So the tea party is wounded and Chris Christie is the face of (R)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by generalmeow

You didn't give me an example. You talked out your ass grasping at straws trying to prove something you know isn't true. Republicans spend and increase the size and scope of government as much as Democrats.

---

So are you saying the deficit wasn't reduced and we didn't have a budget surplus under a republican house and senate during Clinton's 2nd term? It's not hard to figure out if that's true or not. Even you could probably do it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bailey Guns

Even you could probably do it.

---

I'm not so sure about that ...

In any event, no, the Tea Party isn't wounded despite all the wishful thinking by the Dems and Libertarians nor is Chris Christie the new face of the GOP. Evidently some people don't mind waiting 3 or 4 generations to fix things since they want everything to fall apart first. Personally, I'd rather be effective in my lifetime by trying to rebolster an existing party and returning it toward opposing Marxism, establishing free enterprise, and decreasing the size of government while realizing the anti-Establishment clause does not require antipathy toward Christianity.

This talk of Chris "Fattycake" Christie being anything of a thought for any kind of higher office, much less a 2016 presidential run just proves how twisted our media is. Look at the numbers- Ted Cruz, among more than just registered Republican constituents has a very high approval rating right now. And in polling across the nation folks like Lee, Cruz, and Paul have higher ratings than McCain, Graham, and other left-of-center Republicans. No way, no how. The Tea Party is not down, it is not out, and Gov. Christie has a snowball's chance in hell of making it in the (R) primaries... And yes, I'll bet that I won't eat those words in 2015. [Coffee]

Christie can eat a fat Twinkie. He's dead to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by generalmeow

That's funny, because I would consider being ignorant of what the people are voting for you are actually doing to your future to be more childish. Because it's something a child would do. An adult would reject it. So the people who reject the two party system are the adults, and everyone else is the children.

If you know they're going to fleece you, and you still vote for them, you are a child. If you don't know they're going to fleece you, you are child. If you insult the people who know they're going to fleece you, and don't vote for them, you are a child.

---

Is this English? Is there a coherent thought in here?
I'd argue this post sort of supports why I'm not going to identify with flaming libertarians.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aloha_Shooter

I'm not so sure about that ...

In any event, no, the Tea Party isn't wounded despite all the wishful thinking by the Dems and Libertarians nor is Chris Christie the new face of the GOP. Evidently some people don't mind waiting 3 or 4 generations to fix things since they want everything to fall apart first. Personally, I'd rather be effective in my lifetime by trying to rebolster an existing party and returning it toward opposing Marxism, establishing free enterprise, and decreasing the size of government while realizing the anti-Establishment clause does not require antipathy toward Christianity.

---

And I would agree.
The democrats definitely get the "big tent" idea right in all the ways we get it wrong. Just look at the arguing in this thread.
If we were democrats, we'd focus on winning first, and then settling the difference amongst ourselves later.

There is plenty of room for debate between the tea party folks, the libertarians, and just those who hate progressivism in the GOP if we're willing to realize the alternative is worse than all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by generalmeow

My number one preference is for Libertarians to be in charge. My second preference is for democrats to get everything they want, so people get so infuriated with this bullshit that they boil over. Having republicans in charge is not a preference at all. I vote Libertarian because with one vote I get my first two preferences.

---

Libertarians by nature don't want to be in charge. Your other choice is to set your course for the center of the sun and hit the throttle. That sounds like fun.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ronin13

This talk of Chris "Fattycake" Christie being anything of a thought for any kind of higher office, much less a 2016 presidential run just proves how twisted our media is. Look at the numbers- Ted Cruz, among more than just registered Republican constituents has a very high approval rating right now. And in polling across the nation folks like Lee, Cruz, and Paul have higher ratings than McCain, Graham, and other left-of-center Republicans. No way, no how. The Tea Party is not down, it is not out, and Gov. Christie has a snowball's chance in hell of making it in the (R) primaries... And yes, I'll bet that I won't eat those words in 2015. [Coffee]

---

And yet, none of the Big-L Libertarians are going to like what that means.

The 2016 election will be won in the Republican caucuses.

Not the primary. By the time those come around, the Rs are down to one or two candidates.

But you need an R next to your name to get in the door to argue. 2007-2008 was a very lonely year in my precinct. I was just about the only one in the room who wasn't looking for an "electable" RINO or someone who couldn't think of a bigger issue than teh ghey. And I'd really like some of the Big-Ls to show up and give me a hand, even if it means being a "sellout" with a dreaded R. What you do in the voting booth is between you and God, but that closed caucus is where you get to decide what you see on the ballot when you get into the booth. Hell, even Milton Friedman carried an R next to his name, not so much because he believed in the stupid crap that Nixon/Ford/Bush41 did, but for the same reason that cruise ships are all registered in Liberia and Norway.

As for Christie himself: I'm from Chicago. Based upon that alone, I will never, ever vote for a candidate from that open sewer, regardless of party affiliation or platform. And IMHO, Noo Joizey is even worse. If CC's the best we can do, then IMHO, f*** us for having failed so badly and completely.

Don't get too wound up about Christie. If (and that's a big "IF") he throws his hat into the ring all we need are some photos of him holding hands with Obama walking along the beach to derail his entire campaign.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bailey Guns

Don't get too wound up about Christie. If (and that's a big "IF") he throws his hat into the ring all we need are some photos of him holding hands with Obama walking along the beach to derail his entire campaign.

---

Hey, I'm not AS worried as some. But don't forget that the right-of-center in this country has made a career of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Signing the state-level proto-Obamacare should have derailed Reversible Mittens two years ago, and yet we ended up with the middle-of-the-road "electable" guy.

(Speaking of which, could some R-party insider PM me and explain why the "electable" guys like Mittens and McLame can't seem to get elected?)