Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 02-15-2018, 07:23 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 31,612
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Stone View Post
The idea that Republicans don't care about the character of the people on 'their' side is hard to square with the fact that the Trump nomination/election caused a major rift in the Republican party, with a whole lot of prominent Republicans becoming 'Never Trumpers' who even voted for Hillary Clinton over Trump. The pre-eminent Conservative magazine National Review refused to endorse Trump. Prominent Republicans like P.J. O'Rourke, Jonah Goldberg, John Podhoretz, Bill Kristol, Mitt Romney, George W. Bush, George Will, Andrew Sullivan and others announced they were voting for Hillary or abstaining because Trump was morally unacceptable. When Trump said outrageous things he got lots of pushback from Republican politicians, including both the Speaker of the House and the Majority leader in the Senate.

Can anyone remember Democratic politicians during an election coming out against their own candidate like that?

On the SDMB, lots of resident 'righties' including myself came out against Trump.

Show me a similar case where a large percentage of movers and shakers in the Democratic party jumped ship and endorsed a Republican for President merely because their candidate was not a good enough human being. Bear in mind that these people shared the same politics as Trump, mainly. Perhaps not on the border, but on regulations and taxes they are very happy with the way things are going. And they still won't endorse him.

Also, from the Right's perspective a guy like Bernie Sanders flirts with ideologies that were responsible for the deaths of millions of people. I consider a committed Marxist to be every bit as evil as a Nazi, and yet the left is very tolerant of the Marxism in its midst. You should be ashamed when you march and see someone marching alongside you with a hammer and sickle flag or a Che Guevera T-shirt - every bit as ashamed as a Republican should be if the Klan shows up at a right-wing rally. Instead, you vote for people like Bernie Sanders, who was a Soviet dupe long before the left discovered that Russia likes to interfere in American politics. And you allow Marxist organizations to provide funding, campaign materials, and other benefits. Hell, the left has tolerated and even accepted the Communist Party of the USA, even though it was essentially run out of the Kremlin as an attempt to destabilize American politics. No one on the left cared about Russian meddling in elections - so long as the meddling was tomtheir benefit.

You also had no problem with Barack Obama's questionable relationships with domestic terrorists and radical preachers. So I guess it really matters what you consider to be outrageous, too.
This thread is about mistreatment of women, not political extremes or other political hypocrisies and sins, so I'll skip all that, but I'd be happy to respond in an appropriate thread if you're interested in discussing it.

As to mistreatment of women, I think you're excusing the Republican party far too easily here. All those names you mentioned are not welcome in the party right now. They essentially left it. The party, right now, is Trump's party, and very, very few Republicans in Congress or the Senate are seriously critical of his treatment of women (what he's admitted as well as what he's been accused of). The party apparatus, including leadership in both houses of Congress, along with the vast majority of Republican office-holders, even the ones that criticized him during the campaign, have ceased criticizing him at all with regards to his treatment of women. The party apparatus supported Roy Moore, and virtually no prominent Republicans in the House or Senate came out in favor of Moore's opponent. The party (apparatus and colleagues in Congress) has put much, much less pressure on those like Farenthold than the Democrats did on Conyers and Franken.

Taking all that into account, I think it's entirely reasonable to assert that the Democratic party organization and apparatus and officeholders have made a few tentative steps in the right direction on this issue, while the Republican party organization, apparatus, and officeholders have not.
  #52  
Old 02-15-2018, 09:51 PM
Johnny Ace Johnny Ace is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 5,064
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Stone View Post
The idea that Republicans don't care about the character of the people on 'their' side is hard to square with the fact that the Trump nomination/election caused a major rift in the Republican party, with a whole lot of prominent Republicans becoming 'Never Trumpers' who even voted for Hillary Clinton over Trump. The pre-eminent Conservative magazine National Review refused to endorse Trump. Prominent Republicans like P.J. O'Rourke, Jonah Goldberg, John Podhoretz, Bill Kristol, Mitt Romney, George W. Bush, George Will, Andrew Sullivan and others announced they were voting for Hillary or abstaining because Trump was morally unacceptable. When Trump said outrageous things he got lots of pushback from Republican politicians, including both the Speaker of the House and the Majority leader in the Senate.
Kimstu is understating. NINETY PERCENT of Republicans who voted in the Presidential election voted for Trump. Unless you have some kind of cite for a massive number of Pubbies who didn't vote at all, you have some serious 'splainin' to do.
  #53  
Old 02-19-2018, 01:58 PM
Stonebow Stonebow is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: The Lower 48
Posts: 1,864
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
Taking all that into account, I think it's entirely reasonable to assert that the Democratic party organization and apparatus and officeholders have made a few tentative steps in the right direction on this issue, while the Republican party organization, apparatus, and officeholders have not.
I agree 100% with this. I think it's very odd to get angry with Dems for not initiating a wholesale purge, or saying their efforts are insincere if they wouldn't do the same if there was a real possibility of a Republican taking the spot. When faced with Al Franken's antics vs a person who might want to rollback abortion protections or other women's health progress, I can see how someone might make a strategic decision to fight another day, some other way (see: Clinton).

It's the same as people who critique proponents of tolerance as intolerant of the views of supremacists...it's a philosophical/ political stance, not a suicide pact.
  #54  
Old 02-20-2018, 07:10 AM
Gyrate Gyrate is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greater Croydonia
Posts: 22,013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Stone View Post
Can anyone remember Democratic politicians during an election coming out against their own candidate like that?

On the SDMB, lots of resident 'righties' including myself came out against Trump.

Show me a similar case where a large percentage of movers and shakers in the Democratic party jumped ship and endorsed a Republican for President merely because their candidate was not a good enough human being. Bear in mind that these people shared the same politics as Trump, mainly. Perhaps not on the border, but on regulations and taxes they are very happy with the way things are going. And they still won't endorse him.
Show me a Democrat as bad as Trump.

There have certainly been instances where LaRouchians have nabbed the Democratic nomination in uncontested seats at lower rungs of government and been rebuffed by the party membership including in at least one case endorsement of the Republican challenger. But by and large - and this is a rather key point - Democrats generally don't nominate people that terrible for election to high office. Your argument is predicated on the assumption that "both sides do it". But both sides don't. Sure, the odd loon gets through (I'm looking at you, Alvin Greene) but where are the left-wing Trumps we're supposedly ignoring?

And it's not like the Dems don't clean house. Where is John Edwards these days? Why did Eliot Spitzer lose his job but Mark Sanford was welcomed back with open arms?

Quote:
Also, from the Right's perspective a guy like Bernie Sanders flirts with ideologies that were responsible for the deaths of millions of people. I consider a committed Marxist to be every bit as evil as a Nazi, and yet the left is very tolerant of the Marxism in its midst.
So the chain of logic goes "Bernie Sanders likes socialism, socialist is a form of Marxism, Stalin was a Marxist, Stalin killed millions, therefore Bernie Sanders endorses the murder of millions"? Have I got that right? Did that make sense in your head?

Quote:
You should be ashamed when you march and see someone marching alongside you with a hammer and sickle flag or a Che Guevera T-shirt - every bit as ashamed as a Republican should be if the Klan shows up at a right-wing rally. Instead, you vote for people like Bernie Sanders, who was a Soviet dupe long before the left discovered that Russia likes to interfere in American politics. And you allow Marxist organizations to provide funding, campaign materials, and other benefits. Hell, the left has tolerated and even accepted the Communist Party of the USA, even though it was essentially run out of the Kremlin as an attempt to destabilize American politics. No one on the left cared about Russian meddling in elections - so long as the meddling was tomtheir benefit.
By that argument, the right has "tolerated and even accepted" Nazis and other white nationalist groups as well as various armed militia and a wide assortment of right-wing US terrorist groups. Is that the syllogism you want to make? Because if you want to compare the left's "acceptance" of a bunch of ineffectual and deluded idiots running the Communist Party of the USA and the right's acceptance of actual FBI-identified terrorist groups and individuals who are considered a greater threat than radical Islam and have murdered far more Americans in the last 30 years than their left-wing equivalents, we can certainly discuss that.

Quote:
You also had no problem with Barack Obama's questionable relationships with domestic terrorists and radical preachers. So I guess it really matters what you consider to be outrageous, too.
If you meant to say "You didn't buy into the dishonest right-wing propaganda about Obama", you'd be correct.
__________________
"Don't delude yourself into thinking we're interested in you. We're just here for the trainwreck, man." - DooWahDiddy
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:08 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017