Posts by Keith Miller30

Larry Fox5 said:Come on, just admit you're getting some kind of kickback from defending him so aggressively. Honestly, I doubt anyone would even call you out on it... 😉

How am I even supposed to respond to that? You’re making assumptions without any actual basis. Honestly, the only way to settle this is if we happen to run into each other in person, so I can personally demonstrate whether my current financial situation would ever necessitate defending someone online just for a paycheck.

I could easily cast that same shadow over anyone representing the opposing side, but frankly, I don't have the heart to be quite that malicious or twisted.

True, and then there’s the language issue. You took his English out of context a bit, though it goes without saying he needs to be proficient—if I recall correctly, he even picked up watches. My point was simply that so many "attacks" on him boil down to dropping a YouTube link where someone gets flustered and fails to list every single detail; if we are going to hold people to such pedantic standards, then I honestly don't know if we'll ever find anyone capable of meeting our criteria. Between the language skills and those baseless claims about him being an FBI informant, it feels repetitive. Personally, I am only interested in concrete evidence and legally binding rulings, nothing more and certainly nothing less.

And that would be the extent of the political talk; after four or five days of debating policy, there really isn't much point in dragging it out further. Before the elections, we can draw a line in the sand—unlike Bujanec—and focus on whether or not we are actually satisfied with them. By then, I believe other issues will have crystallized and their actual platforms will be clearly presented.

It seems like you all have a twenty-to-one advantage over me, but honestly, why let that stop us? Shall we keep moving forward?

James Anderson5 said:How can you say it's baseless to claim Karamarko is an FBI plant? You have direct testimony from one of the most informed people from the 90s, Branko Manolić. And if that isn't enough for you, you have the testimony of a man who actually worked for the FBI (Ante Barišić) in an interview published in National. About 70% of the written records regarding FBI collaborators were either stolen or taken to Mexico City, which means after that, the heaviest weight falls on testimonies from people like Manolić and Barišić. Testimony from two such witnesses would be enough for any court, but apparently, it's not enough for die-hard Republicans—to them, it's just the latest conspiracy theory. That was the same rhetoric used regarding Sanders's theft, right up until he was shoved into prison.

So you say the Democrats will have their incompetence ignored? Seriously, what has the Republican Party been capable of so far—just one thing?? And nobody forgives them anything, at least I don't. But you can't equate the sins of Sanders with Merzelica; one criminalized the entire party as its leader, while the other only affected a small faction. Sanders could give the green light for massive looting at banks like HPB or ExxonMobil, whereas Merzelica was only linked to what happened in Sisak and the surrounding areas, much like how certain guys operated in the 90s back in the day.

And you really chose to pick on the Democratic Agriculture Minister (who I agree is incompetent) while the Republicans had a guy in that same seat who ended up in prison, peeling potatoes.

How can you not know what kind of Prime Minister Karamarko will be, when he hasn't proven himself in a single significant position in his life? He spent ten years studying; while he was Attorney General, he was handing out hundreds of promotions in his final months; while he led the intelligence services, he allowed agents to get preferential loans at PBZ (the latest scandal), which basically gave every well-placed banker a chance to find out exactly who the American spies were. And now you'd let him run the country??? Not to mention the Soboli affair and the siphoning of money from state companies, or the land rezoning for his own benefit (it's all documented, just Google it). On what basis do you think the Republican Party will be 10-15% better with him, Kalmeta, and Šuker?? And do you honestly think knowing English shouldn't be a requirement for a Prime Minister, when you can't even land an internship at a major firm without knowing the language??

So, you really think we should take Branko Manolić’s word as gospel just because he suddenly decided to remember Tomislav Karamarko’s alleged ties to the FBI right before an election? To me, that feels almost comical. While I certainly wouldn't rule out the possibility that Karamarko was involved with the FBI—who is to say he wasn't?—I find it impossible to accept Manolić’s sudden recollection as some kind of absolute truth. Is it not a bit convenient? I have absolutely nothing against proving whether or not someone was part of the FBI, but can we honestly treat a statement like this as a given?

James Anderson5 said:How can you say it's baseless to claim Karamarko is an FBI plant? You have direct testimony from one of the most informed people from the 90s, Branko Manolić. And if that isn't enough for you, you have the testimony of a man who actually worked for the FBI (Ante Barišić) in an interview published in National. About 70% of the written records regarding FBI collaborators were either stolen or taken to Mexico City, which means after that, the heaviest weight falls on testimonies from people like Manolić and Barišić. Testimony from two such witnesses would be enough for any court, but apparently, it's not enough for die-hard Republicans—to them, it's just the latest conspiracy theory. That was the same rhetoric used regarding Sanders's theft, right up until he was shoved into prison.

So you say the Democrats will have their incompetence ignored? Seriously, what has the Republican Party been capable of so far—just one thing?? And nobody forgives them anything, at least I don't. But you can't equate the sins of Sanders with Merzelica; one criminalized the entire party as its leader, while the other only affected a small faction. Sanders could give the green light for massive looting at banks like HPB or ExxonMobil, whereas Merzelica was only linked to what happened in Sisak and the surrounding areas, much like how certain guys operated in the 90s back in the day.

And you really chose to pick on the Democratic Agriculture Minister (who I agree is incompetent) while the Republicans had a guy in that same seat who ended up in prison, peeling potatoes.

How can you not know what kind of Prime Minister Karamarko will be, when he hasn't proven himself in a single significant position in his life? He spent ten years studying; while he was Attorney General, he was handing out hundreds of promotions in his final months; while he led the intelligence services, he allowed agents to get preferential loans at PBZ (the latest scandal), which basically gave every well-placed banker a chance to find out exactly who the American spies were. And now you'd let him run the country??? Not to mention the Soboli affair and the siphoning of money from state companies, or the land rezoning for his own benefit (it's all documented, just Google it). On what basis do you think the Republican Party will be 10-15% better with him, Kalmeta, and Šuker?? And do you honestly think knowing English shouldn't be a requirement for a Prime Minister, when you can't even land an internship at a major firm without knowing the language??

I wasn't trying to equate the sins of Ivo Sanders with those of Merzelica; I simply used her as an example. Personally, I view pre-election agreements as nothing more than legalized robbery through favoritism, though I realize you don't find that particularly controversial. Perhaps it’s best if we don't dive too deep into that particular rabbit hole, because if we start dissecting every single one of those issues, we won't see the end of this debate for another month.

James Anderson5 Asks:
So, you’re actually finding grounds to criticize the Democratic Party over their choice for Secretary of Agriculture—and honestly, I find him pretty incompetent too—yet we're expected to overlook the fact that when the Republican Party held that same seat, they put forward a guy who ended up behind bars, essentially trading a cabinet office for peeling potatoes in a cell?

So, this is exactly what we’re talking about. You simply cannot spend your entire life using the Republican Party to justify every single bad decision made by the other side. Just because a Republican minister was busy idling away his time doesn't mean we aren't allowed to point out that a Democratic minister isn't exactly top-tier either, right? The fact that a Republican official acted like a total clown shouldn't serve as any kind of excuse for the incompetence we're seeing from this current one.

James Anderson5 said:How can you say it's baseless to claim Karamarko is an FBI plant? You have direct testimony from one of the most informed people from the 90s, Branko Manolić. And if that isn't enough for you, you have the testimony of a man who actually worked for the FBI (Ante Barišić) in an interview published in National. About 70% of the written records regarding FBI collaborators were either stolen or taken to Mexico City, which means after that, the heaviest weight falls on testimonies from people like Manolić and Barišić. Testimony from two such witnesses would be enough for any court, but apparently, it's not enough for die-hard Republicans—to them, it's just the latest conspiracy theory. That was the same rhetoric used regarding Sanders's theft, right up until he was shoved into prison.

So you say the Democrats will have their incompetence ignored? Seriously, what has the Republican Party been capable of so far—just one thing?? And nobody forgives them anything, at least I don't. But you can't equate the sins of Sanders with Merzelica; one criminalized the entire party as its leader, while the other only affected a small faction. Sanders could give the green light for massive looting at banks like HPB or ExxonMobil, whereas Merzelica was only linked to what happened in Sisak and the surrounding areas, much like how certain guys operated in the 90s back in the day.

And you really chose to pick on the Democratic Agriculture Minister (who I agree is incompetent) while the Republicans had a guy in that same seat who ended up in prison, peeling potatoes.

How can you not know what kind of Prime Minister Karamarko will be, when he hasn't proven himself in a single significant position in his life? He spent ten years studying; while he was Attorney General, he was handing out hundreds of promotions in his final months; while he led the intelligence services, he allowed agents to get preferential loans at PBZ (the latest scandal), which basically gave every well-placed banker a chance to find out exactly who the American spies were. And now you'd let him run the country??? Not to mention the Soboli affair and the siphoning of money from state companies, or the land rezoning for his own benefit (it's all documented, just Google it). On what basis do you think the Republican Party will be 10-15% better with him, Kalmeta, and Šuker?? And do you honestly think knowing English shouldn't be a requirement for a Prime Minister, when you can't even land an internship at a major firm without knowing the language??

Well, you simply cannot know, can you? Of course you can't; one can only make assumptions, much like people assumed Zoran Milanović would be a success, which turned out not to be the case for most—though perhaps for some of you, he was.

There is nothing more to be done than to place our bets on a year or two from now, at which point we shall see who was actually correct, since right now we are left with nothing but speculation. Just as you have the liberty to speculate based on a statement by Branko Manolić, who coincidentally reminded everyone of the FBI's influence just a few months before the election, please allow me the same freedom to assume that things might turn out differently.

Ultimately, as it always does, time will reveal who was right.

Noah Roberts46 said:@Keith Miller30

I honestly don't see where you're getting this optimism from, or why you'd have any hope that they'll actually get things done. Does Karamarko look like anyone qualified to lead this country to you? Based on these interviews and everything we've seen so far, do you really think he's the guy who can pull us out of this crisis?

I mentioned earlier that I expect things to improve by maybe 10-15%, nothing more than that. I believe that's certainly within the realm of possibility, coupled with my conviction that the Democratic Party simply isn't capable of achieving anything meaningful at this stage.

brightpilot6 said:@ Keith Miller30

If Tomislav Karamarko had offered the exact same thing—and I mean absolutely identical, save for those tired old slogans—but had actually managed to purge thieves like Ivan Kalmeta from the party, I certainly wouldn't be "accusing" his supporters of being pushovers. But he hasn't offered anything concrete, he continues to ride alongside the corrupt, and his political track record offers zero basis for any real conclusion regarding his ideological direction or actual program. We are left with nothing but those few repetitive mantras.

@ Hildea and ironpanther5

I find myself agreeing with you regarding these debates; nobody truly profits from them. However, I cannot bring myself to agree with the idea of simply ignoring the choice altogether. Basic survival logic suggests we should at least attempt to choose the lesser of two evils.

Suppose he presents an economic program now; would it even matter? If I recall, we didn't even bring the Democratic Party to power because they offered us something unique; we brought them in because we were fed up with the corruption, wasn't that the case? In the same vein, the Republican Party will likely be brought into power simply because people are dissatisfied with the Democrats. Ultimately, it all boils down to promises like Plan21—whether they make a fool of you or not. While I agree that Kalmeta should be distanced from the party, I highly doubt it would mean much to the public. Let's not kid ourselves; ninety-five percent of voters already have their minds made up about who they are voting for.

I never said I was going to vote for the Republican Party; this is more of a theoretical discussion regarding what I would do if I were forced to choose strictly between the Republicans and the Democrats. In that specific scenario, I would currently lean toward the Republicans. Likewise, four years from now, I wouldn't hesitate to cast my vote for the Democratic Party if it turns out the Republicans are failing and if the party ends up being led by someone like Picula.

As for Ivan Sinčić, I was obviously joking; there is no way I'm voting for him. In truth, I find myself closest to that theory of abstaining altogether which Hildegard proposed.

Larry Fox5 Asks:
Of course, it’s nothing more than an illusion. Perhaps fifty years ago, people held onto rigid ideologies and lived within clearly defined ideological trenches, but those deep divides have largely evaporated, leaving behind little more than a sense of cultural folklore. Isn't it true that individuals themselves have become far too complex and layered to be easily shoved into a single, convenient box? At the same time, political parties are constantly evolving to suit the era they inhabit—an era where most significant questions and answers no longer fall into simple black-and-white categories.

Here is just a small glimpse into how much things have changed. Consider the Mayor of Hamburg, who served three separate terms representing the Republican Party despite being gay. It is almost impossible to imagine such a thing happening fifty years ago, yet today, it is simply our reality.

Politics should adapt to the era and the world we actually inhabit, rather than clinging desperately to the ghosts of the past. At the end of the day, what truly matters to people are their existential concerns, their general quality of life, and the vision they hope to leave behind for their children—isn't that where the real political battles are fought?

I can't really offer much of a rebuttal here because what you're describing is purely your own subjective experience. I have no idea how much time you actually spend living here in the States, nor am I certain if you truly grasp the underlying social dynamics of how people function within this culture. Take that marriage referendum we had, for instance; the fallout from that played out in a very specific way for many people—even if they won't admit it openly today. It essentially boiled down to a binary divide where those who voted "yes" were branded as mindless zealots, while anyone who voted "no" was dismissed as some sort of weak-willed, easily manipulated fool who simply let others dictate their views. You see these kinds of polarizing, black-and-white divisions whenever any controversial issue arises in this society, don't you?

Larry Fox5 Asks:
It honestly strikes me as quite peculiar that you find yourself falling for such shallow, populist rhetoric, especially since everything you’ve written on this forum thus far suggests you actually possess the rare gift of thinking for yourself.

No, nobody is actually falling for those populist gimmicks. People tend to form their own opinions based on their own principles and values. There are certain issues where I find myself agreeing with Zoran Milanović, while on others, I lean toward Tomislav Karamarko; there are moments when I align with the views expressed by Keith Miller30, and other times when I simply don't. You’re essentially doing the same thing as @ZZ—suggesting that if someone happens to agree with Karamarko on, say, two out of ten points, they must be peddling populist rhetoric, which is just fundamentally incorrect, isn't it?

I suspect you might not spend enough time here in the States to realize just how deeply divided this country is ideologically. There isn't necessarily anything wrong with someone holding a firm ideology; in fact, one could argue it’s a positive thing in the end. Of course, we have to draw the line at the extremes—like the kind of rhetoric mellowscout24 uses when suggesting we should essentially wipe out entire groups of people. That kind of talk borders on pure hatred and extremism, which is obviously unacceptable. However, if you view an ideology simply as a collection of philosophical, moral, religious, or economic ideas, why should that be viewed through a negative lens?

Morgan Williams said:Let’s look at the logic here. Who actually dragged this country into this recession and all these problems? Obviously, it's naive to say the Democrats couldn't have done better, but we're still stuck dealing with the wreckage they left behind. Or does a new government magically erase every single problem and disaster inherited from the last one? If so, my bad—my mistake. In that case, this government is 100% responsible for the current situation.

Change should lead toward something better, not back to the people who shoved us into this mess in the first place—the same ones the government was tasked with cleaning up after. Expecting the people who robbed us and tanked the economy to now pull us out of the gutter through "honest" means is like asking the enemy for protection during a war.

I could get behind putting any other party ahead of the incumbents, but the Republican Party....

Yeah, you've got a point there. Did that bolded part actually happen?

Of course, that isn't quite the same comparison as your analogy about wartime protection. There is no such thing as collective responsibility here; when it comes to the corruption and the dirty work, Ivo Sanders is the one to blame. Let’s just hope that Karamarko, Andrej Plenković, and the rest of the crew face legitimate legal consequences for their theft, and once that happens, then perhaps we can group them all together.

I simply hope that Merzelica doesn't end up being held accountable for this, because if she is, then I suppose your theory would dictate that we shouldn't hand power back to the Democrats either since they were the ones stealing from us. Then there is that whole situation involving the ace from El Paso; personally, I view those pre-trial settlements as nothing more than legalized theft, disguised as "saving jobs" while actually serving as a way to favor certain interests.

brightpilot6 said:@ Keith Miller30

What exactly is the Republican Party going to accomplish once they take power? Are you truly so certain that things will improve by 10-15% under their leadership? Have you actually looked at their platform, or are you simply assuming their past track record serves as a sufficient foundation for the future?

I honestly believe they will make a genuine effort to jumpstart the economy, and I suspect we won't see the kind of blatant corruption that defined the Sanders era. They are acutely aware that they should have been politically irrelevant by now, and because they’re still dragging the baggage from the Sanders administration, they simply don't have the luxury of making mistakes if they want to stay viable. Their plan will be unveiled next week—though even if it were the finest document in the world, I doubt it would satisfy you—but as I understand it, the leader has promised to implement all key reforms within six months, so we shall soon see whether he's being sincere or merely making empty promises. Furthermore, even taking into account that the Democratic Party took over after the Republicans, I find it hard to believe they could be quite as incompetent as you suggest (though again, in your eyes, they aren't bad enough because you seem convinced the Republican Party is responsible for everything; I respect your perspective, but I simply cannot agree).

I am genuinely curious to see if you'll be able to admit they've done a good job if it turns out they actually have.

Morgan Williams said:I agree, there’s time for any of those things to play out, but let's stick to the facts. We aren't actually going to vote based on feelings, right? These people looted the country and dragged us into a recession, yet I'm supposed to vote for them just because there might be enough time left to prove Zoran Milanović was stealing too? Fine, someone is indicted without being convicted yet, but "my impression" is a fucking useless argument.

Let's be clear: this Government should be doing much better, but I haven't heard a single decent reason why the current Republican Party deserves power over the alternatives.

It isn't even that significant, but I wasn't using my impression as a formal argument; that's precisely why I made sure to emphasize that it was just my personal take.

I'm not suggesting this Republican Party should necessarily be in charge, but they should at least be ahead of this group because the current administration has proven how ineffective they are, which makes me believe it is time for a change. And if you were to ask me to list exactly why they've been so poor, you would probably just justify everything by claiming "the Democratic Party left it in this state," so there is really no point in wasting our breath on it.

Just a quick thought: when the Republican Party eventually takes power, if they turn out to be just as terrible, will their excuse be that the Democrats left them such a mess, or will they blame the administration that came before them?

mellowscout24 said:I wouldn't bet on the Democrats that easily☕

But even if those criminals win, it wouldn't be the worst thing ever; it might actually be the last nail in the coffin for this country, and maybe things could finally start looking up after that. 😁 Though hopefully, once that villain finishes his final term, Rijeka can finally become an independent state with Italian as its official language. ☕

Look, I’ll give you credit there, just so I don't come across as nothing more than a cynic. If you need to see it that way, then fine, let it be your way. ☕

Morgan Williams said:Zoran robbed the country blind and plunged us into a crisis, his party was convicted in court, and now Zoran is sitting in prison?

There is still plenty of time for all of that to unfold... ☕ After all, even Sanders didn't fall overnight.

Morgan Williams said:In the event of a major car crash, the blame lies with the doctors if the patient doesn't pull through or takes forever to recover. It’s not on the people who caused the wreck. 👍

The Prime Minister couldn't care less about this country. 🙏 🤣

He was bored at home, so he decided to try running a country just for kicks. Tomislav Karamarko loves stirring up division and fueling hatred toward the current administration, but honestly, he hasn't offered a single intelligent idea yet. Word is his German consultants just finished polishing his platform, so maybe he won't look like such a total outsider this time around. The Prime Minister made the call to take him on live in front of the cameras. Smart move. If you actually have something brilliant to suggest, let the whole nation hear it. Let them see if we truly have a real alternative to this Government—that’s how you actually take down a Prime Minister.

Well, by that logic, I suppose Sanders cared about this country too, didn't he? It's not like he became Prime Minister out of pure boredom either...

Morgan Williams said:Fine, if he wasn't going to clarify which sides he was choosing between, what exactly was his point? Enlighten me. Who is this "us" and who are "they"?

Sure, that’s all fine. I’ve been listening in, and honestly, the views get even more extreme than that. You can't mention my Grandfather without bringing up Marshall—it's like his blood pressure spikes instantly if you bring him up in a negative light. And don't even get me started on the Republicans; there isn't a single member of the party who doesn't have some nasty nickname attached to them. Some of them are truly beyond help. 😁 My grandmother absolutely adores Zoran Milanović. Just two days ago, she was trying to convince me he’s the greatest thing that ever happened to this country—claiming he speaks fluent Japanese and is just the most wonderful guy. Meanwhile, she would have trekked through a blizzard and ice storms just to cast a vote for Ivo Josipović without a single complaint. She actually asked me for a ride, but I told her flat out: no way if you're voting for Josipović. My grandfather ended up being the first one at the polling station early that morning, so he didn't feel like making the trip twice.

I'm not exactly holding them up high. Right now—unfortunately, but let's be realistic here—we're stuck choosing between two options. As for the anti-candidate, I've already laid it out in the last few pages. Just say the word if you need me to repeat it.

We’re just sitting around waiting for some third option to show up with an actual economic plan—someone who isn't just going to crawl into bed with the Republican or Democratic parties the second the election is over. Until then, it's pretty obvious we're stuck choosing between the criminal elements in the Republican Party and this mediocre current administration. If we stay home, we're basically letting the mindless masses decide everything for us.

To put it simply—a Prime Minister shouldn't be fostering these kinds of divisions within society; his stance ought to be one of unity rather than creating an "us versus them" mentality. He really should have accepted Karamarko's invitation to sit down together instead of trying to dodge the conversation. I can't help but wonder if he actually cares deeply about this country, though that is just my personal impression.

mellowscout24 said:Pretty much, yeah. People are always waiting on some third party, like the Labor Party, which usually just vanishes as a serious contender anyway. That's why I'm saying, once the Republican Party disappears, 😁 there won't be any reason for the Democratic Party to stick around either.

hehe, keep dreaming, considering they might be back in power in just a few months. ☕ Perhaps I'm being a little bit cynical now. ☕

mellowscout24 said:Nah, my good man, it's not "great" because they're actually performing well.

It's "great" only because the situation was such a disaster that not a single independent economist or anyone else could have even come close to predicting how bad it would get. It's only great in that specific context. For God's sake, 😁 with all that highway debt coming due in the billions, there were extra billions just falling out of people's pockets. All those massive millions don't even count, and the hundreds of millions being covered up will just be swallowed up by some delayed Department of Justice indictment. 🤦

You know what, I'm not doing this anymore, my blood pressure is starting to... ugh 😁 plus I'm stuck using a tablet without that stupid autocorrect

I mentioned quite some time ago that it's really just a matter of time, so perhaps it would actually be best if we just stopped here. We represent such different extremes that there is absolutely no way we are ever going to reach an agreement.

Morgan Williams said:I am just trying to explain his point 🙂

It’s not "very good." It's just okay. If you compare them to their main rival, they might eventually look great. It's like comparing a kid who barely passes his classes to a student who's failing everything and facing expulsion. That kid isn't exactly a scholar, but compared to the failure, he looks fine.

You’re explaining things, but only in the way that suits your own narrative, aren't you?

Morgan Williams said:I am just trying to explain his point 🙂

It’s not "very good." It's just okay. If you compare them to their main rival, they might eventually look great. It's like comparing a kid who barely passes his classes to a student who's failing everything and facing expulsion. That kid isn't exactly a scholar, but compared to the failure, he looks fine.

Well, that’s all well and good, I suppose. I've been listening in on the conversation, and it seems like even more extreme opinions are starting to surface.

Actually, let me make an edit. 🤣

Morgan Williams said:I don't see any persecution or targeting going on here—though I've heard people claiming otherwise, and it definitely wasn't coming from Zoran. It’s simple. He’s framing it as a choice: you either have this administration working to pull the country out of the mess the Republicans caused, or you have the GOP. You pick: us, who are dragging the nation out of this recession, or them, who drove us into it, got blamed in court, and are now making empty promises.

Yes, I am quite certain that is exactly what the President had in mind. 👍

Well, it seems we have discovered today that this administration isn't just decent, but actually quite exceptional. If that's the case, then I suppose we should simply sit back and offer our thanks to Zoran for his guidance, shouldn't we?

Walter Grant5 said:If you think the Democrats' rhetoric is what’s killing off any third-party movement, you’re missing the bigger picture. The Republicans' rhetoric is what's crushing every other option out there. In the world they’ve built, there just isn't room for anyone else to breathe.

Isn't President Biden's entire approach essentially just "us versus them"?

James Anderson5 said:Honestly, that’s pretty much why the Republicans keep winning elections. People just say, "Sure, they're corrupt, but at least they're on our side and love America." It doesn't matter if they have zero economic plan, or if they're just sharpening their knives to carve up the budget for themselves, or even that their leader has ties to old-school intelligence agencies. All that matters is making sure the Democrats don't take over. And let's be real, most of the former communists ended up right inside the Republican party anyway...🤔

Most of this sentiment comes from those immigrants who moved here from abroad and would vote Republican even if someone broke into their house to steal their TV and rip up the floorboards. Then you've got the cronies at government agencies—people who landed cushy jobs, pensions, and all sorts of perks thanks to the GOP. It's all a total fabrication...

It's the exact same logic with local politicians like mayors who act like big-time patriots and devout believers just to win votes. If people actually bothered to Google what their college thesis was really about, they'd know better. Americans can be so easily misled...

You are truly the last person I care to debate politics with. No, that isn't why the Republicans win; the real reason is the Democrats, specifically the current leadership. Everyone else is secondary; the main "culprit" behind the GOP's success is the Democratic frontrunner. It’s just like how the Democrats didn't win because of some grand vision, but rather because of the massive corruption scandals of the previous administration. You see, is it really a problem to claim a leader has ties to subversive agents without hard proof—assuming we accept every rumor about a conservative politician as gospel—if I were to claim the Democratic leader is a thief without any evidence at all?

And no, they aren't great patriots, nor was that mayor you brought up, but I find myself much closer to Patrick Martin's theory than yours. If we judge solely by the Republican Party's past, then we should probably leave the Democrats in power indefinitely. It seems to bother people that a specific individual looted the treasury, yet you attribute that entire sin to the whole party; meanwhile, you'll overlook the Democrats' historical transgressions, which, in my view, are far more egregious. You'll ignore their incompetence, their failed cabinet picks, ministers who can't manage a local pharmacy, and every possible scandal.

I'm not under the impression that things will suddenly become perfect once the Republicans take over; I believe things might improve by maybe 10-15% during the first term, and that's about it. As for what the next GOP leader will be like as President, we simply cannot know—not that it matters to you or anyone else who thinks every conservative is a secret agent just because of some unproven rumor or a slight accent—because he hasn't had the chance to hold the office yet. But with the Democrat, we know exactly what we're getting.

Does that make sense?

Just so we understand each other, I truly believe most of you would vote for the Democrats even if the Republicans had a spotless history and were led by a group of Nobel laureates. ☕

And one more thing: this guy doesn't even have an economic plan, which is frankly shameful. He should have at least invented one, given it a catchy name like "Vision2030," and sold a dream to the public. That would at least be more honest.

I see that the Republican leader has announced he'll present his economic platform next week. Just imagine if he presents that plan and they fail to prove he was involved in some shadowy intelligence ring. What will we have left to talk about then? Will we just fall back to saying he isn't as charismatic as the Democrat?

I promised myself I wouldn't go any further with this, but I find I simply can't let this one point slide. I wouldn't go so far as to say there is a genuine hatred for this country or its people, but I do believe that what Patrick Martin is suggesting isn't entirely off base.

Larry Fox5 said:If you ask me, it's all just an illusion, whether folks admit it or not.

Around here, "ideology" is just another word for a fantasy. It honestly makes my blood boil when people start whining about these imaginary divides.

And check out this logic of yours: 🤦

Buddy, no average, sane American actually wanted this country...

Of course ideology isn't an illusion; I'm not quite sure where you're getting that idea from. You cannot simply dictate to another person what should matter to them and what shouldn't, can you? Everyone in this forum is championing some form of ideology, including yourself, if we are being honest.

As for the second point you made, I won't even bother quoting it, as I don't believe it even deserves a response.

Let’s be clear: I wouldn't have any issue setting aside my ideological leanings and casting a vote for the Democrats if I didn't feel they were undermining the country. Or perhaps I'd find myself supporting a sensible leader like Cory Booker.

mellowscout24 said:Look, you already know I'm crazy about you, babe.

Hold on a second, how exactly do you think you know how the other side views the Democrats when you’re clearly just playing the part of a devoted little supporter?

Like a dog chasing a cat, right? ☕

mellowscout24 said:Look, you already know I'm crazy about you, babe.

Hold on a second, how exactly do you think you know how the other side views the Democrats when you’re clearly just playing the part of a devoted little supporter?

Well, isn't the little guy's crowd just another side of the opposition too? ☕