PDA

View Full Version : The GOP Disgusts Me



NJCardFan
09-14-2010, 11:18 PM
This is one of the main reasons why I left the Republican Party back in 1995. Their entire ideology is all about compromise and reaching across the aisle and shit like that. Screw that. This is the one thing I give the left and the Dems. They don't compromise shit. Well, neither should Republicans. Their not wanting to support O'Donnell is disgusting but they'll support a RINO like Castle who is as far left as they come. Stupid.

Rockntractor
09-14-2010, 11:21 PM
This is one of the main reasons why I left the Republican Party back in 1995. Their entire ideology is all about compromise and reaching across the aisle and shit like that. Screw that. This is the one thing I give the left and the Dems. They don't compromise shit. Well, neither should Republicans. Their not wanting to support O'Donnell is disgusting but they'll support a RINO like Castle who is as far left as they come. Stupid.

I left the party too but I'm not sure what I accomplished, now I can't vote in primaries.

Gingersnap
09-14-2010, 11:25 PM
More GD than election-specific. I do feel your pain. :D

lacarnut
09-15-2010, 12:09 AM
Carl Rove was pissed cause Castle lost. The old crowd like him should STFU and fade into the sunset. His time is past and like most politicians/lobbyist/power brokers that spend too much time in DC, their brains get infected with governmentitis and stupidity.

MountainMan
09-15-2010, 12:14 AM
You guys just don't get it. As much as Castle disgusts me, he was the ONLY viable candidate in that race. Without Castle, we have almost NO shot at capturing the senate which means we WILL get more leftwing agendas out of the senate AS WELL AS more leftwing judges to fill vacant seats.

If the republicans had won the senate, Obumble would have had to put up better judicial candidates.

lacarnut
09-15-2010, 12:47 AM
You guys just don't get it. As much as Castle disgusts me, he was the ONLY viable candidate in that race. Without Castle, we have almost NO shot at capturing the senate which means we WILL get more leftwing agendas out of the senate AS WELL AS more leftwing judges to fill vacant seats.

If the republicans had won the senate, Obumble would have had to put up better judicial candidates.

She has a shot at winning. Tea Party candidates won 28 out of 33 races. No one gave Scott Brown a chance. An unknown Tea Party rookie candidate slaughtered Rick Lazio in NY.

You say that the loss of this Senate seat will give Obama a leg up on judicial candidates. Let's do the math. In order for the Repubs to control the Senate, they need to win 10 seats which would give them a 51 to 49 majority. You are telling me that the Repubs are going to win EXACTLY 9 seats, and that this one seat that Castle was assured of winning is going to put the Senate in a virtual tie ( 50 to 50) with the VP making the deciding vote.

If your predicition is correct, I want to take you to Vegas cause we can make a shit pot full of money with that crystal ball of yours.

BTW, you do not have a clue on how the 2 liberals Repubs (Snow & Collins) will vote on jucdicial nominees so instead of winning 10 the Repubs better win 12 to be on the safe side.

Jfor
09-15-2010, 01:13 AM
You guys just don't get it. As much as Castle disgusts me, he was the ONLY viable candidate in that race. Without Castle, we have almost NO shot at capturing the senate which means we WILL get more leftwing agendas out of the senate AS WELL AS more leftwing judges to fill vacant seats.

If the republicans had won the senate, Obumble would have had to put up better judicial candidates.

You don't get it. Doesn't matter if we controlled the agenda. The rino's do not vote with the GOP.

lacarnut
09-15-2010, 01:44 AM
You don't get it. Doesn't matter if we controlled the agenda. The rino's do not vote with the GOP.

Correct. People are pissed at incumbents D & R so it was no lock cinch that Castle would have been re-elected. Independents and Tea Party folks might have voted for the Democratic outsider.

noonwitch
09-15-2010, 08:46 AM
This is one of the main reasons why I left the Republican Party back in 1995. Their entire ideology is all about compromise and reaching across the aisle and shit like that. Screw that. This is the one thing I give the left and the Dems. They don't compromise shit. Well, neither should Republicans. Their not wanting to support O'Donnell is disgusting but they'll support a RINO like Castle who is as far left as they come. Stupid.


You know what's funny? Democrat activists are always accusing more mainstream dems of selling out and compromising.

Rockntractor
09-15-2010, 09:11 AM
You know what's funny? Democrat activists are always accusing more mainstream dems of selling out and compromising.

Don't listen to what the activists are saying, look at how the Dems are voting.

MountainMan
09-15-2010, 10:13 AM
You don't get it. Doesn't matter if we controlled the agenda. The rino's do not vote with the GOP.

Actually they do most of the time so yes, it fucking matters who controls the agenda because whomever controls the senate controls the chairmanships.


Real fucking tough questions for you all here. Do you think that if Orrin Hatch of Utah was controlling the Judiciary Committee, that Sotmeyer or the other leftwing kook that Obama nominated for the SCOTUS would have even gotten past? The answer is no. Thats why control of the senate is needed.

Jfor
09-15-2010, 10:22 AM
Actually they do most of the time so yes, it fucking matters who controls the agenda because whomever controls the senate controls the chairmanships.


Real fucking tough questions for you all here. Do you think that if Orrin Hatch of Utah was controlling the Judiciary Committee, that Sotmeyer or the other leftwing kook that Obama nominated for the SCOTUS would have even gotten past? The answer is no. Thats why control of the senate is needed.

Real fucking tough question for you. Why do we have to hold our nose and vote for the lesser of the two evils in a PRIMARY? You need to STFU and start supporting conservative candidates. Look back at Castle's voting record. No fucking way was he voting with the conservative Republicans.

And your thinking that our taking back the Senate was a forgone conclusion is was/is just wrong.

djones520
09-15-2010, 10:43 AM
Real fucking tough question for you. Why do we have to hold our nose and vote for the lesser of the two evils in a PRIMARY? You need to STFU and start supporting conservative candidates. Look back at Castle's voting record. No fucking way was he voting with the conservative Republicans.

And your thinking that our taking back the Senate was a forgone conclusion is was/is just wrong.

Because the primaries determine if your candidate can win the general election. We got a true conservative on the ticket in Delaware now. DELAWARE.

Like Scott Brown and Massachussets, these states aren't going to elect a real conservative. Their going to elect a moderate republican. The GOP figured they'd have better luck getting someone like Castle elected in the General, and having someone who'd vote GOP 80% of the time, then supporting someone who had weaker chances in the General Election.

If your trying to win over heavy democratic area's, your not going to do it with staunch republicans.

Jfor
09-15-2010, 10:43 AM
Mau10man... It is exactly your way of thinking that lost us the Senate and the House in 2006. Too many rino's and too many people thinking "there isn't a dime's worth of difference between them". So folks voted for democrats that ran as conservatives. Conservatives can win. We will never get a candidate that doesn't have some flaws, but for you to rip on Christine O'Donnell because of left leaning polls and left leaning articles and because of articles by the GOP who were supporting Castle is disingenuous at best.

Constitutionally Speaking
09-15-2010, 10:50 AM
Actually they do most of the time so yes, it fucking matters who controls the agenda because whomever controls the senate controls the chairmanships.


Real fucking tough questions for you all here. Do you think that if Orrin Hatch of Utah was controlling the Judiciary Committee, that Sotmeyer or the other leftwing kook that Obama nominated for the SCOTUS would have even gotten past? The answer is no. Thats why control of the senate is needed.



Actually, Mau, I believe they WOULD have gotten past - and it would be BECAUSE of people like Snow, Spector, Castle, Graham, etc. that they would have.

I agree that control of the Senate is important, but Castle was a sure vote for so many things that are absolutely abhorrent that in this case it does not make that much of a difference.

People like him are what prevented a sound energy policy under the Bush administration and THAT is what led to the meltdown in the mortgage industry and the economy in general.

With a sound energy policy, the meltdown would have been avoided - or at least it would not have been nearly so severe. It also allowed the left to point fingers at Republicans and blame them for the whole thing - after all THEY were in charge AND had a majority in both the Senate and House for the bulk of Bush's term. They had an R by their name but the Democrats still effectively controlled the agenda on oil exploration and many other issues BECAUSE the RINO's constantly sided with the Dems on these key issues. Joe public doesn't know that the Dems held the economy hostage with these people's help. They simply look at the letter after the name and assume that party actually controlled things.

djones520
09-15-2010, 11:06 AM
I know it's the NY Times, but it shows the point I'm trying to make.

http://elections.nytimes.com/2010/forecasts/senate/delaware

It shows Coons vs Castle, and Coons vs O'Donnell.

Castle beats Coons pretty handily. O'Donnell loses to Coon's pretty handily.

RCP has had Coons over O'Donnell for the last month and a half with the lead continually growing.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2010/senate/2010_delaware_senate_race.html

Jfor
09-15-2010, 11:26 AM
I know it's the NY Times, but it shows the point I'm trying to make.

http://elections.nytimes.com/2010/forecasts/senate/delaware

It shows Coons vs Castle, and Coons vs O'Donnell.

Castle beats Coons pretty handily. O'Donnell loses to Coon's pretty handily.

RCP has had Coons over O'Donnell for the last month and a half with the lead continually growing.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2010/senate/2010_delaware_senate_race.html

And O'Donnell wasn't supposed to win the primary either. There is plenty of time for her to make a good run. I would rather a democrat have the seat than a rino Republican.

Calypso Jones
09-15-2010, 11:30 AM
Castle should have been shown the door years ago. Why did conservatives put up with this judas? As for 'He's the only viable candidate', well.....let's just see. It's about time actual conservative voters stopped having to hold their noses and vote for rinos. let's see if ACTUAL conservatives can win. I think they JUST might. Can't win them all but you've got to start somewhere and here's a good start.

Wei Wu Wei
09-15-2010, 11:40 AM
right on OP
Palin/Beck 2012

Gingersnap
09-15-2010, 02:02 PM
Castle should have been shown the door years ago. Why did conservatives put up with this judas? As for 'He's the only viable candidate', well.....let's just see. It's about time actual conservative voters stopped having to hold their noses and vote for rinos. let's see if ACTUAL conservatives can win. I think they JUST might. Can't win them all but you've got to start somewhere and here's a good start.

I think that's fair picture of the average voter. Constantly voting in RINOs isn't helping conservatism and it just slightly slows down the headlong rush into a total welfare state. Since the RINOs are no better than the Dems, why vote for them? Getting on the scoreboard doesn't mean much if you're going to forfeit the game anyway.

warpig
09-15-2010, 02:10 PM
I heard on the radio just now that she has raised 350,000 since last night.

Odysseus
09-15-2010, 02:47 PM
Carl Rove was pissed cause Castle lost. The old crowd like him should STFU and fade into the sunset. His time is past and like most politicians/lobbyist/power brokers that spend too much time in DC, their brains get infected with governmentitis and stupidity.
No, he should remember Reagan's eleventh commandment: "Thou shalt not speak ill of a fellow Republican." Rove needs to man up, admit that he backed the wrong horse (if only to himself) and do everything within his power to get O'Donnell elected. If he can do that, he can prove that he's as good a campaign operative as he claims. If he can't, then who needs to spend money to hire him?

You guys just don't get it. As much as Castle disgusts me, he was the ONLY viable candidate in that race. Without Castle, we have almost NO shot at capturing the senate which means we WILL get more leftwing agendas out of the senate AS WELL AS more leftwing judges to fill vacant seats.

If the republicans had won the senate, Obumble would have had to put up better judicial candidates.
Obama will continue to put up leftists. Show me one liberal SCOTUS nominee that was presented to the Senate and voted down. Republicans always played the game fairly, assuming that it's a president's perogative to pick judges who reflect his philosophy. That's how we ended up with Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer.

Actually they do most of the time so yes, it fucking matters who controls the agenda because whomever controls the senate controls the chairmanships.

Real fucking tough questions for you all here. Do you think that if Orrin Hatch of Utah was controlling the Judiciary Committee, that Sotmeyer or the other leftwing kook that Obama nominated for the SCOTUS would have even gotten past? The answer is no. Thats why control of the senate is needed.
Even if Hatch had been the committee chairman, he'd have given Sotomayor and Kagan fair treatment. It's only Republican nominees who get Borked. A bare majority wouldn't prevent Obama from submitting his kinds of judges, and Lindsay Graham, Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe can always be counted on to go against the party. In fact, John McCain and his "gang of fourteen" deliberately undermined Bush's nominees to the apellate courts, and this was when Republicans were in the majority. The problem isn't the numbers, it's the numbness. Republicans have to stop being polite and collegial and start treating Democrats the way that Democrats treat Republicans.

MountainMan
09-16-2010, 12:45 AM
Real fucking tough question for you. Why do we have to hold our nose and vote for the lesser of the two evils in a PRIMARY? You need to STFU and start supporting conservative candidates. Look back at Castle's voting record. No fucking way was he voting with the conservative Republicans.

And your thinking that our taking back the Senate was a forgone conclusion is was/is just wrong.


Mau10man... It is exactly your way of thinking that lost us the Senate and the House in 2006. Too many rino's and too many people thinking "there isn't a dime's worth of difference between them". So folks voted for democrats that ran as conservatives. Conservatives can win. We will never get a candidate that doesn't have some flaws, but for you to rip on Christine O'Donnell because of left leaning polls and left leaning articles and because of articles by the GOP who were supporting Castle is disingenuous at best.

Fuck you Jfor, I have been supporting conservatives since 1994. However, I am also a political realist which means you put up the most conservative candidate that can win.

I also find it ironic that so many are posting in a thread about hating the GOP when most of you have said that you left the GOP years ago. Guess what? You can't change the GOP unless you are involved at the grassroots. I have been involved in the local republican party here since 94. How many of you can say the same thing?

fettpett
09-16-2010, 07:16 AM
all you have to remember is the Gang of 13 lead by our former Pres Candidate John McCain, followed closely by his butt-buddy Lindsay Graham

KhrushchevsShoe
09-16-2010, 08:02 AM
Fuck you Jfor, I have been supporting conservatives since 1994. However, I am also a political realist which means you put up the most conservative candidate that can win.

I also find it ironic that so many are posting in a thread about hating the GOP when most of you have said that you left the GOP years ago. Guess what? You can't change the GOP unless you are involved at the grassroots. I have been involved in the local republican party here since 94. How many of you can say the same thing?

[ ] Told
[ ] Not Told
[x] Told like a bitch

Sonnabend
09-16-2010, 08:13 AM
[ ] Told
[ ] Not Told
[x] Told like a bitch

http://chzderp.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/7c0a46e7-b84b-4219-9dbd-b90c199e5be1.jpg

NJCardFan
09-16-2010, 09:43 AM
Fuck you Jfor, I have been supporting conservatives since 1994. However, I am also a political realist which means you put up the most conservative candidate that can win.

I also find it ironic that so many are posting in a thread about hating the GOP when most of you have said that you left the GOP years ago. Guess what? You can't change the GOP unless you are involved at the grassroots. I have been involved in the local republican party here since 94. How many of you can say the same thing?

And I supported the Republican Party since 1983(when I became old enough to vote) but I grew up in a Republican household so you can say I was a Republican most of my life. And what did it get me? Kicked in the balls. No one was more excited than I when the GOP regained control in '94 but the whole Clinton witch hunt turned me off. There were more important fish to fry than trying to hang the guy for getting blown. That is an issue between he and his wife, not us. Not to mention the amount of Republicans who preach moral values then end up being dirty. As I said, with Democrats, what you see is what you get. With many Republicans, what you see is a wolf in sheeps clothing. I know the family of Frank Lobiondo R-NJ and I supported him from the get go and wanna know what he did? He votes yes on Cap & Tax. For years he had a voting record I can support then he goes and votes for this. Oy. I still support Republican candidates in federal elections but in state and local, I support either the Libertarian candidates or another 3rd party. The thing with O'Donnell is that this sends a message to the GOP that we're fed up with them too and they better straiten up and fly right.

Also, let's not forget that this is a seat for 2 years only. A Dem is already keeping that seat warm so it won't make a hill of beans. But if O'Donnell can have a good showing, it could set her up for 2012.

Jfor
09-16-2010, 10:02 AM
Fuck you Jfor, I have been supporting conservatives since 1994. However, I am also a political realist which means you put up the most conservative candidate that can win.

I also find it ironic that so many are posting in a thread about hating the GOP when most of you have said that you left the GOP years ago. Guess what? You can't change the GOP unless you are involved at the grassroots. I have been involved in the local republican party here since 94. How many of you can say the same thing?

No, fuck you. You say to vote the most conservative that can win. I guess in your brain, most conservative means Mike Castle? Let's review Castle's voting record: voted for taarp, voted for the disclose act, supports infantacide, anti-gun, he is graded the most liberal Republican voting with Conservative issues only 52% of the time. So you say vote for the most conservative who can win? Looks like the most conservative won. Recent poll after the election shows O'Donnell down by 9 point now. She has already made up 2 points. You and your ilk think it was already a slam dunk that the GOP could have gotten the Senate back. It wasn't.

Havng somebody who votes with Conservatives only 52% of the time doesn't leave much confidence that he would side with the GOP. So, once again, all you RINO's can go screw yourselves.

lacarnut
09-16-2010, 10:41 AM
[ ] Told
[ ] Not Told
[ ] Told like a bitch
[x] Commie Shoe is a Bitch


Fixed

djones520
09-16-2010, 01:16 PM
Lets cool the language down, or take it to the Thunderdome. Only warning.

MountainMan
09-16-2010, 02:19 PM
[ ] Told
[ ] Not Told
[x] Told like a bitch

Stupid commie... :rolleyes:

MountainMan
09-16-2010, 02:29 PM
Lets cool the language down, or take it to the Thunderdome. Only warning.


Frack you you fricking frack a frack!!!!! Last time you fracking wanted to frack, you got your fracking arse fracked!..

:D

Odysseus
09-16-2010, 03:41 PM
Frack you you fricking frack a frack!!!!! Last time you fracking wanted to frack, you got your fracking arse fracked!..

:D

Dude, you smurf like a smurfing smurf. Smurfiously, you need to smurf it down a smurf. :D

Constitutionally Speaking
09-16-2010, 03:46 PM
Look Mau IS a real conservative - he just believes that O'Donnell will have a much tougher time getting elected than Castle would have AND that control of committees is a very important thing.


AND HE IS CORRECT ON THAT.


Where I disagree with him is that I believe O'Donnell can win, and that Control of the committees is not as important as providing the American people with truth in advertising. If we present ourselves as being fiscally conservative we damned well better be so. I believe that phony Conservatives ultimately hurt our brand where Mau believes we need to work more slowly to build the base from the ground up.


HE has a legitimate point, I just think that in this case, he is mistaken.

Arroyo_Doble
09-16-2010, 03:48 PM
With the moderates in the Republican Party almost completely purged (Maine ... 2012 is just around the corner), it is time to move on to the conservative purge.

djones520
09-16-2010, 03:51 PM
Look Mau IS a real conservative - he just believes that O'Donnell will have a much tougher time getting elected than Castle would have AND that control of committees is a very important thing.


AND HE IS CORRECT ON THAT.


Where I disagree with him is that I believe O'Donnell can win, and that Control of the committees is not as important as providing the American people with truth in advertising. If we present ourselves as being fiscally conservative we damned well better be so. I believe that phony Conservatives ultimately hurt our brand where Mau believes we need to work more slowly to build the base from the ground up.


HE has a legitimate point, I just think that in this case, he is mistaken.

I'm not holding my breath on her pulling a win. At the same time the polls showed her catching up to Castle, they showed her losing even worse to the Dem. It is going to be a really tough fight for her. It'll pay off in gold of she wins, but it's gonna cost a lot more money then with Castle.

Odysseus
09-16-2010, 04:06 PM
With the moderates in the Republican Party almost completely purged (Maine ... 2012 is just around the corner), it is time to move on to the conservative purge.

You guys said the same thing when Reagan got the Republican nomination in 1980.

BTW, where are those moderate Democrats, the DINOs, who would reach across party lines to support conservative proposals that made sense to them? There had to be some, right? Let me think... On the Iraq War, you had Joe Lieberman... No, wait, that didn't exactly work out for him as a Democrat, did it? What about Zell Miller? Hmmmm... Nevermind.

Constitutionally Speaking
09-16-2010, 04:18 PM
I'm not holding my breath on her pulling a win. At the same time the polls showed her catching up to Castle, they showed her losing even worse to the Dem. It is going to be a really tough fight for her. It'll pay off in gold of she wins, but it's gonna cost a lot more money then with Castle.



It absolutely is going to be difficult. No question about that.

djones520
09-16-2010, 04:25 PM
You guys said the same thing when Reagan got the Republican nomination in 1980.

BTW, where are those moderate Democrats, the DINOs, who would reach across party lines to support conservative proposals that made sense to them? There had to be some, right? Let me think... On the Iraq War, you had Joe Lieberman... No, wait, that didn't exactly work out for him as a Democrat, did it? What about Zell Miller? Hmmmm... Nevermind.

Silly Major. I guess you missed the memo were bipartisan was redefined to mean that Republicans bend over and spread their cheeks, and nothing else.

Arroyo_Doble
09-16-2010, 04:43 PM
You guys said the same thing when Reagan got the Republican nomination in 1980.

Not me. I was 15 and in the throes of hormones and objectivism at the time.


BTW, where are those moderate Democrats, the DINOs, who would reach across party lines to support conservative proposals that made sense to them? There had to be some, right? Let me think... On the Iraq War, you had Joe Lieberman... No, wait, that didn't exactly work out for him as a Democrat, did it? What about Zell Miller? Hmmmm... Nevermind.

Joe was a liberal that found himself on the wrong side of Iraq. That is all. The casting of him as a moderate is a recent invention but still, why are you reaching so far back? Because Blanche won her primary?

Wei Wu Wei
09-16-2010, 05:46 PM
Lets cool the language down, or take it to the Thunderdome. Only warning.

thank god half of the threads this last week have devolved into whiny shit flinging

Odysseus
09-16-2010, 06:47 PM
thank god half of the threads this last week have devolved into whiny shit flinging

And you blame whom for that?

lacarnut
09-16-2010, 07:05 PM
thank god half of the threads this last week have devolved into whiny shit flinging

If Obama and Democrats had not made such a mess of things, your ears would not be burning.

Jfor
09-16-2010, 07:09 PM
thank god half of the threads this last week have devolved into whiny shit flinging

Why don't you respond to other threads you have started before cutting and running.

m00
09-16-2010, 11:21 PM
With the moderates in the Republican Party almost completely purged (Maine ... 2012 is just around the corner), it is time to move on to the conservative purge.

Do you mean purging conservatives from the Republican Party? I agree. A lot more L voters. :D

jediab
09-17-2010, 12:30 PM
The way I look at it, is if the GOP refuses to endorse anyone who wins the primary fair and square, then they are now the very same "elite" Washington types that the TeaParty and lot of other people are sick of. By refusing to listen to the voice of the people and going with someone else, the GOP is saying, "We know what's best for you." Just like the libtards in control have been doing for the last 2 years.