Thought of the day

Oct 14 2016 Published by under Uncategorized

Please explain to me why we are supposed to coddle the supposedly normal or centrist Republicans at this point. And pat them soothingly and give them cookies because finally, at this late date, they have discovered Trumpism is horrible.

What is to be gained here?

24 responses so far

  • Grumble says:

    I have not engaged in Republican-coddling and would never do so. I have, however, emitted a taunting laugh or two.

  • Lisa says:

    How can you even laugh? I'm slowly emitting a great sigh of relief as things implode, but I'm terrified that it took this long for the last few wheels to come off. How did so many people not realize what a colossal mistake this candidacy was for so long?

  • OlympiasEpiriot says:

    "Please explain to me why we are supposed to coddle the supposedly normal or centrist Republicans at this point."

    --They are hurt sick puppies and we are the empathetic bleeding heart liberals who try to make everyone's life better.

    "And pat them soothingly and give them cookies because finally, at this late date, they have discovered Trumpism is horrible."

    --See previous bit.

    "What is to be gained here?"

    --Nothing. Nada. Actually, I think we'd be shooting ourselves in both feet and the genitals if we were actually to do so.

  • Yizmo Gizmo says:

    They are not Centrist by any stretch of the imagination.
    They kept moving right since Reagan and in the process moved the 50-yard line
    to the right for 35 years. Then everyone started to realize what was going on.
    Look at them now--they can't win a Presidential
    election to save their lives. Maybe they have some more hanging chads up their sleeves.

  • eeke says:

    You know, democrats are not much better. Maybe slightly more PC, diverse, and show ostensible decency, but at the end of the day, they are owned by Wallstreet goons and can be (and possibly are) equally as corrupt. Trump is a despicable human being, but I can't get all complacent because the GOP is imploding. The other party isn't far behind. There's my 2 cent cynicism for the day.

  • Grumble says:

    eeke: There's a vibrant movement for change within the Democratic party (see Bernie Sanders and the millions of people who voted for him). That gives me reason to hope, and to put far more faith into mainstream Democratic politicians than the Republican hypocrites who should have known from the first minute of Donnie's escalator ride that he was toxic to their party and our nation. Hillary won't be the most progressive president, but to say she and the Dems "aren't far behind" Trump and the GOP on the corruption front smacks of false equivalence.

  • Because they are mostly white men, and therefore more important than the rest of us, even if we outnumber them.

  • eeke says:

    Grumble, I am totally with the Sanders campaign. I am not saying that Democrats are equally as bad as repugnants, only less so (and for different reasons). Hillary has put forth a number of policies in the past that I see are very poor choices, have cost lives, and there is simply no brushing aside that she is owned by the oligarchy. Sanders himself was on the soapbox about this.

    Anyway, my point was, we shouldn't be all complacent. I like that BS has pushed the conversation to the left, but there is a long ways to go to get out of the corporate grip.

  • drugmonkey says:

    You know, democrats are not much better.

    This is emphatically and factually incorrect. If you don't understand this you have not been paying attention to anything for the past 35 years. Alternately you are a wooly headed wishful thinker who doesn't understand politics- if so, go read up on the Overton Window, it may help. I have even less patience for neoNaderite idiocy than I do for these last-minute wakeners of the GOP.

    If you like that Sanders and Warren are pushing the Window to the left, elect Hillary and as many Dem Senators and Reps as possible and sink a fucking political piton. Then keep pushing left.

  • Next Grant says:

    The DT campaign has planted a seed, we’ll see what grows out. I am afraid it won't be too long until we find out.

  • qaz says:

    To prevent a civil war? If they're going to lose, then let's give them a chance to redeem themselves. I think milk and cookies are a very small price to pay for a landslide win and a real progressive agenda.

  • drugmonkey says:

    There is not going to be any civil war, qaz. Calm thyself. This is a political battle.

  • drugmonkey says:

    (and btw, fanning "civil war" fears works precisely in the favor of these so called mainstream Republicans as they work desperately to salvage power while Trumpism takes down their Party legitimacy. We do not need them and Hillary should make no concessions whatsoever.)

  • qaz says:

    I agree completely. But given their tribalism, if we praise them for *finally!* recognizing the problem of Trumpism, then we strengthen the internal divisions and we're more likely to win a true landslide, which Hillary is going to need to pass the agenda we need. They will block her the same way they blocked Obama. Don't interfere when your opponent is making a mistake. Just toss them an anchor and step back.

  • qaz says:

    Besides, when they try to come back, we have them endorsing and then un-endorsing (and then often re-endorsing) the anchor.

  • Comradde PhysioProffe says:

    Divide! Destroy! Eliminate! Do not give a single fucken inch to these right-wing GOP filth fleeing Trump like flea-ridden rats a ship that has run out of rotting garbage!

  • Grumble says:

    I always suspected CPP was a Dalek.

  • jmz4 says:

    It makes them more likely to splinter off and work with the Democrats in the next 4-8 years. There's enough moderate Republicans in New York, New Jersey and Philly alone to give a moderate-left party a governing majority in the House.
    If it gets vitriolic enough, maybe the Trumpers/Rhinos will split off on their own and American politics will open up to more than two parties (shut up, I can dream).

  • Anonymouse says:

    "What is to be gained here?"

    What? The precious endorsements, such as the one granted by the "normal" and "centrist" Chief Warmonger Wolfowitz, who recently fell in love with Hilda:

  • LincolnX says: Civil War II?

  • WH says:

    Hillary Clinton strongly resembles a centrist Republican. She’s cozy with Wall Street, pro-free trade, very much for foreign military intervention, and as open and transparent as Sasquatch.

    Like Anonymouse said, why do you think Paul Wolfowitz is endorsing her?

  • Grumble says:

    Yeah, nowadays that describes a leftist Republican.

  • tired of it already says:

    you know-the whole false equivalence thing is out of hand. Here's someone with real service, trying to navigate the extreme complexities of actual government, has actually thought about the law and its implications, policy and its implications, who has a foundation who has done real good, has kept her marriage together in spite of challenges (to put it mildly), against a greedy, lying, sexual predator, who was and still is only out for himself (check who his campaign is paying and not paying--he and his get paid first), who's policies are knee jerk and designed to appeal to base instincts, who's "foundation" is designed to use other people's money ("the best" according to DT) to make DT look good or provide a tax shelter, who doesn't think before or after he speaks. What has he done except use the tax law and his father's inheritance to make money for himself? It's not just the taxes--he says how generous he is--how charitable--but the record says otherwise. Did he help Atlantic City? Remember the promises in exchange to allow casinos? How about Trump U grads (or shall I say conman marks?). His lies are so grandiose that they are dismissed as "hyperbole"--but she is branded the bigger and worst liar for smaller things. How can all those moral church going repubs and evangelical leaders endorse (!) a man who is 60 with a 20 something wife pregnant--his 3rd wife and 5th child--married just a few months, going"hard" after a married woman? His wife defends him by saying she has 2 "boys" at home. This man wants to be president and his current wife says he has the mentality of her young son. Do you understand how old he is? Do you really think he is going to change? Imagine if your university, institute, lab, home or work emails (and I mean everyone's --not just yours) were put on the internet. No matter if you don't have control over what is being said--and you are not in the conversation--you are blamed for what they contain. --How many people could walk away unscathed--?. Can you imagine if the last 5 years of emails from Trump were revealed? The last year and a half of the Trump campaign? We keep saying we want better candidates--who would put themselves out there? No, she's not perfect--but who is? We are talking about a real person with 30 years track record--makes it easy to criticize doesn't it? Against a man who has a track record of hate, disrespect, greed and porn--but we dismiss it--because only now he is "in" politics. As if character is turned on and off. And then there's this--many people, mostly men, have a problem with a woman as president. They may not admit it--but it's there. Like with Obama--the reason for the absolute rejection of anything, even their own thing--is visceral. Can't have a black man succeed. Can't have a woman succeed. The right wing repubs built this monster and the media played it for all the ratings and money they could get. We are all the lesser for it.

  • Grumble says:

    "How can all those moral church going repubs and evangelical leaders endorse (!) a man who is 60 with a 20 something wife pregnant--his 3rd wife and 5th child--married just a few months, going"hard" after a married woman?"

    I think you know the answer to that.

Leave a Reply