good and good being made evil... That whole argument is on it's head. OF COURSE I would prefer an upright man... Honest and forthright, true to his oath, humble before God, driven by principle... How has that become a slur?

[Bigun]

OF COURSE I would prefer an upright man... Honest and forthright, true to his oath, humble before God, driven by principle... How has that become a slur?

It hasn't @roamer_1 and who wouldn't prefer that man?  All we have to do is find him, talk him into running, and figure out how to finance the effort.

[Night Hides Not]

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.

"Admirably" is debatable, but I'm in agreement with you. Considering the changing landscape in Texas, I'll have to be much more careful with my vote next year.

[roamer_1]

It hasn't @roamer_1 and who wouldn't prefer that man?  All we have to do is find him, talk him into running, and figure out how to finance the effort.

I dunno @Bigun , seems like folks nowadays consider a gentleman to be a milksop rather than a man of discipline and spring steel...

[roamer_1]

It hasn't @roamer_1 and who wouldn't prefer that man?  All we have to do is find him, talk him into running, and figure out how to finance the effort.

And I was part of that last time, btw... for the first time since 07 on the national ticket.

[XenaLee]

It hasn't @roamer_1 and who wouldn't prefer that man?  All we have to do is find him, talk him into running, and figure out how to finance the effort.

Good luck with that.   Wouldn't you have to be a little nuts (or more than a little) to want to put yourself and your family and your entire group of friends, administrative staff and associates through what the RL has put Trump & friends through? 

[roamer_1]

Good luck with that.   Wouldn't you have to be a little nuts (or more than a little) to want to put yourself and your family and your entire group of friends, administrative staff and associates through what the RL has put Trump & friends through?

No worse than what Tump put Cruz through...  Pardon me, but my give-a-damn's busted.

[XenaLee]

No worse than what Tump put Cruz through...  Pardon me, but my give-a-damn's busted.

And lo and behold.... Cruz got over it and ended up supporting Trump, putting the good of the nation over his own hurt feelings.   Too bad everyone can't accomplish the same.   

[Bigun]

Good luck with that.   Wouldn't you have to be a little nuts (or more than a little) to want to put yourself and your family and your entire group of friends, administrative staff and associates through what the RL has put Trump & friends through?

25 years ago I delved into the political arena as a candidate for an office much lower down on the totem that the presidency.  Let's just say the experience was eye-opening and let it go at that.  Can't imagine what it must be like to run for president these days.
 

[XenaLee]

No worse than what Tump put Cruz through...  Pardon me, but my give-a-damn's busted.

And by the way.... I'm calling you out on the fact that you just missed the opportunity to say "What?  Then are you saying that Trump is a little (or more than a little) nuts?".

AHhahahaha!!!!   

[XenaLee]

25 years ago I delved into the political arena as a candidate for an office much lower down on the totem that the presidency.  Let's just say the experience was eye-opening and let it go at that.  Can't imagine what it must be like to run for president these days.

Even if you're already a millionaire, it would be a nightmare for all involved.... if you're on the right side of the political spectrum.   If you're a rat, however, it's golden.

[libertybele]

And lo and behold.... Cruz got over it and ended up supporting Trump, putting the good of the nation over his own hurt feelings.   Too bad everyone can't accomplish the same.   

Agreed...Trump was relentless on Cruz, yet Cruz still put nation first over pride.  It's going to be very interesting to see how Trump treats his DEM opponents during the election process.  Will he be just as abusive towards them as he was to Cruz or will he go easier on them like he did Hillary?

[Bill Cipher]

Good luck with that.   Wouldn't you have to be a little nuts (or more than a little) to want to put yourself and your family and your entire group of friends, administrative staff and associates through what the RL has put Trump & friends through? 

 Boo-hoo-hoo!  Po’ widdle Twumpikins!  He’s such a saint.

[Cyber Liberty]

25 years ago I delved into the political arena as a candidate for an office much lower down on the totem that the presidency.  Let's just say the experience was eye-opening and let it go at that.  Can't imagine what it must be like to run for president these days.

Last time I delved into GOP politics, I left disgusted because of all the McCainiacs I had to deal with.  My District Chair hated me and pushed us out of everywhere he could.  What jerks!  I'm delving again, this time in a much redder county that never liked McStain.  Mrs. Liberty and I got ourselves appointed Precinct Committeemen already.  Tomorrow we're attending the Mohave County Republican Picnic up in the mountains.  Going to enjoy some cooler weather, starting today.

I hope I win a door prize.  They're giving away guns.

[XenaLee]

Boo-hoo-hoo!  Po’ widdle Twumpikins!  He’s such a saint.

Sooo.... I take it that you deny what the radical left and their puppets in the lamestream media have put Trump, his family and anyone associated with him through?   Really?

[musiclady]

That's right @musiclady , right as rain, which brings me back to something you debunked upthread - a moral saint, which I would not be so quick to shy away from...

Talk about evil being made good and good being made evil... That whole argument is on it's head. OF COURSE I would prefer an upright man... Honest and forthright, true to his oath, humble before God, driven by principle... How has that become a slur?

You, of course, are right, @roamer_1 ......and I shouldn't have been so quick to say we weren't asking for moral rectitude.  It is now used as a slur as if somehow being a "moral saint" is a bad thing, and by defending it, one is asking too much of a candidate.

This is one thing that has surprised me a bit among Conservatives and Christians (who should be the last people on earth making morality a slur), that in order to defend (or excuse) their support for someone who is so debauched, they must make fun of a characteristic that they used to say was important.

I expect that kind of thing from the godless left, but have been taken aback at the accusations and excuses made among Conservatives.

[Bigun]

Last time I delved into GOP politics, I left disgusted because of all the McCainiacs I had to deal with.  My District Chair hated me and pushed us out of everywhere he could.  What jerks!  I'm delving again, this time in a much redder county that never liked McStain.  Mrs. Liberty and I got ourselves appointed Precinct Committeemen already.  Tomorrow we're attending the Mohave County Republican Picnic up in the mountains.  Going to enjoy some cooler weather, starting today.

I hope I win a door prize.  They're giving away guns.

Excellent!  That is important work.  Good luck with the door prize.