• Due to ongoing issues caused by Search, it has been temporarily disabled
  • Please excuse the mess, we're moving the furniture and restructuring the forum categories
  • You may need to edit your signatures.

    When we moved to Xenfora some of the signature options didn't come over. In the old software signatures were limited by a character limit, on Xenfora there are more options and there is a character number and number of lines limit. I've set maximum number of lines to 4 and unlimited characters.

Are there any republicans who are reasonable and not maga?

"Which ones? I don't know, but I'm sure there are some," makes it sound like your position is informed by impressions rather than facts. However, as someone who forgets specifics after reading up on things, I get it. I'd just say "I don't remember; I'd have to look at it again," rather than guessing based on half-memory (which ALWAYS bites me in the ass) or getting shirty about it.


You're right of course and thank you.


-
 
I know at this point there's little more to say, but I will add that I think there is a material difference between a voter and a candidate.

Recent events have made me more of a blue-dog Democrat than ever. I think if you run for office on a Republican ticket, it requires that you sign on to the party's policy, whether you think you're doing it or not. Candidacy as a Republican requires not just affiliation but active complicity in implementing the policy of the party, and until further notice, I will not vote for anyone, no matter the details, who does not find that option too repugnant to bear.

But I think that all-or-nothing attitude when it comes to argument on issues, questions of political orientation, and interaction with voters themselves, is a mistake. People have varied mixtures of opinion, and to lump them together represents the kind of scorched-earth polarization which the Republican party has applied to such effect. Too many people work and think in headlines and slogans, too many people let them stand in for argument, and too many voters, I think, vote on them. Own the libs, make America great again, and screw the details.

Even the best causes can have too high a price, and that goes for everyone, not just them.
 
I know at this point there's little more to say, but I will add that I think there is a material difference between a voter and a candidate.

Recent events have made me more of a blue-dog Democrat than ever. I think if you run for office on a Republican ticket, it requires that you sign on to the party's policy, whether you think you're doing it or not. Candidacy as a Republican requires not just affiliation but active complicity in implementing the policy of the party, and until further notice, I will not vote for anyone, no matter the details, who does not find that option too repugnant to bear.

But I think that all-or-nothing attitude when it comes to argument on issues, questions of political orientation, and interaction with voters themselves, is a mistake. People have varied mixtures of opinion, and to lump them together represents the kind of scorched-earth polarization which the Republican party has applied to such effect. Too many people work and think in headlines and slogans, too many people let them stand in for argument, and too many voters, I think, vote on them. Own the libs, make America great again, and screw the details.

Even the best causes can have too high a price, and that goes for everyone, not just them.


All that makes sense, but I don't plan on running for office anyway.

I don't like blanket statements either (I'm assuming that's what you mean by an all-or-nothing attitude) but having been in MSN and fox forums for months defending dems, I have yet to run across a reasonable maga, especially when it comes to admitting when they're wrong. They'd rather double down on their stupidity and amplify the hate.

Check out my following post for example:




ETA: On the MSN forums, anyone can report a comment, and it immediately gets deleted, and the maga weirdoes do that rather than let a post be seen that proves them wrong, but unfortunately for them, I know how to reinstate my them.


-
 
Last edited:
The take away I got is certain arguments claim that critics only skewer things thay are negative against their cause (which broadly is true for a percentage) but failed to cite blatant biases and outright hyperbolic lying that actually happened and is citable... which drove some of the harshest criticisms of the same and likely turned off voters who might have given consideration to being persuaded otherwise.

I think otherwise you're reasonable if you are willing to hold a conversation respectfully without boiling the discussion down to the lowest common denominator by calling everyone that voted differently [insert name here].

Do that much and party support isn't much of an issue. Or atleast it shouldn't be. But in my case I needed the alternative candidate to provide more than lip service as answers to questions. It would have been fine for them to have been blunt of they could articulate how they would be similar or different than their predecessor. Some of that criteria would be reasonable to discuss.
 
Last edited:
The take away I got is certain arguments claim that critics only skewer things thay are negative against their cause (which broadly is true for a percentage) but failed to cite blatant biases and outright hyperbolic lying that actually happened and is citable... which drove some of the harshest criticisms of the same and likely turned off voters who might have given consideration to being persuaded otherwise.

I think otherwise you're reasonable if you are willing to hold a conversation respectfully without boiling the discussion down to the lowest common denominator by calling everyone that voted differently [insert name here].
Do that much and party support isn't much of an issue. Or atleast it shouldn't be. But in my case I needed the alternative candidate to provide more than lip service as answers to questions. It would have been fine for them to have been blunt of they could articulate how they would be similar or different than their predecessor. Some of that criteria would be reasonable to discuss.


That's true, which is why I USUALLY don't attack first, but I have made mistakes in the past (name me one person who hasn't), and when I'm wrong, I USUALLY try to own up to it, but I've never seen one EN maga weirdo do that yet.

If I've wrong you in any way, then I apologize.


-
 
Last edited:
Yes, there are. In my opinion, not many but some. I know a fella, an architect who thinks Trump actually won the 2020 election. Or more accurately, he thinks Trump might have won if not for Dem shenanigans. Otherwise, he's quite reasonable....for an architect, who are generally unreasonable and lack an understanding of basic physics. But the guy is generally pleasant to work with and except for his support of Trump, quite reasonable. My next-door neighbors are quite reasonable too, except for having voted for Trump. I also have several relations or are reasonable folks.
 
That's true, which is why I USUALLY don't attack first, but I have made mistakes in the past (name me one person who hasn't), and when I'm wrong, I USUALLY try to own up to it, but I've never seen one maga weirdo do that yet.

If I've wrong you in any way, then I apologize.


-
To be candid I didn't intend to attack and offend you in the other thread. It's just I was critical of the media there before the chaos of the assassination attempts on Trump and Biden's debate performance leading to his removal from the nomination and everything thereafter. And it seems everyone in that sphere either played dumb or perceivably should have known better. It drove my trust in the media to say anything objectively to the ground along with the candidates playing along with that. But having elaborated on that, you voting for the other candidate in of itself isn't something I would blindly attack as not every voter is single-issue. So apologies if I made it seem like I was directing some of my hostility at you.

edit: I should add that I don't absolve "my favored" candidate either. But sometimes the flow of the discussion can make it seem like I do.
 
So apologies if I made it seem like I was directing some of my hostility at you.


No apologies necessary, my friend. I just got stressed out because some folks were attacking me in this thread, and I know that's not an excuse, but once again, I appreciate your understanding.


-
 
Yes, there are. In my opinion, not many but some. I know a fella, an architect who thinks Trump actually won the 2020 election. Or more accurately, he thinks Trump might have won if not for Dem shenanigans. Otherwise, he's quite reasonable....for an architect, who are generally unreasonable and lack an understanding of basic physics. But the guy is generally pleasant to work with and except for his support of Trump, quite reasonable. My next-door neighbors are quite reasonable too, except for having voted for Trump. I also have several relations or are reasonable folks.


I can definitely appreciate what you're saying, but since I've dealt with hundreds of maga weirdoes is MSN and fox forums, especially fox, with so much extreme hate for dems, that it makes me hate them right back and anyone like them.

Once again, I apologize to anyone I've maligned wrongly.


-
 
No apologies necessary, my friend. I just got stressed out because some folks were attacking me in this thread, and I know that's not an excuse, but once again, I appreciate your understanding.


-
It's politics. Kinda hard to avoid heated discussions especially in a venue that has a high concentration of it. If you're not pulling the "hurp-a-derp" everyone that didn't vote xyz is racist flag I'm fairly open to discussing things. Although it tends to be more productive in direct messages away from the noise. Well... for me anyway.
 
I can definitely appreciate what you're saying, but since I've dealt with hundreds of maga weirdoes is MSN and fox forums, especially fox, with so much extreme hate for dems, that it makes me hate them right back and anyone like them.

Once again, I apologize to anyone I've maligned wrongly.


-
I occasionally just stop reading threads when I get like that. Sometimes, I get pretty jerking and I feel bad about it. I try not to be but like my children, sometimes I lash out.

ETA, Also I try to remember that the anonymous internet is not real life, even folks that seem like crazy jackasses on the internet would probably be decent reasonable people if they had to face you.
 
I occasionally just stop reading threads when I get like that. Sometimes, I get pretty jerking and I feel bad about it. I try not to be but like my children, sometimes I lash out.


I totally get that, but when maga weirdoes are lying about BLM George Floyd and the dems 2017 Inauguration protests that turned violent as a counter-response to the J6 insurrection (especially in an MSN or fox forum but also in here), I try to be nice and correct them, but some get insulting and call me a liar (and worse), and well I'm sorry, but I'm a reasonable republican until that happens, and then I go into attack mode. You can see that here:




And I'm actually involved in another one today:

Supreme Court Deals Blow to Jan. 6 Defendant


-
 
That's just my opinion, and obviously, your mileage does vary from mine.

We can still have opinions, right, or are you against that also?


-
Being full of hate to those who hold different sexualities than you isn't an opinion, it is a fault. And no, you are not entitled to hate others.
 
Being full of hate to those who hold different sexualities than you isn't an opinion, it is a fault. And no, you are not entitled to hate others.


What the hell are you talking about? I don't hate those with different sexualities than me. I've gotten tons of hate for my own and you're just another example of that hate.

I've always enjoyed reading many of your post, and have given you some thumbs up for them, but this is just plain delusional.

Good luck with all your hate towards me for no damn reason other than I'm a reasonable republican.



-
 
I'm NOT against it, but do you really think making the word "master" unacceptable (as in, "master" bedroom, or "master's" tour for golf, or stair "master" for example) just because it's linked to slavery? Seems a little overboard to me.


Trust me, I've been scolded many, many times by dems for that very reason. It's just plain annoying.


-
The incoming head of state is functionally indistinguishable from a nazi and he is filling cabinet positions with open nazis. You supported this man, knowing full well what he would do, no matter how much you wish to believe otherwise. Therefore you get the blame and opprobium for your own actions.

You're like the good German burgher who walked past the KZ every morning on the way to his office, who during the war took on some of the inmates as slave labour, yet when the Allied soldiers came around and showed him the horrors he was complicit in was heard to cry plainitive "you can't blame me! How was I to know?"
 
The incoming head of state is functionally indistinguishable from a nazi and he is filling cabinet positions with open nazis. You supported this man,knowing full well what he would do, no matter how much you wish to believe otherwise. Therefore you get the blame and opprobium for your own actions.

You're like the good German burgher who walked past the KZ every morning on the way to his office, who during the war took on some of the inmates as slave labour, yet when the Allied soldiers came around and showed him the horrors he was complicit in was heard to cry plainitive "you can't blame me! How was I to know?"


Where the hell do you get that noise from? Just because I'm a reasonable republican? Jeez, talk about delusional.

Are you this full of hate for ALL republicans, just because Harris lost? I voted for her so get a life and quit hating people you don't even know.


-
 
Last edited:
The incoming head of state is functionally indistinguishable from a nazi and he is filling cabinet positions with open nazis. You supported this man, knowing full well what he would do, no matter how much you wish to believe otherwise. Therefore you get the blame and opprobium for your own actions.

You're like the good German burgher who walked past the KZ every morning on the way to his office, who during the war took on some of the inmates as slave labour, yet when the Allied soldiers came around and showed him the horrors he was complicit in was heard to cry plainitive "you can't blame me! How was I to know?"


FYI, I'm a veteran, and I hate trump for the nasty crap he said about my fellow vets, so don't even try and make me out the villain for your delusional assumptions and hate.


-
 
They may say that, but that doesn't make it a fact. It's just another maga weirdo opinion from idiots that think the hypocritical, veteran-hating liar called trump is god. How could I possibly take them seriously? The ENs aren't any better either.


-
That is why you are just as bad as the nazi trumpistas, you think having the bare minimum of respect for others is an extremist position.

You are telling us that you think hating those who are not walking in lockstep with you is the only reasonable position.
 
What the hell are you talking about? I don't hate those with different sexualities than me. I've gotten tons of hate for my own and you're just another example of that hate.

I've always enjoyed reading many of your post, and have given you some thumbs up for them, but this is just plain delusional.

Good luck with all your hate towards me for no damn reason other than I'm a reasonable republican.



-
I am just repeating the talking points that you yourself say you support using the kind of language you don't want to hear because it reveals what you are.

You left reasonableness a long time ago and are far, far away from it.
 
Being full of hate to those who hold different sexualities than you isn't an opinion, it is a fault. And no, you are not entitled to hate others.
Most of public controversy deals with wok'ism forcing stuff like that down the country's throat and blowing it into a bigger controversy than it should be.

What gets drowned out is that trans-genderism, LGTBQ, and similar are not in of themselves an existential issue. Once someone is an adult tthe're free to make their own decisions and deal with the implications without being unduly hated and discriminated for it. It does NOT however justify the irrationality of such things as letting people with originally male physiologies to just steamroll womens sports competitions that place them in an undue advantage, or keeping secrets from parents the idea that a minor wants to identify as another gender they weren't born as... understanding that a minor neither has a fully developed physiology and lacks the life experience to adequately weigh decisions that could impact the rest of their lives.

There is also a stink about public drag shows involving nudity and pornographic books being introduced in elementary schools that have come up

Just to name a couple of things. While in most cases I would agree that there is plenty of flexibility to accept PEOPLE in societal norms and that people must be judged by the content of their character and not of whether they fit my personal idelas... I absolutely don't agree with handwaiving aspects that also disproportionately harm society, or discriminate based on a certain denial of implications.
 
It just happens to be the easiest immediate example of some of the lunacy of politics.. it applies to most of the identity politics that's being thrown around. Few people seem to be interested in nuance
 
that's why i disagree. the woke weren't forcing this stuff down people's throats, they had an unpopular position on some of these things which is why the conservatives forced it down everyone's throats and blew it up into some huge controversy. the dems didn't have an effective means of countering that and keeping the national discourse on topic. i think that's the nuance here.
 
i have a completely different impression of who it was that couldn't stop talking about the trans
For what it's worth, I think it's the right that won't stop talking about but its the left that brought it up in the first place. Its kind of BS for the left to dot the bit where they go "why is the right so obsessed with trans issues" Well, probably because before yesterday*, nobody would even consider medically transitioning prepubescent children but now they do it. Most folks think its crazy and the right wins that argument for most folks. Sure, its not happening to many children but how many does it need to be. Same with transwomen in sports, or self ID being enough to get a rapist in a women's prison.

I have said in the past, moral panics aren't always baseless. McCarthy made up his list of commies spies but when the soviet archives were opened, we found out there really were a bunch of commie spies in the US while McCarthy was spouting his nonsense. Satanic panic also coincided with a period where folks were actually admitting pedophilia was real thing that happened. Prior to the 70s, society mostly pretended it wasn't happening. The right is in a moral panic about trans issues but folks on the left really are pushing an agenda regarding gender issues that seems crazy to most folks. A small group to be fair but an awfully vocal group.

And again, I'm not convinced it actually mattered that much in this election.
 
that's why i disagree. the woke weren't forcing this stuff down people's throats, they had an unpopular position on some of these things which is why the conservatives forced it down everyone's throats and blew it up into some huge controversy. the dems didn't have an effective means of countering that and keeping the national discourse on topic. i think that's the nuance here.
This but I think the unwillingness of mainstream dems except for folks like Carvil to say, no to any of this. And I get, the reps wouldn't do that to Trump either. There's something the Reps did wrong, if they ran anyone but Trump or Vivek, this would have been an actual landside in the popular vote and electoral college. So, it seems silly to complain about. Still, something I think the Dems did wrong.
 
This but I think the unwillingness of mainstream dems except for folks like Carvil to say, no to any of this. And I get, the reps wouldn't do that to Trump either. There's something the Reps did wrong, if they ran anyone but Trump or Vivek, this would have been an actual landside in the popular vote and electoral college. So, it seems silly to complain about. Still, something I think the Dems did wrong.


I didn't see any of that in this election, but that might've been because I wasn't paying attention to this issue. Although some maga weirdoes in the MSN and fox forums were laughing at the dems because they didn't know what a woman was, but I try to ignore folks like that who lie to make themselves feel better about their stupidity and ignorance.

Personally, I think LGBTQ folks are ok in my book, and I have no issue with them at all, but GF seems to think I do, and that's why (IMO) they're also delusional.

Plus, the fact that they think I'm some kind of nazi because I'm a reasonable republican is laughable at best, and a good sign that the loss of this election has driven them to hate ALL republicans regardless of the fact that I voted for Harris.

I have a feeling that GV is so obsessed with this that they'll be back to call me a nazi again and again and again without any facts to back them up.

I'm a target to them, and they don't care that it's untrue, because it makes them feel better.


-
 
Last edited:
I didn't see any of that in this election, but that might've been because I wasn't paying attention to this issue. Although some maga weirdoes in the MSN and fox forums were laughing at the dems because they didn't know what a woman was, but I try to ignore folks like that who lie to make themselves feel better about their stupidity and ignorance.

Personally, I think LGBTQ folks are ok in my book, and I have no issue with them at all, but GF seems to think I do, and that's why (IMO) they're also delusional.

Plus, the fact that they think I'm some kind of nazi because I'm a reasonable republican is laughable at best, and a good sign that the loss of this election has driven them to hate ALL republicans regardless of the fact that I voted for Harris.

I have a feeling that GV is so obsessed with this that they'll be back to call me a nazi again and again and again without any facts to back them up.

I'm a target to them, and they don't care that it's untrue, because it makes them feel better.


-
 
"Those who will not remember history are doomed to repeat it."
and
"History may not repeat verbatim, but it sure throws a lot of remakes."
~~sorry I don't remember the authors
 
Back
Top Bottom