Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
See, aside from your claim, who’s trying to control whom here? I’d argue the faction calling for military presence in domestic politics.
Pages 109-112 here give a pretty good summary of what happened.
That "party switch" is one of the biggest loads that you (and other guilt-ridden Democrats) have ever squatted down and dumped out.
I work under the assumption that basically everything that Trump does is to enrich himself. He will make more money if he's reelected so most everything he's doing nowadays is to get reelected. And to be fair - pretty much every politician does that.
In my opinion, the behavior of some posters on the left even on this board confirms this claim.
So D'Souza aside, what he says here about Kevin Phillips is pretty funny. He makes a point that the questioner misattributes Phillips as Nixon's campaign manager (fair, he wasn't, but he was a campaign strategist, in the way that Steve Bannon wasn't Trump's campaign manager but was a strategist) and then makes the claim that Nixon never saw any of his work. This is really irrelevant and worse because Phillip's work was generated by his observations on the Nixon campaign.
The only "switch" that happened was that the Republicans went from wanting a big government, to wanting a small government....the opposite for the Democrats.
My eta was too late, please take a moment to read this 1970 NYT interview with Nixon's strategist, Kevin Phillips, which is the starting point of the video you posted. TIA before we discuss further.
The point of the OP is that, if we are getting rid of everything that promoted slavery....the Democrat party should be at the top of that list.
The point of the OP is that, if we are getting rid of everything that promoted slavery....the Democrat party should be at the of top that list.
Opie, I'm directly responding to the video that you posted, not the OP. Do you post those things with the intent no one watches and comments on them?
I think I am when I respond to the claim from D'Souza, this insistence on revising history is really crucial to the claim in the OP. Hence the Candace Owens videos which constantly make the same false claim. I do not understand why it is necessary for making a legitimate argument about conservationism or the GOP in the South - there are legitimate ones for sure - but what's clear is that the people pushing this message feel it necessary to do so repeatedly. Now why?
THIS is the OP...
An extreme right wing source (and a blog at that) that constantly gets things wrong and quite simply is not reliable at all?
Its an interesting question.
A terrible and incorrect what if statement?
This is a snake that eats its own tail. It was Lincoln who wanted the Democratic Party rehabilitated because that was necessary for national reconciliation to begin. A debaathification of the party and the South was definitely on the table, but it was not the policy that Lincoln wanted and when Johnson came in he switched from the Union Party back to being a Democrat and that was all she wrote. I don't know if you're really interested in discussing this subject (thank you for deleting the links you previously posted) but that's why.
I have real trouble with the statement in bold.
I think the history of the Republican Party, especially the early party, is wonderful. I just do not understand why it is so thoroughly rejected by the current party. Here's the Grand Old Party's current leader talking about Abraham Lincoln. - Question: what kind of people does this man appeal to? People who care about the history of the GOP and Abraham Lincoln, or people who feel more inclined to defend the heritage of the Confederacy?
What about the freedom of the protesters to assemble?
Anyone who wants to control the freedom of Americans to assemble and exhibit their ability to speak freely and celebrate the second amendment after overcoming a failed coup, a Chinese Virus, and an insurrection is probably just trying to manufacture conflict. Trump is stating the obvious.
If I were trying to explain to someone what trolling is by presenting examples, this post might be at the top of my list.
There isn't a party that currently stands for that. The GOP direction seems to be more and more spending as well...while lowering revenue. Fiscal conservatism is all but dead.
Why is it that I constantly hear this refrain from conservatives, and yet they always vote for people who end up spending more than the Democrats do?
I think you are misunderstanding. Each president spends more, and more. We go further in debt. I don't like either party. The DIRECTION of the democratic party wants to take spending to new heights......it's unsustainable, but people who want uncle Sam to take care their entire life will vote for it.
No it isn’t. The Democrats simply want to spend money on different things than the Republicans do. They want less money on defense, less corporate handouts, more money for the poor and middle class. You can agree or disagree with these ideas but don’t pretend they want to spend MORE money than Republicans.
Yeah the famous tough guy talking tough but having zero background to back it up. He reminds me of the guy in a fight who stands behind 5 other bigger dudes talking #### over their shoulders at the other guy. Captian Bone Spurs and sliver spoon needs to drop the tough guy act. He ain’t tough.
Anyone who wants to control the freedom of Americans to assemble and exhibit their ability to speak freely and celebrate the second amendment after overcoming a failed coup, a Chinese Virus, and an insurrection is probably just trying to manufacture conflict. Trump is stating the obvious.
I've been attracted to the Libertarian movement for some time now, and I've been reading about classical liberalism. I could get behind this kind of a movement, I just don't know that it could truly gain steam against the bloated monster we currently have. We are entrenched in this two party system of dog####!
Seems to be your go to move when you disagree with something. But deep down you know he's right. We are in the process of changing the names of everything with racism in it's history. The Democrat Party should be included
I've seen the numbers for Medicare for all, free college, free this, free that......and we'll just tax the hell out of the rich!.....
Agreed. I wanted to post that sentiment and not just use an emoji to agree. Because I think finding common ground is important and even though we don't always agree we should point out where agreement exists.
I would also say that inflammatory broad brush statements like "historically Democrats are the party of racism" aren't helpful and frankly this one is untrue. But I am glad we agreed on something.
