Trump Train - Never Mind, Trump is DRIVING the Train After All

In the future, GOP politicians will be asked to explain what took them so long.

She Wanted to Be a Republican President. She’s Voting for Biden.

Republicans who say Donald Trump should lose in November but insist they won’t vote for Joe Biden aren’t being honest, Carly Fiorina argues.
...
Fiorina is not going to keep quiet, write in another candidate, or vote third-party. “I’ve been very clear that I can’t support Donald Trump,” she told me, in an interview that can be heard in full on the latest episode ofThe Ticket. “And elections are binary choices.” She struggled with the decision, and whether to go public. But she said that this struggle is one Republicans need to have—including those who have rationalized supporting Trump despite their disagreements, because of some of his policies or judicial appointments.

“As citizens, our vote is more than a check on a box. You know, it’s a statement about where we want to go, and I think what we need now actually is real leadership that can unify the country,” she said.

nohero said:

 Good for her! Now if they can get Nikki Haley to jump ship....


Morganna said:

nohero said:

 Good for her! Now if they can get Nikki Haley to jump ship....

 I don't see that happening, I think she has big aspirations.  


Red_Barchetta said:

 I don't see that happening, I think she has big aspirations.  

The Republican voters are the real problem and they aren't going anywhere. 


Red_Barchetta said:

 I don't see that happening, I think she has big aspirations.  

 True, and imagine what could happen if she had the nerve to stand up to him.

Interesting that Kasich has teamed up with John Kerry on climate change.  If Republicans decide to go more moderate I think Kasich might give it a go again.


Morganna said:

Interesting that Kasich has teamed up with John Kerry on climate change.  If Republicans decide to go more moderate I think Kasich might give it a go again.

He will probably be too old by then. I mean this in all seriousness, they are all like lemmings jumping off a cliff, I just don't see how this will change any time soon.

I don't agree with Kasich on much, but he is one of the very few Republicans that actually have shown that they have principles, and that those principles do not just go the window if political winds shift.


These days, the GOP politicians acting on principle are those who know that would have no chance to be the nominee for President in 2024, or 2028, and maybe even beyond.


I do not know whether the Republican Party will survive Trump. I never felt that way before but the issue of Race caused the demise of the Whigs and the birth of the Republican Party. The issue of Race may now doom the Republican Party.


My thought is if Trump loses, I think the Republican Party will want to regain some of it's dignity. Trump with his odious sons will probably try to form a Party of their own, for their true believers with their own news station. The many people who defend Trump not because they like him but because they hate Democrats will look for a new leader who can appear moral and perhaps religious to comfortably point a finger at the Liberals without trying to explain their fealty to a man without apparent integrity.

A Mitt Romney or a John Kasich, maybe a Marco Rubio. All men of faith, but definitely not Mike Pence.. No surrounding scandals. Family men. I can't think of any others but I'm sure they are out there.

Hopefully the worst of the party, Mitch McConnell, Lindsey Graham, and a host of others will retire, resign or follow Trump into the night.


I'll just repeat this:

ml1 said:

Red_Barchetta said:

 I don't see that happening, I think she has big aspirations.  

The Republican voters are the real problem and they aren't going anywhere. 

 until the voters change we're just going to get different flavors of Republican crazy when Trump is gone


I wouldn't bet on it, unless something pretty drastic occurs between now and then.

Like the whole Trump family going to jail.


Morganna said:

My thought is if Trump loses, I think the Republican Party will want to regain some of it's dignity. Trump with his odious sons will probably try to form a Party of their own, for their true believers with their own news station. The many people who defend Trump not because they like him but because they hate Democrats will look for a new leader who can appear moral and perhaps religious to comfortably point a finger at the Liberals without trying to explain their fealty to a man without apparent integrity.

A Mitt Romney or a John Kasich, maybe a Marco Rubio. All men of faith, but definitely not Mike Pence.. No surrounding scandals. Family men. I can't think of any others but I'm sure they are out there.

Hopefully the worst of the party, Mitch McConnell, Lindsey Graham, and a host of others will retire, resign or follow Trump into the night.

 Not Rubio.  He's not up for reelection until 2022, so all this time he could be doing the right thing.  I'm confident that he knows all of this is wrong and is ashamed of his own party.  Yet he continues to do the wrong thing.   He's the worst of them. 


Red_Barchetta said:

 Not Rubio.  He's not up for reelection until 2022, so all this time he could be doing the right thing.  I'm confident that he knows all of this is wrong and is ashamed of his own party.  Yet he continues to do the wrong thing.   He's the worst of them. 

 I got seduced by Rubio. He has that ability, like Warren to answer questions at 90 mph. His politics and beliefs are different from mine but I thought I spotted talent. Hate to think of him as the worst of them. I'm trying to see him as a pragmatist.

I have been an ends justifies the means activist in my life. Had to grit my teeth and be nice to people I detested to save a critter, when I felt like blasting them to the news, resisted the invitation to go on News 12. In the end justice was served.

 I'm going to wait for the Trump family to leave DC and see where the dust settles.  Rubio was ready to leave politics but stayed. I'm hoping he can dig his way out of his mistakes. He's one of the younger ones. But it may take a brand new group of Republicans to get elected and steer the party to center right.  I'm trying to be hopeful.


Morganna said:

Red_Barchetta said:

 Not Rubio.  He's not up for reelection until 2022, so all this time he could be doing the right thing.  I'm confident that he knows all of this is wrong and is ashamed of his own party.  Yet he continues to do the wrong thing.   He's the worst of them. 

 I got seduced by Rubio. He has that ability, like Warren to answer questions at 90 mph. His politics and beliefs are different from mine but I thought I spotted talent. Hate to think of him as the worst of them. I'm trying to see him as a pragmatist.

I have been an ends justifies the means activist in my life. Had to grit my teeth and be nice to people I detested to save a critter, when I felt like blasting them to the news, resisted the invitation to go on News 12. In the end justice was served.

 I'm going to wait for the Trump family to leave DC and see where the dust settles.  Rubio was ready to leave politics but stayed. I'm hoping he can dig his way out of his mistakes. He's one of the younger ones. But it may take a brand new group of Republicans to get elected and steer the party to center right.  I'm trying to be hopeful.

We should expect our leaders to have principles and things they believe in. Most republicans know fully well that this is wrong, just like many germans probably knew that what Hitler did was wrong. Rubio does not pass that sniff test anymore, like most in the GOP (with only few exceptions like Romney, Kasich, ...).


basil said:

We should expect our leaders to have principles and things they believe in. Most republicans know fully well that this is wrong, just like many germans probably knew that what Hitler did was wrong. Rubio does not pass that sniff test anymore, like most in the GOP (with only few exceptions like Romney, Kasich, ...).

 I've wondered if Rubio's motivation was the court.  Seems to be a staunch Catholic. 

Well, I've been waiting for the SCOTUS ruling on Louisiana abortion clinics, possibly being decided this week. This might fire up Trump's base one way or the other.

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/503645-all-eyes-on-roberts-ahead-of-supreme-courts-abortion-ruling


The Republicans behind The Lincoln Project and their allies are the true Conservatives. I do not agree with their ideology and especially dislike the Neo-Cons but I believe they have some basic moral principles. 

From the middle 1960s and Nixon's "Southern Strategy" the Republican Party took in the racist refugees from the Southern Democrats and co-opted the George Wallace voters. Now, perhaps, they are paying the price.


Morganna said:
 I've wondered if Rubio's motivation was the court.  Seems to be a staunch Catholic.  

Many supported Hitler because they (correctly) feared the Soviets. That still doesn't make them right. History tends to not be very kind to these folks. Which is why Rubio will have to go too, decent guy or not.


basil said:

Many supported Hitler because they (correctly) feared the Soviets. That still doesn't make them right. History tends to not be very kind to these folks. Which is why Rubio will have to go too, decent guy or not.

 And Russians supported Stalin because they feared the Fascists. It was BS. 

Morganna said:

basil said:

We should expect our leaders to have principles and things they believe in. Most republicans know fully well that this is wrong, just like many germans probably knew that what Hitler did was wrong. Rubio does not pass that sniff test anymore, like most in the GOP (with only few exceptions like Romney, Kasich, ...).

 I've wondered if Rubio's motivation was the court.  Seems to be a staunch Catholic. 



 https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/how-catholic-is-marco-rubio


basil said:

Morganna said:
 I've wondered if Rubio's motivation was the court.  Seems to be a staunch Catholic.  

Many supported Hitler because they (correctly) feared the Soviets. That still doesn't make them right. History tends to not be very kind to these folks. Which is why Rubio will have to go too, decent guy or not.

 I was taught by two German survivors of this period. And I’m not talking about Shoah survivors, I’m talking about German families, cultured people with ‘ordinary’ lives trying to survive frightening times. 
They were explicit in describing what it was like to live through the buildup to dictatorship and war then occupation, especially when you didn’t agree with what was happening. There was no way out for people like them. They could not make their voices heard. They literally lived in fear of their lives - if they did not conform, their own family informed against the ‘traitor’/‘the weakness within’ so ‘impurity could be cured’. The younger teacher said fear was thicker than fog, every day and night, everywhere. And then it grew into terror, and anger as everything good was destroyed. 
(She lost hope. One day I might tell you  what she told us about her teenage years.)

Why did they tell us these things?? Because they were adamant that such things should never happen again, on either side of the picture. And that no student of theirs should ever live in fear of her rights being stripped or limited, or her vote decided for her. 


ml1 said:

I'll just repeat this:

ml1 said:

Red_Barchetta said:

 I don't see that happening, I think she has big aspirations.  

The Republican voters are the real problem and they aren't going anywhere. 

 until the voters change we're just going to get different flavors of Republican crazy when Trump is gone

 still no one is addressing the fact that about 40% of voters nationally, and strong majorities in about 20 states are all in on the most horrific aspects of Trumpism. 

This is not going away any time soon, regardless of whether Kasich and Romney and other so-called "sane" Republicans try to push back. 


basil said:

Many supported Hitler because they (correctly) feared the Soviets. That still doesn't make them right. History tends to not be very kind to these folks. Which is why Rubio will have to go too, decent guy or not.

 I'm going to disagree with this analogy and boy that puts me in the weird spot of defending the right to life position but, if you are a one issue voter or politician, and you are defending the position that life begins at conception or you believe that position is a foundation of your faith, then I think you can't compare it to a fear of the Soviets. 

I will argue for choice, but I am open minded enough to understand the other position.  This issue is not like any of the other issues that divide the parties. Well maybe capital punishment. As science advances, viability has moved and many women are torn. 

But we will see how the SCOTUS rules this week and if any protests ensue. Then again it may get lost in the shuffle.


STANV said:

 https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/how-catholic-is-marco-rubio

 My ex was born Catholic but in Peru apparently a Protestant ministry was set up and the family sent their children to that school but then back to the Catholic faith.  Similar to Rubio's experience.

When they came to the US they remained Catholic and like most of my friends and family they lapse or leave or change religions (Kasich did) so it goes with the faith.  Many of us have a love/hate relationship with the Catholic Church, then as most Catholics say, once a Catholic always a Catholic.  At fourteen I announced to my mother that the Church did not do enough during the Holocaust and was doing nothing for Civil Rights so I was officially denouncing the faith.  

As for the right to life supporters they are from a broad range of faiths. So the fact that Rubio has explored another faith doesn't make him more or less Catholic or more or less pro life.


Morganna said:

basil said:

Many supported Hitler because they (correctly) feared the Soviets. That still doesn't make them right. History tends to not be very kind to these folks. Which is why Rubio will have to go too, decent guy or not.

 I'm going to disagree with this analogy and boy that puts me in the weird spot of defending the right to life position but, if you are a one issue voter or politician, and you are defending the position that life begins at conception or you believe that position is a foundation of your faith, then I think you can't compare it to a fear of the Soviets. 

I will argue for choice, but I am open minded enough to understand the other position.  This issue is not like any of the other issues that divide the parties. Well maybe capital punishment. As science advances, viability has moved and many women are torn. 

But we will see how the SCOTUS rules this week and if any protests ensue. Then again it may get lost in the shuffle.

Let’s put aside if these are sensible positions to begin with, but if you have an absolute fear of the soviets and that is the single issue you care more about than anything else, or if you have an absolute belief that life starts at conception and that is the single issue you care more about than anything else, why is that any different?


basil said:

Let’s put aside if these are sensible positions to begin with, but if you have an absolute fear of the soviets and that is the single issue you care more about than anything else, or if you have an absolute belief that life starts at conception and that is the single issue you care more about than anything else, why is that any different?

The absolute belief of the anti-abortionist is a battle against murder. Was the absolute fear of the Soviets a battle against murder? Possibly, but supporting Hitler weakens the argument.


DaveSchmidt said:

basil said:

Let’s put aside if these are sensible positions to begin with, but if you have an absolute fear of the soviets and that is the single issue you care more about than anything else, or if you have an absolute belief that life starts at conception and that is the single issue you care more about than anything else, why is that any different?

The absolute belief of the anti-abortionist is a battle against murder. Was the absolute fear of the Soviets a battle against murder? Possibly, but supporting Hitler weakens the argument.

Does the end justify the means?


And, just for the record, I don’t think the comparison is far fetched at all. By the time you are going to agree with me, it will be too late.


basil said:

And, just for the record, I don’t think the comparison is far fetched at all. By the time you are going to agree with me, it will be too late.

The record wasn’t in doubt.

You asked for a difference. Grasping Morganna’s objection, or at least thinking I did, I offered one. (One of these days, raising, articulating and otherwise discussing a point of contention will be taken for the clarifying exercise it is and not inferred as a position.)


basil said:

Let’s put aside if these are sensible positions to begin with, but if you have an absolute fear of the soviets and that is the single issue you care more about than anything else, or if you have an absolute belief that life starts at conception and that is the single issue you care more about than anything else, why is that any different?

 Perhaps  because fearing the Soviets seems a little less immediate and definite. Every abortion is defined as a death by the right to life position. Being afraid of another power taking over is a little more abstract. But this is a discussion better handled by someone with Rubio's position.  I can't make the argument with the same fervor. I just have understanding for those who take that position. 

That said, SCOTUS just overturned the Louisiana limitations.

My bet is this will fire up the Republicans and make the Democrats more confident that there is no danger of Roe being overturned. Democrats, particularly younger Democrats do not seem to be motivated by SCOTUS picks. I wish they were.


STANV said:

Morganna said:

basil said:

We should expect our leaders to have principles and things they believe in. Most republicans know fully well that this is wrong, just like many germans probably knew that what Hitler did was wrong. Rubio does not pass that sniff test anymore, like most in the GOP (with only few exceptions like Romney, Kasich, ...).

 I've wondered if Rubio's motivation was the court.  Seems to be a staunch Catholic. 

 https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/how-catholic-is-marco-rubio

Just an aside.  Don't rely on the "Church Militant" organization for ruling on who or what is authentically "Catholic".

They are probably correct in recounting the surface facts about Rubio's relationship with various denominations, but that's probably about it. 


In order to add a comment – you must Join this community – Click here to do so.