7 ms·

The republican party is simply unacceptable on many levels for any intelligent, honest person. I realize that you, like many people, simply do not see it that

The republican party is simply unacceptable on many levels for any intelligent, honest person. I realize that you, like many people, simply do not see it that way, and imagine that there is some kind of equivalence or near equivalence in how corrupt and crazy both parties are, but most of us don't. What we are seeing is horrific, a party that is against reason and goodness and civility at almost every step. They picked a rapist trust fund baby autocrat as their leader. He is now our president. So yes, we are going to be partisan. We wouldn't be allowed to run as a republican if we were 'fiscally conservative' but felt that gays should be treated as people, refugees with compassion, women with respect, the environment with car, and that religion was crazy. Furthermore anyone with a scientific bent would look at the empirical evidence provided by other nations with good standards of living and economic freedom and NOT BE fiscally conservative in the way the republican party is. It has no evidence supporting its efficacy!

philh 10y ago
> The republican party is simply unacceptable on many levels for any intelligent, honest person. > I realize that you, like many people, simply do not see it that way, Are you saying that hueving is not an intelligent, honest person?
- seszett 10y ago
  I don't actually see any support for the Republican party in hueving's post.
aaron-lebo 10y ago
What you are advocating sounds like fundamentalism. That's a bad starting point for objectivity.
- Retra 10y ago
  What part of that sounds like fundamentalism?
Arizhel 10y ago
>and that religion was crazy. This is the real sticking point here. If you're not a highly religious person (or at least willing to claim to be one), and not willing to publicly advocate religion in your campaign, then you're not going to get anywhere in the Republican Party. Republican voters simply will NOT vote for someone who isn't religious. And non-religious voters will not vote for a Republican.
- almost_usual 10y ago
  "Republican voters simply will NOT vote for someone who isn't religious" The majority probably won't. "And non-religious voters will not vote for a Republican" This isn't true. I know atheists who voted Republican this election purely for economic reasons. Spending nearly $1000 a month on Affordable Healthcare will do that to people.
  - Arizhel 10y ago
    You have a good point at the end there; I'm wrong, there is a contingent of non-religious people who vote Republican because of the fiscal conservatism stuff (though that's pretty suspect considering how they spend like drunken sailors on the DoD budget every time they're in power). But my main point stands: if you're a scientist, and not spouting a bunch of religious stuff, you're simply not going to get elected on the GOP ticket. The majority of GOP voters simply will not be interested, and you need a majority to get elected; the only way around this is if you're running for some office where there's no challengers so you just pick up the (R) votes from GOP voters who blindly vote (R) no matter what. But you're not going to get very far doing that, just local office.
jedi_stannis 10y ago
> This is a squandered opportunity to try to get scientific minded people into running for the republican seats, which is how you would get real change in the discourse. I believe his point is that getting scientists into Republican seats might re-shape the party from being anti-science, to being a pro-science, fiscally conservative alternative to the Democrats. One of the major parties being unacceptable is highly problematic.
hueving 10y ago
>The republican party is simply unacceptable on many levels for any intelligent, honest person. Anyone who would say this with a straight face isn't intelligent or isn't honest, so they can't speak for intelligent honest people. >but most of us don't. Who exactly do you think you are speaking for? Identity politics and strong liberal populations in universities has made it social suicide for anyone to admit they have any doubts about the Democratic party. >We wouldn't be allowed to run as a republican if we were 'fiscally conservative' but felt that gays should be treated as people Two seconds of Googling reveals your bullshit: http://ijr.com/2014/10/185584-9-prominent-republicans-who-support-gay-marriage/ http://ijr.com/2014/10/185584-9-prominent-republicans-who-su... Humans have and can be elected into the Republican party and that's how you achieve change. >freedom and NOT BE fiscally conservative in the way the republican party is. It has no evidence supporting its efficacy! The situation in Greece and various other European countries seems to suggest you can't buy your way out of a recession with entitlements either. You'll find very little evidence supporting the efficacy of any system that translates well to the US, which has the irritating job of being the entire Western World's military.
- justin66 10y ago
  > Identity politics and strong liberal populations in universities has made it social suicide for anyone to admit they have any doubts about the Democratic party. I don't think you understand the political terrain here at all. Bernie Sanders supporters of the "I have doubts about the Democratic party" variety were very, very well represented in universities during the last election.
  - hueving 10y ago
    Do you really think that students openly supporting a candidate running for a Democratic nomination who was further left than Hillary is really against the Democratic party? They wanted someone else to be the nominee, but it's not like they were voting Republican.
    - foota 10y ago
      You can be against the democratic party and the republican party (although in the current system, this means you pick the lesser of two evils)
mudil 10y ago
This is an insulting comment that should be whited out.
leesalminen 10y ago
You sound like a pretty angry person. We really are all stronger together ;). Instead of digging your heels in the ground why not stop for a minute and listen to those you disagree with and attempt to find an acceptable middle ground? The future of this country is not a zero sum game.
mattferderer 10y ago
The Republican party politicians rejected Trump. Voters in the primaries elected him as their candidate. Many Republicans wanted to pick someone else but were worried that it would destroy their party by failing to listen to voters. You cannot paint all members of either party with a broad brush as you're doing. Believe it or not we are a diverse country & so are our politicians that are forced to join one party or the other. Many flip flop. It appears that many Republicans are learning to work with Trump instead of fight against him. That (compromise) is a skill that makes a good politician by the way. It's something everyone should start trying to do. Trump is a person who has changed his views & party often. You can persuade Trump. Extremism helped create Trump & win him the election. That is what this type of thinking is furthering. It is much more dangerous & long term than Trump. - Obligatory I didn't vote for Trump and am not a member of either party -

philh 10y ago

> The republican party is simply unacceptable on many levels for any intelligent, honest person. > I realize that you, like many people, simply do not see it that way, Are you saying that hueving is not an intelligent, honest person?

seszett 10y ago
I don't actually see any support for the Republican party in hueving's post.

aaron-lebo 10y ago

What you are advocating sounds like fundamentalism. That's a bad starting point for objectivity.

Retra 10y ago
What part of that sounds like fundamentalism?

Arizhel 10y ago

>and that religion was crazy. This is the real sticking point here. If you're not a highly religious person (or at least willing to claim to be one), and not willing to publicly advocate religion in your campaign, then you're not going to get anywhere in the Republican Party. Republican voters simply will NOT vote for someone who isn't religious. And non-religious voters will not vote for a Republican.

almost_usual 10y ago
"Republican voters simply will NOT vote for someone who isn't religious" The majority probably won't. "And non-religious voters will not vote for a Republican" This isn't true. I know atheists who voted Republican this election purely for economic reasons. Spending nearly $1000 a month on Affordable Healthcare will do that to people.
- Arizhel 10y ago
  You have a good point at the end there; I'm wrong, there is a contingent of non-religious people who vote Republican because of the fiscal conservatism stuff (though that's pretty suspect considering how they spend like drunken sailors on the DoD budget every time they're in power). But my main point stands: if you're a scientist, and not spouting a bunch of religious stuff, you're simply not going to get elected on the GOP ticket. The majority of GOP voters simply will not be interested, and you need a majority to get elected; the only way around this is if you're running for some office where there's no challengers so you just pick up the (R) votes from GOP voters who blindly vote (R) no matter what. But you're not going to get very far doing that, just local office.

jedi_stannis 10y ago

> This is a squandered opportunity to try to get scientific minded people into running for the republican seats, which is how you would get real change in the discourse. I believe his point is that getting scientists into Republican seats might re-shape the party from being anti-science, to being a pro-science, fiscally conservative alternative to the Democrats. One of the major parties being unacceptable is highly problematic.

hueving 10y ago

>The republican party is simply unacceptable on many levels for any intelligent, honest person. Anyone who would say this with a straight face isn't intelligent or isn't honest, so they can't speak for intelligent honest people. >but most of us don't. Who exactly do you think you are speaking for? Identity politics and strong liberal populations in universities has made it social suicide for anyone to admit they have any doubts about the Democratic party. >We wouldn't be allowed to run as a republican if we were 'fiscally conservative' but felt that gays should be treated as people Two seconds of Googling reveals your bullshit: http://ijr.com/2014/10/185584-9-prominent-republicans-who-support-gay-marriage/ http://ijr.com/2014/10/185584-9-prominent-republicans-who-su... Humans have and can be elected into the Republican party and that's how you achieve change. >freedom and NOT BE fiscally conservative in the way the republican party is. It has no evidence supporting its efficacy! The situation in Greece and various other European countries seems to suggest you can't buy your way out of a recession with entitlements either. You'll find very little evidence supporting the efficacy of any system that translates well to the US, which has the irritating job of being the entire Western World's military.

justin66 10y ago
> Identity politics and strong liberal populations in universities has made it social suicide for anyone to admit they have any doubts about the Democratic party. I don't think you understand the political terrain here at all. Bernie Sanders supporters of the "I have doubts about the Democratic party" variety were very, very well represented in universities during the last election.
- hueving 10y ago
  Do you really think that students openly supporting a candidate running for a Democratic nomination who was further left than Hillary is really against the Democratic party? They wanted someone else to be the nominee, but it's not like they were voting Republican.
  - foota 10y ago
    You can be against the democratic party and the republican party (although in the current system, this means you pick the lesser of two evils)

mudil 10y ago

This is an insulting comment that should be whited out.

leesalminen 10y ago

You sound like a pretty angry person. We really are all stronger together ;). Instead of digging your heels in the ground why not stop for a minute and listen to those you disagree with and attempt to find an acceptable middle ground? The future of this country is not a zero sum game.

mattferderer 10y ago

The Republican party politicians rejected Trump. Voters in the primaries elected him as their candidate. Many Republicans wanted to pick someone else but were worried that it would destroy their party by failing to listen to voters. You cannot paint all members of either party with a broad brush as you're doing. Believe it or not we are a diverse country & so are our politicians that are forced to join one party or the other. Many flip flop. It appears that many Republicans are learning to work with Trump instead of fight against him. That (compromise) is a skill that makes a good politician by the way. It's something everyone should start trying to do. Trump is a person who has changed his views & party often. You can persuade Trump. Extremism helped create Trump & win him the election. That is what this type of thinking is furthering. It is much more dangerous & long term than Trump. - Obligatory I didn't vote for Trump and am not a member of either party -