Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Isn't it your party?

---

No more my party than yours. Unlike you, I have never been a registered Republican. Like you, I claim to be conservative. Unlike you, I actually am a conservative and am a pragmatist who always votes for the more conservative candidates in local, state and national elections.

Question: do you really believe calling it "my party" is a zing or put down?

---

Calling it "your party" seems accurate. You always vote for the Republican candidates, no matter how bad they are.

How does one become a "registered Republican" in Texas. Maybe white rock can help us on that one.

---

So I guess the answer is yes, you feel calling other people Republicans is a put down or a zing. Lol.

It makes no difference to me what you call me. If you want to call me a Republican to make you feel better about your own choices, so be it. I don't look at that as an insult, but then again, I'm not a deranged NT.

Yes, I will always vote for the more conservative candidate over the liberal counterpart. Anyone who calls themselves conservative and votes (or doesn't vote) in a way that gets liberals elected is a buffoon. One would've thought the last two years would've taught you that lesson but apparently you're a slow learner.

---

No, I don't think calling someone a Republican or Democrat is a zinger. It is interesting that your interpret "your party" as a zinger or an insult. You always vote Republican but consider it an insult if some anonymous poster references your party. It isn't an insult; it is an accurate description

i voted for Trump twice; never again. Biden is terrible, but hasn't talked about terminating parts of the Constitution or encouraged people to attack the Capitol. That is a disqualification from holding federal office. I'll be voting in the Republican primary for one of the good candidates that will be running.

From your posts I believe you are a Christian. I know I am. I cringe when some of the posters here define Christianity for the rest of us because some have eccentric beliefs about what Christians believe. Aren't you glad they don't define Christianity for the rest of us. Likewise, I cringe when you try to define "conservative" for the rest of us. Your beliefs concerning conservatism are not the final word on the subject (thankfully). You are listening to your conscience and I respect that. I'm listening to mine and will vote accordingly.

---

Neither of us want Trump. The difference between us is you'd rather burn down the house (and the country in the process) than see trump win.

---

I observed Trump trying to burn down the house and you voting for him as striking the match.

---

That's pretty silly. I voted for him before January 6th, as did you. If he tried to burn down the house on January 6th, then surely charges would have been brought against him for sedition to prevent him from running again, correct? I mean we wouldn't let a guy who tried to "burn down the house" run for president again, would we?

---

Lots of good info in this discussion. Hopefully Jim Jordan can bring more of this to light.

HuMcK said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Isn't it your party?

---

No more my party than yours. Unlike you, I have never been a registered Republican. Like you, I claim to be conservative. Unlike you, I actually am a conservative and am a pragmatist who always votes for the more conservative candidates in local, state and national elections.

Question: do you really believe calling it "my party" is a zing or put down?

---

Calling it "your party" seems accurate. You always vote for the Republican candidates, no matter how bad they are.

How does one become a "registered Republican" in Texas. Maybe white rock can help us on that one.

---

So I guess the answer is yes, you feel calling other people Republicans is a put down or a zing. Lol.

It makes no difference to me what you call me. If you want to call me a Republican to make you feel better about your own choices, so be it. I don't look at that as an insult, but then again, I'm not a deranged NT.

Yes, I will always vote for the more conservative candidate over the liberal counterpart. Anyone who calls themselves conservative and votes (or doesn't vote) in a way that gets liberals elected is a buffoon. One would've thought the last two years would've taught you that lesson but apparently you're a slow learner.

---

No, I don't think calling someone a Republican or Democrat is a zinger. It is interesting that your interpret "your party" as a zinger or an insult. You always vote Republican but consider it an insult if some anonymous poster references your party. It isn't an insult; it is an accurate description

i voted for Trump twice; never again. Biden is terrible, but hasn't talked about terminating parts of the Constitution or encouraged people to attack the Capitol. That is a disqualification from holding federal office. I'll be voting in the Republican primary for one of the good candidates that will be running.

From your posts I believe you are a Christian. I know I am. I cringe when some of the posters here define Christianity for the rest of us because some have eccentric beliefs about what Christians believe. Aren't you glad they don't define Christianity for the rest of us. Likewise, I cringe when you try to define "conservative" for the rest of us. Your beliefs concerning conservatism are not the final word on the subject (thankfully). You are listening to your conscience and I respect that. I'm listening to mine and will vote accordingly.

---

Neither of us want Trump. The difference between us is you'd rather burn down the house (and the country in the process) than see trump win.

---

I observed Trump trying to burn down the house and you voting for him as striking the match.

---

That's pretty silly. I voted for him before January 6th, as did you. If he tried to burn down the house on January 6th, then surely charges would have been brought against him for sedition to prevent him from running again, correct? I mean we wouldn't let a guy who tried to "burn down the house" run for president again, would we?

---

This might be the most pernicious logical fallacy to come put of the Trump era. As if a lack of criminal prosecution is all that matters, and anything short of that means it's acceptable behavior. The irony lies in that fact that you will vigorously oppose any and all investigation or prosecution, while dismissing any attempt at accountability as just partisan actions.

It's a circular argument for dismissing anything inconvenient: "all investigations/judicial actions against Republicans are just partisan witch-hunts>>>a lack of judicial action/conviction means nothing bad happened".

---

Although the king of circular reasoning would typically know a thing or two about it, you've missed the mark here. I've never complained about the Feds looking at Trump's potential criminal conduct. The only thing I've complained about was the dog and pony show that was the House investigation, which you well know - if you were honest - was nothing more than an attempt to score political points for the Dems. House can't even bring criminal charges.

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Isn't it your party?

---

No more my party than yours. Unlike you, I have never been a registered Republican. Like you, I claim to be conservative. Unlike you, I actually am a conservative and am a pragmatist who always votes for the more conservative candidates in local, state and national elections.

Question: do you really believe calling it "my party" is a zing or put down?

---

Calling it "your party" seems accurate. You always vote for the Republican candidates, no matter how bad they are.

How does one become a "registered Republican" in Texas. Maybe white rock can help us on that one.

---

So I guess the answer is yes, you feel calling other people Republicans is a put down or a zing. Lol.

It makes no difference to me what you call me. If you want to call me a Republican to make you feel better about your own choices, so be it. I don't look at that as an insult, but then again, I'm not a deranged NT.

Yes, I will always vote for the more conservative candidate over the liberal counterpart. Anyone who calls themselves conservative and votes (or doesn't vote) in a way that gets liberals elected is a buffoon. One would've thought the last two years would've taught you that lesson but apparently you're a slow learner.

---

No, I don't think calling someone a Republican or Democrat is a zinger. It is interesting that your interpret "your party" as a zinger or an insult. You always vote Republican but consider it an insult if some anonymous poster references your party. It isn't an insult; it is an accurate description

i voted for Trump twice; never again. Biden is terrible, but hasn't talked about terminating parts of the Constitution or encouraged people to attack the Capitol. That is a disqualification from holding federal office. I'll be voting in the Republican primary for one of the good candidates that will be running.

From your posts I believe you are a Christian. I know I am. I cringe when some of the posters here define Christianity for the rest of us because some have eccentric beliefs about what Christians believe. Aren't you glad they don't define Christianity for the rest of us. Likewise, I cringe when you try to define "conservative" for the rest of us. Your beliefs concerning conservatism are not the final word on the subject (thankfully). You are listening to your conscience and I respect that. I'm listening to mine and will vote accordingly.

---

Let's be honest - your issue with me is not how I define conservative. I suspect you'd have difficulty identifying more than a handful of conservative issues with which you disagree with me. In truth, where we diverge is that you - like the MAGA republicans who couldn't bring themselves to vote for McCarthy - would rather see the party burn to the ground than see a MAGA candidate win or have a position of leadership in the party. You'd rather the democrat win than see that. I believe your rigidity and inability to compromise - just like MAGA's the last few days - is bad for conservatism. That's why I called your consternation at the MAGA repubs the last few days so incredibly ironic.

---

True dat (in bold)

As for the rest of the paragraph, no

---

I understand why you would attempt to brush off the apt comparison, since it doesn't paint a flattering picture. But when you financially support people who try to get Democrats elected because you think a Republican candidate didn't dislike Trump enough, the comparison remains apropos.

---

You put party before principle and I don't. If you guys (no offense intended)keep nominating bozos I'll keep supporting the lesser bozos.

You don't paint a flattering picture which is why I am glad it is mistaken.

I like the new rules prompted by the Republican revolt. Don't you?
https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/118780

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Isn't it your party?

---

No more my party than yours. Unlike you, I have never been a registered Republican. Like you, I claim to be conservative. Unlike you, I actually am a conservative and am a pragmatist who always votes for the more conservative candidates in local, state and national elections.

Question: do you really believe calling it "my party" is a zing or put down?

---

Calling it "your party" seems accurate. You always vote for the Republican candidates, no matter how bad they are.

How does one become a "registered Republican" in Texas. Maybe white rock can help us on that one.

---

So I guess the answer is yes, you feel calling other people Republicans is a put down or a zing. Lol.

It makes no difference to me what you call me. If you want to call me a Republican to make you feel better about your own choices, so be it. I don't look at that as an insult, but then again, I'm not a deranged NT.

Yes, I will always vote for the more conservative candidate over the liberal counterpart. Anyone who calls themselves conservative and votes (or doesn't vote) in a way that gets liberals elected is a buffoon. One would've thought the last two years would've taught you that lesson but apparently you're a slow learner.

---

No, I don't think calling someone a Republican or Democrat is a zinger. It is interesting that your interpret "your party" as a zinger or an insult. You always vote Republican but consider it an insult if some anonymous poster references your party. It isn't an insult; it is an accurate description

i voted for Trump twice; never again. Biden is terrible, but hasn't talked about terminating parts of the Constitution or encouraged people to attack the Capitol. That is a disqualification from holding federal office. I'll be voting in the Republican primary for one of the good candidates that will be running.

From your posts I believe you are a Christian. I know I am. I cringe when some of the posters here define Christianity for the rest of us because some have eccentric beliefs about what Christians believe. Aren't you glad they don't define Christianity for the rest of us. Likewise, I cringe when you try to define "conservative" for the rest of us. Your beliefs concerning conservatism are not the final word on the subject (thankfully). You are listening to your conscience and I respect that. I'm listening to mine and will vote accordingly.

---

Let's be honest - your issue with me is not how I define conservative. I suspect you'd have difficulty identifying more than a handful of conservative issues with which you disagree with me. In truth, where we diverge is that you - like the MAGA republicans who couldn't bring themselves to vote for McCarthy - would rather see the party burn to the ground than see a MAGA candidate win or have a position of leadership in the party. You'd rather the democrat win than see that. I believe your rigidity and inability to compromise - just like MAGA's the last few days - is bad for conservatism. That's why I called your consternation at the MAGA repubs the last few days so incredibly ironic.

---

True dat (in bold)

As for the rest of the paragraph, no

---

I understand why you would attempt to brush off the apt comparison, since it doesn't paint a flattering picture. But when you financially support people who try to get Democrats elected because you think a Republican candidate didn't dislike Trump enough, the comparison remains apropos.

---

You put party before principle and I don't. If you guys (no offense intended)keep nominating bozos I'll keep supporting the lesser bozos.

You don't paint a flattering picture which is why I am glad it is mistaken.

I like the new rules prompted by the Republican revolt. Don't you?
https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/118780

---

Sorry, but it's anything but "principled" to vote in a way that gets candidates elected who support what is essentially infanticide up to the point of child birth (and some after), requiring companies to provide abortifacients, teaching that gender is fluid, passes executive orders/legislation to allow men to compete against women, promotes anti-family values, and passes legislation that is fiscally irresponsible.

In short, the thing you don't seem to comprehend is policies matter. Hard to say you're a principled conservative when you vote in a way that favors or promotes the foregoing policies.

BTW, when you say "you guys" keep nominating bozos, I guess that would apply to you as well, since we both voted against Trump in the primaries. Kind of childish to keep touting that line when you are a Republican who voted (and has advised he will continue to vote) in the primaries.

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Isn't it your party?

---

No more my party than yours. Unlike you, I have never been a registered Republican. Like you, I claim to be conservative. Unlike you, I actually am a conservative and am a pragmatist who always votes for the more conservative candidates in local, state and national elections.

Question: do you really believe calling it "my party" is a zing or put down?

---

Calling it "your party" seems accurate. You always vote for the Republican candidates, no matter how bad they are.

How does one become a "registered Republican" in Texas. Maybe white rock can help us on that one.

---

So I guess the answer is yes, you feel calling other people Republicans is a put down or a zing. Lol.

It makes no difference to me what you call me. If you want to call me a Republican to make you feel better about your own choices, so be it. I don't look at that as an insult, but then again, I'm not a deranged NT.

Yes, I will always vote for the more conservative candidate over the liberal counterpart. Anyone who calls themselves conservative and votes (or doesn't vote) in a way that gets liberals elected is a buffoon. One would've thought the last two years would've taught you that lesson but apparently you're a slow learner.

---

No, I don't think calling someone a Republican or Democrat is a zinger. It is interesting that your interpret "your party" as a zinger or an insult. You always vote Republican but consider it an insult if some anonymous poster references your party. It isn't an insult; it is an accurate description

i voted for Trump twice; never again. Biden is terrible, but hasn't talked about terminating parts of the Constitution or encouraged people to attack the Capitol. That is a disqualification from holding federal office. I'll be voting in the Republican primary for one of the good candidates that will be running.

From your posts I believe you are a Christian. I know I am. I cringe when some of the posters here define Christianity for the rest of us because some have eccentric beliefs about what Christians believe. Aren't you glad they don't define Christianity for the rest of us. Likewise, I cringe when you try to define "conservative" for the rest of us. Your beliefs concerning conservatism are not the final word on the subject (thankfully). You are listening to your conscience and I respect that. I'm listening to mine and will vote accordingly.

---

Let's be honest - your issue with me is not how I define conservative. I suspect you'd have difficulty identifying more than a handful of conservative issues with which you disagree with me. In truth, where we diverge is that you - like the MAGA republicans who couldn't bring themselves to vote for McCarthy - would rather see the party burn to the ground than see a MAGA candidate win or have a position of leadership in the party. You'd rather the democrat win than see that. I believe your rigidity and inability to compromise - just like MAGA's the last few days - is bad for conservatism. That's why I called your consternation at the MAGA repubs the last few days so incredibly ironic.

---

True dat (in bold)

As for the rest of the paragraph, no

---

I understand why you would attempt to brush off the apt comparison, since it doesn't paint a flattering picture. But when you financially support people who try to get Democrats elected because you think a Republican candidate didn't dislike Trump enough, the comparison remains apropos.

---

You put party before principle and I don't. If you guys (no offense intended)keep nominating bozos I'll keep supporting the lesser bozos.

You don't paint a flattering picture which is why I am glad it is mistaken.

I like the new rules prompted by the Republican revolt. Don't you?
https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/118780

---

Sorry, but it's anything but "principled" to vote in a way that gets candidates elected who support what is essentially infanticide up to the point of child birth (and some after), requiring companies to provide abortifacients, teaching that gender is fluid, passes executive orders/legislation to allow men to compete against women, promotes anti-family values, and passes legislation that is fiscally irresponsible.

In short, the thing you don't seem to comprehend is policies matter. Hard to say you're a principled conservative when you vote in a way that favors or promotes the foregoing policies.

BTW, when you say "you guys" keep nominating bozos, I guess that would apply to you as well, since we both voted against Trump in the primaries. Kind of childish to keep touting that line when you are a Republican who voted (and has advised he will continue to vote) in the primaries.

---

Am I a registered Republican? Isn't that a zinger

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Isn't it your party?

---

No more my party than yours. Unlike you, I have never been a registered Republican. Like you, I claim to be conservative. Unlike you, I actually am a conservative and am a pragmatist who always votes for the more conservative candidates in local, state and national elections.

Question: do you really believe calling it "my party" is a zing or put down?

---

Calling it "your party" seems accurate. You always vote for the Republican candidates, no matter how bad they are.

How does one become a "registered Republican" in Texas. Maybe white rock can help us on that one.

---

So I guess the answer is yes, you feel calling other people Republicans is a put down or a zing. Lol.

It makes no difference to me what you call me. If you want to call me a Republican to make you feel better about your own choices, so be it. I don't look at that as an insult, but then again, I'm not a deranged NT.

Yes, I will always vote for the more conservative candidate over the liberal counterpart. Anyone who calls themselves conservative and votes (or doesn't vote) in a way that gets liberals elected is a buffoon. One would've thought the last two years would've taught you that lesson but apparently you're a slow learner.

---

No, I don't think calling someone a Republican or Democrat is a zinger. It is interesting that your interpret "your party" as a zinger or an insult. You always vote Republican but consider it an insult if some anonymous poster references your party. It isn't an insult; it is an accurate description

i voted for Trump twice; never again. Biden is terrible, but hasn't talked about terminating parts of the Constitution or encouraged people to attack the Capitol. That is a disqualification from holding federal office. I'll be voting in the Republican primary for one of the good candidates that will be running.

From your posts I believe you are a Christian. I know I am. I cringe when some of the posters here define Christianity for the rest of us because some have eccentric beliefs about what Christians believe. Aren't you glad they don't define Christianity for the rest of us. Likewise, I cringe when you try to define "conservative" for the rest of us. Your beliefs concerning conservatism are not the final word on the subject (thankfully). You are listening to your conscience and I respect that. I'm listening to mine and will vote accordingly.

---

Let's be honest - your issue with me is not how I define conservative. I suspect you'd have difficulty identifying more than a handful of conservative issues with which you disagree with me. In truth, where we diverge is that you - like the MAGA republicans who couldn't bring themselves to vote for McCarthy - would rather see the party burn to the ground than see a MAGA candidate win or have a position of leadership in the party. You'd rather the democrat win than see that. I believe your rigidity and inability to compromise - just like MAGA's the last few days - is bad for conservatism. That's why I called your consternation at the MAGA repubs the last few days so incredibly ironic.

---

True dat (in bold)

As for the rest of the paragraph, no

---

I understand why you would attempt to brush off the apt comparison, since it doesn't paint a flattering picture. But when you financially support people who try to get Democrats elected because you think a Republican candidate didn't dislike Trump enough, the comparison remains apropos.

---

You put party before principle and I don't. If you guys (no offense intended)keep nominating bozos I'll keep supporting the lesser bozos.

You don't paint a flattering picture which is why I am glad it is mistaken.

I like the new rules prompted by the Republican revolt. Don't you?
https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/118780

---

Sorry, but it's anything but "principled" to vote in a way that gets candidates elected who support what is essentially infanticide up to the point of child birth (and some after), requiring companies to provide abortifacients, teaching that gender is fluid, passes executive orders/legislation to allow men to compete against women, promotes anti-family values, and passes legislation that is fiscally irresponsible.

In short, the thing you don't seem to comprehend is policies matter. Hard to say you're a principled conservative when you vote in a way that favors or promotes the foregoing policies.

BTW, when you say "you guys" keep nominating bozos, I guess that would apply to you as well, since we both voted against Trump in the primaries. Kind of childish to keep touting that line when you are a Republican who voted (and has advised he will continue to vote) in the primaries.

---

Am I a registered Republican? Isn't that a zinger

---

No, it's what I would call highly ironic.

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Isn't it your party?

---

No more my party than yours. Unlike you, I have never been a registered Republican. Like you, I claim to be conservative. Unlike you, I actually am a conservative and am a pragmatist who always votes for the more conservative candidates in local, state and national elections.

Question: do you really believe calling it "my party" is a zing or put down?

---

Calling it "your party" seems accurate. You always vote for the Republican candidates, no matter how bad they are.

How does one become a "registered Republican" in Texas. Maybe white rock can help us on that one.

---

So I guess the answer is yes, you feel calling other people Republicans is a put down or a zing. Lol.

It makes no difference to me what you call me. If you want to call me a Republican to make you feel better about your own choices, so be it. I don't look at that as an insult, but then again, I'm not a deranged NT.

Yes, I will always vote for the more conservative candidate over the liberal counterpart. Anyone who calls themselves conservative and votes (or doesn't vote) in a way that gets liberals elected is a buffoon. One would've thought the last two years would've taught you that lesson but apparently you're a slow learner.

---

No, I don't think calling someone a Republican or Democrat is a zinger. It is interesting that your interpret "your party" as a zinger or an insult. You always vote Republican but consider it an insult if some anonymous poster references your party. It isn't an insult; it is an accurate description

i voted for Trump twice; never again. Biden is terrible, but hasn't talked about terminating parts of the Constitution or encouraged people to attack the Capitol. That is a disqualification from holding federal office. I'll be voting in the Republican primary for one of the good candidates that will be running.

From your posts I believe you are a Christian. I know I am. I cringe when some of the posters here define Christianity for the rest of us because some have eccentric beliefs about what Christians believe. Aren't you glad they don't define Christianity for the rest of us. Likewise, I cringe when you try to define "conservative" for the rest of us. Your beliefs concerning conservatism are not the final word on the subject (thankfully). You are listening to your conscience and I respect that. I'm listening to mine and will vote accordingly.

---

Let's be honest - your issue with me is not how I define conservative. I suspect you'd have difficulty identifying more than a handful of conservative issues with which you disagree with me. In truth, where we diverge is that you - like the MAGA republicans who couldn't bring themselves to vote for McCarthy - would rather see the party burn to the ground than see a MAGA candidate win or have a position of leadership in the party. You'd rather the democrat win than see that. I believe your rigidity and inability to compromise - just like MAGA's the last few days - is bad for conservatism. That's why I called your consternation at the MAGA repubs the last few days so incredibly ironic.

---

True dat (in bold)

As for the rest of the paragraph, no

---

I understand why you would attempt to brush off the apt comparison, since it doesn't paint a flattering picture. But when you financially support people who try to get Democrats elected because you think a Republican candidate didn't dislike Trump enough, the comparison remains apropos.

---

You put party before principle and I don't. If you guys (no offense intended)keep nominating bozos I'll keep supporting the lesser bozos.

You don't paint a flattering picture which is why I am glad it is mistaken.

I like the new rules prompted by the Republican revolt. Don't you?
https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/118780

---

Sorry, but it's anything but "principled" to vote in a way that gets candidates elected who support what is essentially infanticide up to the point of child birth (and some after), requiring companies to provide abortifacients, teaching that gender is fluid, passes executive orders/legislation to allow men to compete against women, promotes anti-family values, and passes legislation that is fiscally irresponsible.

In short, the thing you don't seem to comprehend is policies matter. Hard to say you're a principled conservative when you vote in a way that favors or promotes the foregoing policies.

BTW, when you say "you guys" keep nominating bozos, I guess that would apply to you as well, since we both voted against Trump in the primaries. Kind of childish to keep touting that line when you are a Republican who voted (and has advised he will continue to vote) in the primaries.

---

Am I a registered Republican? Isn't that a zinger

---

No, it's what I would call highly ironic.

---

It's ironic because there is no such thing as a registered Republican in Texas? Or ironic because you meant it as a zinger and there is no such thing as a registered Republican and you didn't know that?

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Isn't it your party?

---

No more my party than yours. Unlike you, I have never been a registered Republican. Like you, I claim to be conservative. Unlike you, I actually am a conservative and am a pragmatist who always votes for the more conservative candidates in local, state and national elections.

Question: do you really believe calling it "my party" is a zing or put down?

---

Calling it "your party" seems accurate. You always vote for the Republican candidates, no matter how bad they are.

How does one become a "registered Republican" in Texas. Maybe white rock can help us on that one.

---

So I guess the answer is yes, you feel calling other people Republicans is a put down or a zing. Lol.

It makes no difference to me what you call me. If you want to call me a Republican to make you feel better about your own choices, so be it. I don't look at that as an insult, but then again, I'm not a deranged NT.

Yes, I will always vote for the more conservative candidate over the liberal counterpart. Anyone who calls themselves conservative and votes (or doesn't vote) in a way that gets liberals elected is a buffoon. One would've thought the last two years would've taught you that lesson but apparently you're a slow learner.

---

No, I don't think calling someone a Republican or Democrat is a zinger. It is interesting that your interpret "your party" as a zinger or an insult. You always vote Republican but consider it an insult if some anonymous poster references your party. It isn't an insult; it is an accurate description

i voted for Trump twice; never again. Biden is terrible, but hasn't talked about terminating parts of the Constitution or encouraged people to attack the Capitol. That is a disqualification from holding federal office. I'll be voting in the Republican primary for one of the good candidates that will be running.

From your posts I believe you are a Christian. I know I am. I cringe when some of the posters here define Christianity for the rest of us because some have eccentric beliefs about what Christians believe. Aren't you glad they don't define Christianity for the rest of us. Likewise, I cringe when you try to define "conservative" for the rest of us. Your beliefs concerning conservatism are not the final word on the subject (thankfully). You are listening to your conscience and I respect that. I'm listening to mine and will vote accordingly.

---

Let's be honest - your issue with me is not how I define conservative. I suspect you'd have difficulty identifying more than a handful of conservative issues with which you disagree with me. In truth, where we diverge is that you - like the MAGA republicans who couldn't bring themselves to vote for McCarthy - would rather see the party burn to the ground than see a MAGA candidate win or have a position of leadership in the party. You'd rather the democrat win than see that. I believe your rigidity and inability to compromise - just like MAGA's the last few days - is bad for conservatism. That's why I called your consternation at the MAGA repubs the last few days so incredibly ironic.

---

True dat (in bold)

As for the rest of the paragraph, no

---

I understand why you would attempt to brush off the apt comparison, since it doesn't paint a flattering picture. But when you financially support people who try to get Democrats elected because you think a Republican candidate didn't dislike Trump enough, the comparison remains apropos.

---

You put party before principle and I don't. If you guys (no offense intended)keep nominating bozos I'll keep supporting the lesser bozos.

You don't paint a flattering picture which is why I am glad it is mistaken.

I like the new rules prompted by the Republican revolt. Don't you?
https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/118780

---

Sorry, but it's anything but "principled" to vote in a way that gets candidates elected who support what is essentially infanticide up to the point of child birth (and some after), requiring companies to provide abortifacients, teaching that gender is fluid, passes executive orders/legislation to allow men to compete against women, promotes anti-family values, and passes legislation that is fiscally irresponsible.

In short, the thing you don't seem to comprehend is policies matter. Hard to say you're a principled conservative when you vote in a way that favors or promotes the foregoing policies.

BTW, when you say "you guys" keep nominating bozos, I guess that would apply to you as well, since we both voted against Trump in the primaries. Kind of childish to keep touting that line when you are a Republican who voted (and has advised he will continue to vote) in the primaries.

---

Am I a registered Republican? Isn't that a zinger

---

No, it's what I would call highly ironic.

---

It's ironic because there is no such thing as a registered Republican in Texas? Or ironic because you meant it as a zinger and there is no such thing as a registered Republican and you didn't know that?

---

As stated above, the irony is your use of the term "you guys" when you admittedly vote in Republican primaries (and will continue to do so).

Let me know if you need me to dumb it down further.

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Isn't it your party?

---

No more my party than yours. Unlike you, I have never been a registered Republican. Like you, I claim to be conservative. Unlike you, I actually am a conservative and am a pragmatist who always votes for the more conservative candidates in local, state and national elections.

Question: do you really believe calling it "my party" is a zing or put down?

---

Calling it "your party" seems accurate. You always vote for the Republican candidates, no matter how bad they are.

How does one become a "registered Republican" in Texas. Maybe white rock can help us on that one.

---

So I guess the answer is yes, you feel calling other people Republicans is a put down or a zing. Lol.

It makes no difference to me what you call me. If you want to call me a Republican to make you feel better about your own choices, so be it. I don't look at that as an insult, but then again, I'm not a deranged NT.

Yes, I will always vote for the more conservative candidate over the liberal counterpart. Anyone who calls themselves conservative and votes (or doesn't vote) in a way that gets liberals elected is a buffoon. One would've thought the last two years would've taught you that lesson but apparently you're a slow learner.

---

No, I don't think calling someone a Republican or Democrat is a zinger. It is interesting that your interpret "your party" as a zinger or an insult. You always vote Republican but consider it an insult if some anonymous poster references your party. It isn't an insult; it is an accurate description

i voted for Trump twice; never again. Biden is terrible, but hasn't talked about terminating parts of the Constitution or encouraged people to attack the Capitol. That is a disqualification from holding federal office. I'll be voting in the Republican primary for one of the good candidates that will be running.

From your posts I believe you are a Christian. I know I am. I cringe when some of the posters here define Christianity for the rest of us because some have eccentric beliefs about what Christians believe. Aren't you glad they don't define Christianity for the rest of us. Likewise, I cringe when you try to define "conservative" for the rest of us. Your beliefs concerning conservatism are not the final word on the subject (thankfully). You are listening to your conscience and I respect that. I'm listening to mine and will vote accordingly.

---

Let's be honest - your issue with me is not how I define conservative. I suspect you'd have difficulty identifying more than a handful of conservative issues with which you disagree with me. In truth, where we diverge is that you - like the MAGA republicans who couldn't bring themselves to vote for McCarthy - would rather see the party burn to the ground than see a MAGA candidate win or have a position of leadership in the party. You'd rather the democrat win than see that. I believe your rigidity and inability to compromise - just like MAGA's the last few days - is bad for conservatism. That's why I called your consternation at the MAGA repubs the last few days so incredibly ironic.

---

True dat (in bold)

As for the rest of the paragraph, no

---

I understand why you would attempt to brush off the apt comparison, since it doesn't paint a flattering picture. But when you financially support people who try to get Democrats elected because you think a Republican candidate didn't dislike Trump enough, the comparison remains apropos.

---

You put party before principle and I don't. If you guys (no offense intended)keep nominating bozos I'll keep supporting the lesser bozos.

You don't paint a flattering picture which is why I am glad it is mistaken.

I like the new rules prompted by the Republican revolt. Don't you?
https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/118780

---

Sorry, but it's anything but "principled" to vote in a way that gets candidates elected who support what is essentially infanticide up to the point of child birth (and some after), requiring companies to provide abortifacients, teaching that gender is fluid, passes executive orders/legislation to allow men to compete against women, promotes anti-family values, and passes legislation that is fiscally irresponsible.

In short, the thing you don't seem to comprehend is policies matter. Hard to say you're a principled conservative when you vote in a way that favors or promotes the foregoing policies.

BTW, when you say "you guys" keep nominating bozos, I guess that would apply to you as well, since we both voted against Trump in the primaries. Kind of childish to keep touting that line when you are a Republican who voted (and has advised he will continue to vote) in the primaries.

---

Am I a registered Republican? Isn't that a zinger

---

No, it's what I would call highly ironic.

---

It's ironic because there is no such thing as a registered Republican in Texas? Or ironic because you meant it as a zinger and there is no such thing as a registered Republican and you didn't know that?

---

As stated above, the irony is your use of the term "you guys" when you admittedly vote in Republican primaries (and will continue to do so).

Let me know if you need me to dumb it down further.

---

I'm a Republican? That's really a dirty zinger (as you said). For that reason, you need to really dumb it down (to Gaetz level at least)

So much propaganda….

All this voting and debating and compromising is incredibly embarrassing in a democracy. https://t.co/HhURG2n2qh

— Casey Mattox (@CaseyMattox_) January 9, 2023

Detest the MAGA uber right but am simultaneously tired of the DC party group think. They- both Ds and Rs- long ago stopped representing the people and became worried about their party winning above all else. Sadly, an enormous majority of the country isn't represented well by either party but is forced to vote this way, in the same way these representatives move away from their constituents just to maintain status quo and avoid a loss of power.

It's a broken system.

The 39% (national poll) was 29% (Texas poll) about 8-10 years ago.

The center has failed.

Looks like the civil war is going to be a surprise to Biden voters. https://t.co/x9vhsBNhJJ

— Carl Benjamin (@Sargon_of_Akkad) January 10, 2023

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Isn't it your party?

---

No more my party than yours. Unlike you, I have never been a registered Republican. Like you, I claim to be conservative. Unlike you, I actually am a conservative and am a pragmatist who always votes for the more conservative candidates in local, state and national elections.

Question: do you really believe calling it "my party" is a zing or put down?

---

Calling it "your party" seems accurate. You always vote for the Republican candidates, no matter how bad they are.

How does one become a "registered Republican" in Texas. Maybe white rock can help us on that one.

---

So I guess the answer is yes, you feel calling other people Republicans is a put down or a zing. Lol.

It makes no difference to me what you call me. If you want to call me a Republican to make you feel better about your own choices, so be it. I don't look at that as an insult, but then again, I'm not a deranged NT.

Yes, I will always vote for the more conservative candidate over the liberal counterpart. Anyone who calls themselves conservative and votes (or doesn't vote) in a way that gets liberals elected is a buffoon. One would've thought the last two years would've taught you that lesson but apparently you're a slow learner.

---

No, I don't think calling someone a Republican or Democrat is a zinger. It is interesting that your interpret "your party" as a zinger or an insult. You always vote Republican but consider it an insult if some anonymous poster references your party. It isn't an insult; it is an accurate description

i voted for Trump twice; never again. Biden is terrible, but hasn't talked about terminating parts of the Constitution or encouraged people to attack the Capitol. That is a disqualification from holding federal office. I'll be voting in the Republican primary for one of the good candidates that will be running.

From your posts I believe you are a Christian. I know I am. I cringe when some of the posters here define Christianity for the rest of us because some have eccentric beliefs about what Christians believe. Aren't you glad they don't define Christianity for the rest of us. Likewise, I cringe when you try to define "conservative" for the rest of us. Your beliefs concerning conservatism are not the final word on the subject (thankfully). You are listening to your conscience and I respect that. I'm listening to mine and will vote accordingly.

---

Let's be honest - your issue with me is not how I define conservative. I suspect you'd have difficulty identifying more than a handful of conservative issues with which you disagree with me. In truth, where we diverge is that you - like the MAGA republicans who couldn't bring themselves to vote for McCarthy - would rather see the party burn to the ground than see a MAGA candidate win or have a position of leadership in the party. You'd rather the democrat win than see that. I believe your rigidity and inability to compromise - just like MAGA's the last few days - is bad for conservatism. That's why I called your consternation at the MAGA repubs the last few days so incredibly ironic.

---

True dat (in bold)

As for the rest of the paragraph, no

---

I understand why you would attempt to brush off the apt comparison, since it doesn't paint a flattering picture. But when you financially support people who try to get Democrats elected because you think a Republican candidate didn't dislike Trump enough, the comparison remains apropos.

---

You put party before principle and I don't. If you guys (no offense intended)keep nominating bozos I'll keep supporting the lesser bozos.

You don't paint a flattering picture which is why I am glad it is mistaken.

I like the new rules prompted by the Republican revolt. Don't you?
https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/118780

---

Sorry, but it's anything but "principled" to vote in a way that gets candidates elected who support what is essentially infanticide up to the point of child birth (and some after), requiring companies to provide abortifacients, teaching that gender is fluid, passes executive orders/legislation to allow men to compete against women, promotes anti-family values, and passes legislation that is fiscally irresponsible.

In short, the thing you don't seem to comprehend is policies matter. Hard to say you're a principled conservative when you vote in a way that favors or promotes the foregoing policies.

BTW, when you say "you guys" keep nominating bozos, I guess that would apply to you as well, since we both voted against Trump in the primaries. Kind of childish to keep touting that line when you are a Republican who voted (and has advised he will continue to vote) in the primaries.

---

Am I a registered Republican? Isn't that a zinger

---

No, it's what I would call highly ironic.

---

It's ironic because there is no such thing as a registered Republican in Texas? Or ironic because you meant it as a zinger and there is no such thing as a registered Republican and you didn't know that?

---

As stated above, the irony is your use of the term "you guys" when you admittedly vote in Republican primaries (and will continue to do so).

Let me know if you need me to dumb it down further.

---

I'm a Republican? That's really a dirty zinger (as you said). For that reason, you need to really dumb it down (to Gaetz level at least)

---

Nah, calling you a Republican would be a bridge too far. Don't want to get your blood pressure up more than it already is, given how excitable you are. You're just a guy who says he's not Republican, throws the label around as an insult, and then votes in all the Republican primaries.

But definitely not one of those evil dirty and nasty Republicans…

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Isn't it your party?

---

No more my party than yours. Unlike you, I have never been a registered Republican. Like you, I claim to be conservative. Unlike you, I actually am a conservative and am a pragmatist who always votes for the more conservative candidates in local, state and national elections.

Question: do you really believe calling it "my party" is a zing or put down?

---

Calling it "your party" seems accurate. You always vote for the Republican candidates, no matter how bad they are.

How does one become a "registered Republican" in Texas. Maybe white rock can help us on that one.

---

So I guess the answer is yes, you feel calling other people Republicans is a put down or a zing. Lol.

It makes no difference to me what you call me. If you want to call me a Republican to make you feel better about your own choices, so be it. I don't look at that as an insult, but then again, I'm not a deranged NT.

Yes, I will always vote for the more conservative candidate over the liberal counterpart. Anyone who calls themselves conservative and votes (or doesn't vote) in a way that gets liberals elected is a buffoon. One would've thought the last two years would've taught you that lesson but apparently you're a slow learner.

---

No, I don't think calling someone a Republican or Democrat is a zinger. It is interesting that your interpret "your party" as a zinger or an insult. You always vote Republican but consider it an insult if some anonymous poster references your party. It isn't an insult; it is an accurate description

i voted for Trump twice; never again. Biden is terrible, but hasn't talked about terminating parts of the Constitution or encouraged people to attack the Capitol. That is a disqualification from holding federal office. I'll be voting in the Republican primary for one of the good candidates that will be running.

From your posts I believe you are a Christian. I know I am. I cringe when some of the posters here define Christianity for the rest of us because some have eccentric beliefs about what Christians believe. Aren't you glad they don't define Christianity for the rest of us. Likewise, I cringe when you try to define "conservative" for the rest of us. Your beliefs concerning conservatism are not the final word on the subject (thankfully). You are listening to your conscience and I respect that. I'm listening to mine and will vote accordingly.

---

Let's be honest - your issue with me is not how I define conservative. I suspect you'd have difficulty identifying more than a handful of conservative issues with which you disagree with me. In truth, where we diverge is that you - like the MAGA republicans who couldn't bring themselves to vote for McCarthy - would rather see the party burn to the ground than see a MAGA candidate win or have a position of leadership in the party. You'd rather the democrat win than see that. I believe your rigidity and inability to compromise - just like MAGA's the last few days - is bad for conservatism. That's why I called your consternation at the MAGA repubs the last few days so incredibly ironic.

---

True dat (in bold)

As for the rest of the paragraph, no

---

I understand why you would attempt to brush off the apt comparison, since it doesn't paint a flattering picture. But when you financially support people who try to get Democrats elected because you think a Republican candidate didn't dislike Trump enough, the comparison remains apropos.

---

You put party before principle and I don't. If you guys (no offense intended)keep nominating bozos I'll keep supporting the lesser bozos.

You don't paint a flattering picture which is why I am glad it is mistaken.

I like the new rules prompted by the Republican revolt. Don't you?
https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/118780

---

Sorry, but it's anything but "principled" to vote in a way that gets candidates elected who support what is essentially infanticide up to the point of child birth (and some after), requiring companies to provide abortifacients, teaching that gender is fluid, passes executive orders/legislation to allow men to compete against women, promotes anti-family values, and passes legislation that is fiscally irresponsible.

In short, the thing you don't seem to comprehend is policies matter. Hard to say you're a principled conservative when you vote in a way that favors or promotes the foregoing policies.

BTW, when you say "you guys" keep nominating bozos, I guess that would apply to you as well, since we both voted against Trump in the primaries. Kind of childish to keep touting that line when you are a Republican who voted (and has advised he will continue to vote) in the primaries.

---

Am I a registered Republican? Isn't that a zinger

---

No, it's what I would call highly ironic.

---

It's ironic because there is no such thing as a registered Republican in Texas? Or ironic because you meant it as a zinger and there is no such thing as a registered Republican and you didn't know that?

---

As stated above, the irony is your use of the term "you guys" when you admittedly vote in Republican primaries (and will continue to do so).

Let me know if you need me to dumb it down further.

---

I'm a Republican? That's really a dirty zinger (as you said). For that reason, you need to really dumb it down (to Gaetz level at least)

---

Nah, calling you a Republican would be a bridge too far. Don't want to get your blood pressure up more than it already is, given how excitable you are. You're just a guy who says he's not Republican, throws the label around as an insult, and then votes in all the Republican primaries.

But definitely not one of those evil dirty and nasty Republicans…

---

You think calling someone a Republican is an insult?

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Isn't it your party?

---

No more my party than yours. Unlike you, I have never been a registered Republican. Like you, I claim to be conservative. Unlike you, I actually am a conservative and am a pragmatist who always votes for the more conservative candidates in local, state and national elections.

Question: do you really believe calling it "my party" is a zing or put down?

---

Calling it "your party" seems accurate. You always vote for the Republican candidates, no matter how bad they are.

How does one become a "registered Republican" in Texas. Maybe white rock can help us on that one.

---

So I guess the answer is yes, you feel calling other people Republicans is a put down or a zing. Lol.

It makes no difference to me what you call me. If you want to call me a Republican to make you feel better about your own choices, so be it. I don't look at that as an insult, but then again, I'm not a deranged NT.

Yes, I will always vote for the more conservative candidate over the liberal counterpart. Anyone who calls themselves conservative and votes (or doesn't vote) in a way that gets liberals elected is a buffoon. One would've thought the last two years would've taught you that lesson but apparently you're a slow learner.

---

No, I don't think calling someone a Republican or Democrat is a zinger. It is interesting that your interpret "your party" as a zinger or an insult. You always vote Republican but consider it an insult if some anonymous poster references your party. It isn't an insult; it is an accurate description

i voted for Trump twice; never again. Biden is terrible, but hasn't talked about terminating parts of the Constitution or encouraged people to attack the Capitol. That is a disqualification from holding federal office. I'll be voting in the Republican primary for one of the good candidates that will be running.

From your posts I believe you are a Christian. I know I am. I cringe when some of the posters here define Christianity for the rest of us because some have eccentric beliefs about what Christians believe. Aren't you glad they don't define Christianity for the rest of us. Likewise, I cringe when you try to define "conservative" for the rest of us. Your beliefs concerning conservatism are not the final word on the subject (thankfully). You are listening to your conscience and I respect that. I'm listening to mine and will vote accordingly.

---

Let's be honest - your issue with me is not how I define conservative. I suspect you'd have difficulty identifying more than a handful of conservative issues with which you disagree with me. In truth, where we diverge is that you - like the MAGA republicans who couldn't bring themselves to vote for McCarthy - would rather see the party burn to the ground than see a MAGA candidate win or have a position of leadership in the party. You'd rather the democrat win than see that. I believe your rigidity and inability to compromise - just like MAGA's the last few days - is bad for conservatism. That's why I called your consternation at the MAGA repubs the last few days so incredibly ironic.

---

True dat (in bold)

As for the rest of the paragraph, no

---

I understand why you would attempt to brush off the apt comparison, since it doesn't paint a flattering picture. But when you financially support people who try to get Democrats elected because you think a Republican candidate didn't dislike Trump enough, the comparison remains apropos.

---

You put party before principle and I don't. If you guys (no offense intended)keep nominating bozos I'll keep supporting the lesser bozos.

You don't paint a flattering picture which is why I am glad it is mistaken.

I like the new rules prompted by the Republican revolt. Don't you?
https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/118780

---

Sorry, but it's anything but "principled" to vote in a way that gets candidates elected who support what is essentially infanticide up to the point of child birth (and some after), requiring companies to provide abortifacients, teaching that gender is fluid, passes executive orders/legislation to allow men to compete against women, promotes anti-family values, and passes legislation that is fiscally irresponsible.

In short, the thing you don't seem to comprehend is policies matter. Hard to say you're a principled conservative when you vote in a way that favors or promotes the foregoing policies.

BTW, when you say "you guys" keep nominating bozos, I guess that would apply to you as well, since we both voted against Trump in the primaries. Kind of childish to keep touting that line when you are a Republican who voted (and has advised he will continue to vote) in the primaries.

---

Am I a registered Republican? Isn't that a zinger

---

No, it's what I would call highly ironic.

---

It's ironic because there is no such thing as a registered Republican in Texas? Or ironic because you meant it as a zinger and there is no such thing as a registered Republican and you didn't know that?

---

As stated above, the irony is your use of the term "you guys" when you admittedly vote in Republican primaries (and will continue to do so).

Let me know if you need me to dumb it down further.

---

I'm a Republican? That's really a dirty zinger (as you said). For that reason, you need to really dumb it down (to Gaetz level at least)

---

Nah, calling you a Republican would be a bridge too far. Don't want to get your blood pressure up more than it already is, given how excitable you are. You're just a guy who says he's not Republican, throws the label around as an insult, and then votes in all the Republican primaries.

But definitely not one of those evil dirty and nasty Republicans…

---

You think calling someone a Republican is an insult?

---

Nope, that would be you. Stop projecting.

Why do you think it's insulting? Why are you ashamed to call yourself a republican? After all, you vote in all their primaries.

whiterock said:

---

The 39% (national poll) was 29% (Texas poll) about 8-10 years ago.

The center has failed.

Looks like the civil war is going to be a surprise to Biden voters. https://t.co/x9vhsBNhJJ

— Carl Benjamin (@Sargon_of_Akkad) January 10, 2023

---

Too many people now realize what the uniparty is.

The establishment overplayed their hand.

Doc Holliday said:

---

whiterock said:

---

The 39% (national poll) was 29% (Texas poll) about 8-10 years ago.

The center has failed.

Looks like the civil war is going to be a surprise to Biden voters. https://t.co/x9vhsBNhJJ

— Carl Benjamin (@Sargon_of_Akkad) January 10, 2023

---

Too many people now realize what the uniparty is.

The establishment overplayed their hand.

---

The middle 80% still are the ones keeping the Nation moving forward. Building the roads, working the hospitals, and everything else. They don't care, just want to live their lives and want the bickering to stop.

Redbrickbear said:

---

So much propaganda….

All this voting and debating and compromising is incredibly embarrassing in a democracy. https://t.co/HhURG2n2qh

— Casey Mattox (@CaseyMattox_) January 9, 2023

---

Amazing how much butthurt over individuals having the ability to affect government rather than bow down to the authoritarianism. I thought it made the GOP look stupid, but I respect the fact it does not goose step behind Dear Leader and actually allows dissent.

RMF5630 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

whiterock said:

---

The 39% (national poll) was 29% (Texas poll) about 8-10 years ago.

The center has failed.

Looks like the civil war is going to be a surprise to Biden voters. https://t.co/x9vhsBNhJJ

— Carl Benjamin (@Sargon_of_Akkad) January 10, 2023

---

Too many people now realize what the uniparty is.

The establishment overplayed their hand.

---

The middle 80% still are the ones keeping the Nation moving forward. Building the roads, working the hospitals, and everything else. They don't care, just want to live their lives and want the bickering to stop.

---

They were indoctrinated not to care about being fleeced by the government. They have just enough to not care.

Enough people opposed to democrats won't vote for neocons and uniparty loyalists. Democrat voters on the other hand are VERY ignorant of how the system actually works.

Doc Holliday said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

whiterock said:

---

The 39% (national poll) was 29% (Texas poll) about 8-10 years ago.

The center has failed.

Looks like the civil war is going to be a surprise to Biden voters. https://t.co/x9vhsBNhJJ

— Carl Benjamin (@Sargon_of_Akkad) January 10, 2023

---

Too many people now realize what the uniparty is.

The establishment overplayed their hand.

---

The middle 80% still are the ones keeping the Nation moving forward. Building the roads, working the hospitals, and everything else. They don't care, just want to live their lives and want the bickering to stop.

---

They were indoctrinated not to care about being fleeced by the government. They have just enough to not care.

Enough people opposed to democrats won't vote for neocons and uniparty loyalists. Democrat voters on the other hand are VERY ignorant of how the system actually works.

---

No, they just don't care about politics and just want to do their thing. Minority like talking this ***** Much less gonna actually fight.

Time for Center to take it back.and start getting shot done, real ***** Not the political games.

RMF5630 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

whiterock said:

---

The 39% (national poll) was 29% (Texas poll) about 8-10 years ago.

The center has failed.

Looks like the civil war is going to be a surprise to Biden voters. https://t.co/x9vhsBNhJJ

— Carl Benjamin (@Sargon_of_Akkad) January 10, 2023

---

Too many people now realize what the uniparty is.

The establishment overplayed their hand.

---

The middle 80% still are the ones keeping the Nation moving forward. Building the roads, working the hospitals, and everything else. They don't care, just want to live their lives and want the bickering to stop.

---

And the middle 80% (really probably 95%) in 1860 just wanted to live their lives and were not interested in war or violence.

The political class can pull people into conflict quickly....not saying it will happen...but people under estimate how fast things can fall apart in a crisis.

Lincoln actions were specially done because he though war would not take place.

[Lincoln had long believed that Southern talk of secession was nothing but bluff. In 1856 he had stated in a speech in Galena, Illinois: "All this talk about the dissolution of the Union is humbug." He grossly underestimated secessionist sentiment and overestimated pro-Union strength in the upper South and border state regions. - Gutenberg's A Short Life of Abraham Lincoln, by John G. Nicolay]

"If a vote had been taken in 1861, in the Northern states alone, on the abstract constitutional question at issue, the President's view would in all probability have been defeated." -W. A. Dunning's summary of Lincoln's view on the supremacy of national sovereignty.

And he was not the only one not expecting war...

"The fame of devotion to the Union, kindled in the North by the words and acts of men like Webster & Gay, had so little penetrated the South that hardly anyone there expected the North to fight for the Union, & everyone felt cheated when it did" -Morison

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

whiterock said:

---

The 39% (national poll) was 29% (Texas poll) about 8-10 years ago.

The center has failed.

Looks like the civil war is going to be a surprise to Biden voters. https://t.co/x9vhsBNhJJ

— Carl Benjamin (@Sargon_of_Akkad) January 10, 2023

---

Too many people now realize what the uniparty is.

The establishment overplayed their hand.

---

The middle 80% still are the ones keeping the Nation moving forward. Building the roads, working the hospitals, and everything else. They don't care, just want to live their lives and want the bickering to stop.

---

And the middle 80% (really probably 95%) in 1860 just wanted to live their lives and were not interested in war or violence.

The political class can pull people into conflict quickly....not saying it will happen...but people under estimate how fast things can fall apart in a crisis.

Lincoln actions were specially done because he though war would not take place.

[Lincoln had long believed that Southern talk of secession was nothing but bluff. In 1856 he had stated in a speech in Galena, Illinois: "All this talk about the dissolution of the Union is humbug." He grossly underestimated secessionist sentiment and overestimated pro-Union strength in the upper South and border state regions. - Gutenberg's A Short Life of Abraham Lincoln, by John G. Nicolay]

"If a vote had been taken in 1861, in the Northern states alone, on the abstract constitutional question at issue, the President's view would in all probability have been defeated." -W. A. Dunning's summary of Lincoln's view on the supremacy of national sovereignty.

And he was not the only one not expecting war...

"The fame of devotion to the Union, kindled in the North by the words and acts of men like Webster & Gay, had so little penetrated the South that hardly anyone there expected the North to fight for the Union, & everyone felt cheated when it did" -Morison

---

That was a different set up. You had distinct lines, a literal border. It was complete States secede.

What these people are talking is more like what went down in Oregon or Waco. It will not be a war, it will be a lot of people being arrested. Not smart or necessary.

RMF5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

whiterock said:

---

The 39% (national poll) was 29% (Texas poll) about 8-10 years ago.

The center has failed.

Looks like the civil war is going to be a surprise to Biden voters. https://t.co/x9vhsBNhJJ

— Carl Benjamin (@Sargon_of_Akkad) January 10, 2023

---

Too many people now realize what the uniparty is.

The establishment overplayed their hand.

---

The middle 80% still are the ones keeping the Nation moving forward. Building the roads, working the hospitals, and everything else. They don't care, just want to live their lives and want the bickering to stop.

---

And the middle 80% (really probably 95%) in 1860 just wanted to live their lives and were not interested in war or violence.

The political class can pull people into conflict quickly....not saying it will happen...but people under estimate how fast things can fall apart in a crisis.

Lincoln actions were specially done because he though war would not take place.

[Lincoln had long believed that Southern talk of secession was nothing but bluff. In 1856 he had stated in a speech in Galena, Illinois: "All this talk about the dissolution of the Union is humbug." He grossly underestimated secessionist sentiment and overestimated pro-Union strength in the upper South and border state regions. - Gutenberg's A Short Life of Abraham Lincoln, by John G. Nicolay]

"If a vote had been taken in 1861, in the Northern states alone, on the abstract constitutional question at issue, the President's view would in all probability have been defeated." -W. A. Dunning's summary of Lincoln's view on the supremacy of national sovereignty.

And he was not the only one not expecting war...

"The fame of devotion to the Union, kindled in the North by the words and acts of men like Webster & Gay, had so little penetrated the South that hardly anyone there expected the North to fight for the Union, & everyone felt cheated when it did" -Morison

---

That was a different set up. You had distinct lines, a literal border. It was complete States secede.

What these people are talking is more like what went down in Oregon or Waco. It will not be a war, it will be a lot of people being arrested. Not smart or necessary.

---

Yugoslavia is another example of where things can go badly quickly.

The Slobodan Milosevic faction within the Communist party of Yugoslavia did not expect people to react the way they did or for things to spiral out of control. They though any talk of possible secession was a bluff.

And of course the State seceding part is what made the war in 1861 not a true civil war. But a war of secession.

The USA will not have a secessionist war again...but it might very well have a true civil war (like England, Spain, China, & Russia have had)

A real war by two or more factions for control of the entire Federal system.

No one will made the mistake of leaving the Union (and giving up power over the military and treasury)...this time everyone will make a real play for total control and to liquidate their internal rivals and ideological enemies.

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

whiterock said:

---

The 39% (national poll) was 29% (Texas poll) about 8-10 years ago.

The center has failed.

Looks like the civil war is going to be a surprise to Biden voters. https://t.co/x9vhsBNhJJ

— Carl Benjamin (@Sargon_of_Akkad) January 10, 2023

---

Too many people now realize what the uniparty is.

The establishment overplayed their hand.

---

The middle 80% still are the ones keeping the Nation moving forward. Building the roads, working the hospitals, and everything else. They don't care, just want to live their lives and want the bickering to stop.

---

And the middle 80% (really probably 95%) in 1860 just wanted to live their lives and were not interested in war or violence.

The political class can pull people into conflict quickly....not saying it will happen...but people under estimate how fast things can fall apart in a crisis.

Lincoln actions were specially done because he though war would not take place.

[Lincoln had long believed that Southern talk of secession was nothing but bluff. In 1856 he had stated in a speech in Galena, Illinois: "All this talk about the dissolution of the Union is humbug." He grossly underestimated secessionist sentiment and overestimated pro-Union strength in the upper South and border state regions. - Gutenberg's A Short Life of Abraham Lincoln, by John G. Nicolay]

"If a vote had been taken in 1861, in the Northern states alone, on the abstract constitutional question at issue, the President's view would in all probability have been defeated." -W. A. Dunning's summary of Lincoln's view on the supremacy of national sovereignty.

And he was not the only one not expecting war...

"The fame of devotion to the Union, kindled in the North by the words and acts of men like Webster & Gay, had so little penetrated the South that hardly anyone there expected the North to fight for the Union, & everyone felt cheated when it did" -Morison

---

That was a different set up. You had distinct lines, a literal border. It was complete States secede.

What these people are talking is more like what went down in Oregon or Waco. It will not be a war, it will be a lot of people being arrested. Not smart or necessary.

---

Yugoslavia is another example of where things can go badly quickly.

The Slobodan Miloevi faction within the Communis party did not expect people to react the way they did or for things to spiral out of control. They though any talk of possible secession was a bluff.

And of course the State seceding part is what made the war in 1861 not a true civil war. But a war of secession.

The USA will not have a secessionist war again...but it might very well have a true civil war (like England, Spain, China, & Russia have had)

A real war by two or more factions for control of the entire Federal system.

No one will made the mistake of leaving the Union (and giving up power over the military and treasury)...this time everyone will make a real play for total control and to liquidate their internal rivals.

---

If you are talking politically, I agree. There is a debate or referendum on the political heart of the Nation. Within the existing system or even a move away from a 2 party rule, coalition govt. I can see that coming.

If you are talking physical war? No way. That will end bad for whoever is involved and is not a smart way to live a life.

RMF5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

whiterock said:

---

The 39% (national poll) was 29% (Texas poll) about 8-10 years ago.

The center has failed.

Looks like the civil war is going to be a surprise to Biden voters. https://t.co/x9vhsBNhJJ

— Carl Benjamin (@Sargon_of_Akkad) January 10, 2023

---

Too many people now realize what the uniparty is.

The establishment overplayed their hand.

---

The middle 80% still are the ones keeping the Nation moving forward. Building the roads, working the hospitals, and everything else. They don't care, just want to live their lives and want the bickering to stop.

---

And the middle 80% (really probably 95%) in 1860 just wanted to live their lives and were not interested in war or violence.

The political class can pull people into conflict quickly....not saying it will happen...but people under estimate how fast things can fall apart in a crisis.

Lincoln actions were specially done because he though war would not take place.

[Lincoln had long believed that Southern talk of secession was nothing but bluff. In 1856 he had stated in a speech in Galena, Illinois: "All this talk about the dissolution of the Union is humbug." He grossly underestimated secessionist sentiment and overestimated pro-Union strength in the upper South and border state regions. - Gutenberg's A Short Life of Abraham Lincoln, by John G. Nicolay]

"If a vote had been taken in 1861, in the Northern states alone, on the abstract constitutional question at issue, the President's view would in all probability have been defeated." -W. A. Dunning's summary of Lincoln's view on the supremacy of national sovereignty.

And he was not the only one not expecting war...

"The fame of devotion to the Union, kindled in the North by the words and acts of men like Webster & Gay, had so little penetrated the South that hardly anyone there expected the North to fight for the Union, & everyone felt cheated when it did" -Morison

---

That was a different set up. You had distinct lines, a literal border. It was complete States secede.

What these people are talking is more like what went down in Oregon or Waco. It will not be a war, it will be a lot of people being arrested. Not smart or necessary.

---

Yugoslavia is another example of where things can go badly quickly.

The Slobodan Miloevi faction within the Communis party did not expect people to react the way they did or for things to spiral out of control. They though any talk of possible secession was a bluff.

And of course the State seceding part is what made the war in 1861 not a true civil war. But a war of secession.

The USA will not have a secessionist war again...but it might very well have a true civil war (like England, Spain, China, & Russia have had)

A real war by two or more factions for control of the entire Federal system.

No one will made the mistake of leaving the Union (and giving up power over the military and treasury)...this time everyone will make a real play for total control and to liquidate their internal rivals.

---

If you are talking politically, I agree. There is a debate or referendum on the political heart of the Nation. Within the existing system or even a move away from a 2 party rule, coalition govt. I can see that coming.

If you are talking physical war? No way. That will end bad for whoever is involved and is not a smart way to live a life.

---

Oh sure. Civil wars are terrible for all involved. But my point is they can take place in almost any political system or country and can get rolling faster than most people think.

If the USA goes 100 years without a civil war it would not surprise me.

And if the USA was involved in a devastating civil war in the next 10 years I would also not be that surprised.

RMF5630 said:

---

The middle 80% still are the ones keeping the Nation moving forward. Building the roads, working the hospitals, and everything else. They don't care, just want to live their lives and want the bickering to stop.

---

Exactly. Our problem is we have those who want to achieve and a handful of idiots that would rather throw bricks and storm our Nation's Capital.

I would agree with you that the masses are either glib or don't care we are in the midst of a culture war.

They'll care when they start feeling the repercussions.

RMF5630 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

whiterock said:

---

The 39% (national poll) was 29% (Texas poll) about 8-10 years ago.

The center has failed.

Looks like the civil war is going to be a surprise to Biden voters. https://t.co/x9vhsBNhJJ

— Carl Benjamin (@Sargon_of_Akkad) January 10, 2023

---

Too many people now realize what the uniparty is.

The establishment overplayed their hand.

---

The middle 80% still are the ones keeping the Nation moving forward. Building the roads, working the hospitals, and everything else. They don't care, just want to live their lives and want the bickering to stop.

---

The bickering won't stop. It's going to get worse until someone wins a national election by the margin DeSantis won in FL.

There is no political middle any more. That's what the polling is saying. It's not saying 39% are ready for the rumble. It's saying roughly 40% of the public can't see any common ground. That's because there is no common ground, in no small part because progressives reject the notion entirely.

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

whiterock said:

---

The 39% (national poll) was 29% (Texas poll) about 8-10 years ago.

The center has failed.

Looks like the civil war is going to be a surprise to Biden voters. https://t.co/x9vhsBNhJJ

— Carl Benjamin (@Sargon_of_Akkad) January 10, 2023

---

Too many people now realize what the uniparty is.

The establishment overplayed their hand.

---

The middle 80% still are the ones keeping the Nation moving forward. Building the roads, working the hospitals, and everything else. They don't care, just want to live their lives and want the bickering to stop.

---

The bickering won't stop. It's going to get worse until someone wins a national election by the margin DeSantis won in FL.

There is no political middle any more. That's what the polling is saying. It's not saying 39% are ready for the rumble. It's saying roughly 40% of the public can't see any common ground. That's because there is no common ground, in no small part because progressives reject the notion entirely.

---

I think the average American is more than willing to meet in the middle. The issue is the 10% on the far right/far left.

I believe those that lean right are forced to go much farther right than ideal in order to avoid far left. And those that lean left are forced to go far left to avoid the far right.

A true moderate R or D would do really well with the general population but the parties won't let that happen - the democrats don't want to nominate someone that might lean right on some issues and the republicans dont want to nominate someone that might lean left on some issues.

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

whiterock said:

---

The 39% (national poll) was 29% (Texas poll) about 8-10 years ago.

The center has failed.

Looks like the civil war is going to be a surprise to Biden voters. https://t.co/x9vhsBNhJJ

— Carl Benjamin (@Sargon_of_Akkad) January 10, 2023

---

Too many people now realize what the uniparty is.

The establishment overplayed their hand.

---

The middle 80% still are the ones keeping the Nation moving forward. Building the roads, working the hospitals, and everything else. They don't care, just want to live their lives and want the bickering to stop.

---

The bickering won't stop. It's going to get worse until someone wins a national election by the margin DeSantis won in FL.

There is no political middle any more. That's what the polling is saying. It's not saying 39% are ready for the rumble. It's saying roughly 40% of the public can't see any common ground. That's because there is no common ground, in no small part because progressives reject the notion entirely.

---

Fair point

Really interesting numbers from CBS poll: 64% of GOP voters approved of the speaker turmoil last week.

Makes sense. As one safe-seat R told me, Gaetz has more fans in their district than Kevin McCarthy. pic.twitter.com/kadmn78DFh

— David Weigel (@daveweigel) January 10, 2023