Lol, Clinton! Clinton Clinton, you'd think he was President and just endorsed Roy Moore.
Stay classy GOP!
- Thread starter Keyser76
- Start date
The problem that the GOP has in 2018 is that the Dems are going to paint Roy Moore as the face of the GOP if he wins this election. And Roy Moore isn't going to stop saying and doing controversial things if he wins that election. I think the GOP will be better off in the long run if Jones or a write-in wins that seat. It's not like he would serve a second term, and his first would be a shortened one.
Agree, it isn't like he was going to be a reliable vote without the baggage of all the allegations. The GOP till has a big split between moderates and further right members, then there is the Trump factor, he just wants to claim wins no matter what they are. But Demographics are skewing left if you look at Virginia and the other results from this month. I just agitate on here, I live in Keyser WV for petes sake, all my friends are trump supporters! lol! I have educated a couple on why their Union loving asses should not vote for "right to work " laws, think the GOP names these things to confuse?
And sadly, the half-retarded, mouth breathing Trump base won't care. It will just rile them up like 5th graders snorting pixie sticks.
Moore isn't going to be the story of 2018, no matter how much libs and MSM are setting that up.
Agree, it's more likely to be something like Repubs lose house and senate due to Dem landslide, Trump impeached, etc.
and these folks are the face of your party. Yup...take THAT message to voters instead of trying to pretend you care about Freedom or morals.This is all you Leftists really care about but you're just afraid to admit it.
funny that you don't extend the same privilege to President Trump....your liberal flag is flying high today
Show me where I have called for his ouster based on anything he may or may not have done. One post.
I can't because you haven't. You have been very careful not to assign guilt or innocence to him preferring to look only at either what he did or said.
Consistent all along.
You're a stand up guy. Can you answer the. standing question I have put to all on the Left?
Are you a Socialist?
If you are, why are you reluctant to admit it?
If you are not, what is different that you believe from them?
Here's a real head scratcher. Bernie says he's a Socialist but refuses to admit he believes in exactly what they do.
Go figure?
I’d prefer a write in, but no way to organize that in such a short time. Let him get voted in and then resign or be ethics’d out, or stay. I don’t really care.
I'm not a socialist, but I do think that some government assistance programs are worthwhile, although maybe not in their current forms. Unemployment insurance is a net positive in my opinion. I'm not opposed to welfare, although I think that needs to be revamped in a major way. That program needs to be more about helping people gain skills so they can add to the economy instead of feeding off it. Health insurance is a difficult problem. We pay for the care of those who can't afford their medical costs one way or another - always have. Most of the proposed solutions either have the government paying for some or all or leaving people uncovered. The ACA as written was a government subsidized mandate for all to be insured. In theory it could work. As written and executed, it had a ton of flaws. The penalty had no teeth - cheaper to pay that than get insurance. It also created problems for employers - lessened incentives to grow small businesses, created more part-time jobs than full-time. I don't have a good answer there.
I'll add that I don't see regulation as socialist. Regulations don't have to be onerous, but some are necessary. I don't trust businesses to do the right thing at all times without oversight any more than I trust the government to do the same.
All Social support should come based on a demonstrated need and responsibility of those requiring aid to either repay it or eventually wean themselves off of it. Before Government took over most of those programs, it was based on private charity and philanthropy and worked to encourage personal responsibility instead of dependency. If you get a chance read this book
http://www.truecharity.us/review-the-tragedy-of-american-compassion-by-marvin-olasky/
Agreed...but Government is not needed to run it. Employer based private insurance is much more efficient and pays more.
Government run Welfare is not intended to provide assistance...it is designed to build dependence. Refer to first answer.
Agreed! Businesses should run it providing entry level work to build marketable and needed job skills and they should get a break on their taxes doing it which would not only save the Government money, but improve our work force skills. No Welfare should be given without work.
Yes it is because it's all 3rd party cost shifting. Patients and providers do not dictate prices based on supply and demand like most other things in our economy function.
True...a better way is to put patients in charge of buying the health care services they need. Providers would be forced to compete under market conditions as they do in almost every other service provided in our economy.
True and not True. It is a Government subsidized mandate, but in theory it was written to fail and force a single payer Government run monopoly. The authors admit it!
100% correct.
All correct.
Market based consumer health care choice driven by supply and demand. That is the only solution that would work because it is the only one folks could afford and Government is not needed to run it.
Markets are very self regulating because at the point price no longer adds value to either service providers or consumers, economic activity ceases. Regulation comes from the discipline of market forces.
To the extent legal contracts are enforced yes. There has to be a redress of grievances when commitments are broken, like for instance folks default on their debts, or proprietary assets are stolen. But Government telling Ford or GM what types of cars to build or how much mileage each should get...no. Hell no! Consumers should drive those demands, and businesses should be left adept enough and free enough to meet them.
Agreed. So in a free market we have competition and choice to seek out better products and services from inferior choices, and in Government we have the power of the voting booth to get rid of incompetent or dishonest representatives who care more about their own jobs than their constituent's desires.
I don't think you are a Socialist, but you have too much Faith in Government instead of the people in my opinion. The Founders trusted the people and limited the Government's ability to control them for good reason. We have 20 trillion dollars worth of unmanageable debt as a result of our loss of control over big Government. You need to get back on the side of the equation where the people run the Government instead of it running us because I trust you more than bureaucrats who are only interested in protecting their jobs and political power.
Thanks for sharing.
Last edited: