The aftermath of the election removed all doubt. And we thank them.
pawfurbehrsays
Liberalism (or really Progressivism) a mental disorder? Yes, yes and Yes
Craig Smithsays
As soon as you embrace the idea that everyone will willingly do more work so that many others can do less (that is the essence of socialism) you lose a grip on reality.
Sandrasays
@ Craig and the ones the libs seeing do more work is never themselves. They are always the (in their own minds) deserving ones doing less.
Jamessays
What’s worse is having parents who are so loyal to the Dwmocrat party, they can’t see things any way. Especially, when in reality they may notagree on certain issues with progressives.
Sean Lsays
My only concern is that if this nonsense results in the implosion of the Democratic Party (which I think is a real likelihood), who steps into the vacuum they leave? Single-party rule isn’t exactly conducive to republicanism. The socialists? The libertarians? Who?
Heliotropesays
The prospect of single party rule in the US is not very likely. There are two fringe “parties” and one fairly unified party. One fringe party is the socialist crowd and the other fringe party is the limited government crowd. The fairly unified party is the “uniparty” made up of the professional politician establishment elites now separated only by membership in either the Democrat or the Republican parties.
Donald Trump rode a wave as a Republican (who actually thinks he is?) and got the votes from the fed-up deplorables and small government advocates who saw him as the only viable choice.
People in the news are generally arguing about the feasibility and stability of a Trump presidency. They are attacking the man. The people who elected Trump, did not vote for the “man” Trump, they voted for the candidate who recognized the decline of the United States and who showed he was worried that the decline was verging on the edge of the point of no return and that the “establishment” was of no help because they were in it for themselves and the country be damned.
Trump will either help stem the tide of decline or he will fail. Hillary would have grifted her way right across the hearts and souls of the deplorables. She is the establishment model for Grifter in Chief. Like Willy Sutton, she knows where the money is. Why whore on a corner when you can whore an entire nation? Besides, you don’t have to lie down to do it.
If (and that is a Y•U•G•E “IF”“) Trump can break down the permanent bureaucracy, cut the habit of a shadow police state by over-reaching regulations, restart the engine of the economy, attack the criminal drug cartels, secure the borders and give people a choice in the schools their kids attend, there is hope of a regeneration of America.
The deplorables are not beholden to special interest groups. Just what that fringe party which put Trump in the White House will come to be called is not known. If the Republicans were to purge the establishment status quo professional politicians mucking up Washington, then the Republican Party could be the party of a free economy, a strong America, and the champion of rights coupled with responsibility. But that is not likely to happen.
Most likely, the deplorables will have to find yet another Trump to continue the restoration of America and as it grows it will find a suitable name that sticks.
KCRobsays
I’m reluctant to tag people that I disagree with as “mental” (although I get tagged as mental) given that it’s not a big step to require those with mental illness (as in not toeing the leftist line) to be “treated”.
The female person at the beginning, wailing and giving the finger, is off her nut. Perhaps she’s not able to accept that you don’t always get your way. Or, perhaps, she blames her misery on others – being a perfect victim – suffering from external forces out of her control (like people struck by tornadoes or meteors).
These people don’t disagree in the normal sense; they seem to be possessed of an unhealthy religious fervor (speaking in tongues – usually heavy with profanity and babbling); possessed by spirits? Where we see disagreement, they see blasphemy and heresy. Fellow-travelers that dare question anything are apostates that must be punished.
I’ve known a few fundamentalist Christians (speaking in tongues variety) and while their religious practices weren’t convention, they were decent people that tried to do what’s right and make some contribution. Unlike the moonbat left.
salgsays
@7 maybe the conservative party because their isn’t one now.
Sean Lsays
@ salg: American conservatism has always been an uneasy coalition: continental-style conservatism, which tends to be reactionary and emphasizes a strong religious component to public life; English-style conservatism that tends to view any and all new ideas with skepticism; and a strain of libertarianism that hasn’t spiraled off into insanity like the Libertarian Party has. None of those factions particularly likes the other. So precisely what the platform of a Conservative Party should be would be a contentious and bitter political battle.
Good video Tucker C
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t2dct9ErA_g
The aftermath of the election removed all doubt. And we thank them.
Liberalism (or really Progressivism) a mental disorder? Yes, yes and Yes
As soon as you embrace the idea that everyone will willingly do more work so that many others can do less (that is the essence of socialism) you lose a grip on reality.
@ Craig and the ones the libs seeing do more work is never themselves. They are always the (in their own minds) deserving ones doing less.
What’s worse is having parents who are so loyal to the Dwmocrat party, they can’t see things any way. Especially, when in reality they may notagree on certain issues with progressives.
My only concern is that if this nonsense results in the implosion of the Democratic Party (which I think is a real likelihood), who steps into the vacuum they leave? Single-party rule isn’t exactly conducive to republicanism. The socialists? The libertarians? Who?
The prospect of single party rule in the US is not very likely. There are two fringe “parties” and one fairly unified party. One fringe party is the socialist crowd and the other fringe party is the limited government crowd. The fairly unified party is the “uniparty” made up of the professional politician establishment elites now separated only by membership in either the Democrat or the Republican parties.
Donald Trump rode a wave as a Republican (who actually thinks he is?) and got the votes from the fed-up deplorables and small government advocates who saw him as the only viable choice.
People in the news are generally arguing about the feasibility and stability of a Trump presidency. They are attacking the man. The people who elected Trump, did not vote for the “man” Trump, they voted for the candidate who recognized the decline of the United States and who showed he was worried that the decline was verging on the edge of the point of no return and that the “establishment” was of no help because they were in it for themselves and the country be damned.
Trump will either help stem the tide of decline or he will fail. Hillary would have grifted her way right across the hearts and souls of the deplorables. She is the establishment model for Grifter in Chief. Like Willy Sutton, she knows where the money is. Why whore on a corner when you can whore an entire nation? Besides, you don’t have to lie down to do it.
If (and that is a Y•U•G•E “IF”“) Trump can break down the permanent bureaucracy, cut the habit of a shadow police state by over-reaching regulations, restart the engine of the economy, attack the criminal drug cartels, secure the borders and give people a choice in the schools their kids attend, there is hope of a regeneration of America.
The deplorables are not beholden to special interest groups. Just what that fringe party which put Trump in the White House will come to be called is not known. If the Republicans were to purge the establishment status quo professional politicians mucking up Washington, then the Republican Party could be the party of a free economy, a strong America, and the champion of rights coupled with responsibility. But that is not likely to happen.
Most likely, the deplorables will have to find yet another Trump to continue the restoration of America and as it grows it will find a suitable name that sticks.
I’m reluctant to tag people that I disagree with as “mental” (although I get tagged as mental) given that it’s not a big step to require those with mental illness (as in not toeing the leftist line) to be “treated”.
The female person at the beginning, wailing and giving the finger, is off her nut. Perhaps she’s not able to accept that you don’t always get your way. Or, perhaps, she blames her misery on others – being a perfect victim – suffering from external forces out of her control (like people struck by tornadoes or meteors).
These people don’t disagree in the normal sense; they seem to be possessed of an unhealthy religious fervor (speaking in tongues – usually heavy with profanity and babbling); possessed by spirits? Where we see disagreement, they see blasphemy and heresy. Fellow-travelers that dare question anything are apostates that must be punished.
I’ve known a few fundamentalist Christians (speaking in tongues variety) and while their religious practices weren’t convention, they were decent people that tried to do what’s right and make some contribution. Unlike the moonbat left.
@7 maybe the conservative party because their isn’t one now.
@ salg: American conservatism has always been an uneasy coalition: continental-style conservatism, which tends to be reactionary and emphasizes a strong religious component to public life; English-style conservatism that tends to view any and all new ideas with skepticism; and a strain of libertarianism that hasn’t spiraled off into insanity like the Libertarian Party has. None of those factions particularly likes the other. So precisely what the platform of a Conservative Party should be would be a contentious and bitter political battle.