CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online log in · register
Home › Society › Politics › Political Scene › Republican Party - General Discussion

Republican Party - General Discussion

Started by Larry Walker24 · · 👁 72 views · 2.2K replies

📡 Subscribe to replies

Participants Larry Walker24mistyhawk17casualskipper6Jeremy Sanchez4Walter Baker2electricnomad8darkhawk30Nancy Gomez26Harold Davis6Alexander Reed7slysurfer14Kenneth Perez15Thomas Nelson25Robin Jones2urbanrider8Amy Nguyen18quietfox38Carol Newman2Ethan Clark3Paul Bishop3darkdriverrapidfox26Mark Hughes36hollowmason64 …
Robin Jones2 Robin Jones2 Active Member
199 messages
joined Nov 2012
#1461 ·
Christian Myers said:I think your logic is a bit flawed. Just because someone is unknown doesn't mean they're a pawn, and being well-known doesn't mean they aren't. Milanka Opačić was one of the heavy hitters in the Democratic Party, and look how that turned out—she became a pawn too. I’d look at it through an ideological lens instead. Personally, I think Obuljenka would be the first pawn to jump ship. And people like her. On the flip side, it seems totally insane to me that someone from the Republican Party would switch to the Democrats to act as a pawn. That's basically career suicide given how much longer the Republicans have held power both nationally and locally. Though, ideologically, maybe it isn't impossible—like Ivana Šojat, who moved from Republican to Democrat due to her beliefs.

You quoted me by accident, or is this some leftover from our previous conversation?
Christian Myers Christian Myers Active Member
100 messages
joined Oct 2024
#1462 ·
Robin Jones2 said:You quoted me by accident, or is this some leftover from our previous conversation?

Honestly, no clue how you even ended up here. 🤔

But hey—at least I got you to read my post. 😁
Robin Jones2 Robin Jones2 Active Member
199 messages
joined Nov 2012
#1463 ·
Christian Myers said:Honestly, no clue how you even ended up here. 🤔

But hey—at least I got you to read my post. 😁

Assumption is the mother of all screw-ups.
Christian Myers Christian Myers Active Member
100 messages
joined Oct 2024
#1464 ·
Robin Jones2 said:Assumption is the mother of all screw-ups.

Well, you would've had to actually read it to realize I wasn't quoting you. Or are you suggesting we just stop reading everything? 😁
Robin Jones2 Robin Jones2 Active Member
199 messages
joined Nov 2012
#1465 ·
Christian Myers said:Well, you would've had to actually read it to realize I wasn't quoting you. Or are you suggesting we just stop reading everything? 😁

I skimmed through your post and didn't see any mention of Buddy or Mike Johnson. Regardless, it’s irrelevant.
Lawrence Booth2 Lawrence Booth2 Regular
297 messages
joined Sep 2022
#1466 ·
https://history.com/today-in-history/founding-of-the-republican-party-1989/

Happy anniversary to all the Republicans—and those who’ll eventually find themselves joining the ranks--on the founding day.
Nancy Gomez26 Nancy Gomez26 Regular
787 messages
joined Jan 2018
#1467 ·
Lawrence Booth2 said:https://history.com/today-in-history/founding-of-the-republican-party-1989/

Happy anniversary to all the Republicans—and those who’ll eventually find themselves joining the ranks--on the founding day.

It’s the classic play: you build a political party alongside the Joy brothers, only to pull the rug out from under them by holding the founding assembly at a different venue entirely—leaving them behind. Looking back, this entire current mess feels like nothing more than the inevitable, logical conclusion of such a dishonest beginning.
Carol Newman2 Carol Newman2 Regular
413 messages
joined Aug 2013
#1468 ·
Smith: I haven't considered leaving the party; many people will eventually return to the Republican Party
http://hr.n1info.com/Vijesti/a518606...iti-GOP-u.html
------

Oh really? And you think everyone on the right is just going to flock back to the Republican Party because of you?
Tyler Vaughn7 Tyler Vaughn7 Active Member
59 messages
joined Feb 2023
#1469 ·
Just look at Margaret Thatcher and how hard they worked to respect those female quotas while trying to freshen up their candidate lists...
She’s basically the poster child for what "youthful" election rosters are supposed to look like.🤣
Nancy Gomez26 Nancy Gomez26 Regular
787 messages
joined Jan 2018
#1470 ·
Charles Brown9 said:"Quote"

Yeah, I messed up a little bit.😁

Listing names right now feels a bit pointless since we don't know who will actually make it into the US Congress. Once the election night dust settles, I'll be able to give you a real list. To put it simply, anyone you’ve never even heard of before this election cycle is likely just a placeholder for the party.

Here is an example for the ninth installment:

Ivan Malenica

2. Grozdana Perić

3. Ante Sanders

4. Marijan Kustic

5. Ante Sanders 4. Marijan Kustic 5. raditi Šimičević


Nediljko Dujić 7. Luka Brčić

Nediljko Dujić 7. Luka Brčić

8. Josip Bilaver


Branka Juričev

10. Anita Pocrnić Radošević

11. Nikola Baradić


Vinko Zulim

13. Josip Begonja

14. Božidar Kalmeta

I tend to view all those blacked-out entries as potential conflicts of interest, especially since their entire livelihood depends on taxpayer funding.

Bero won't even need to go out and recruit anyone. Just at the mention of snap elections, those little political pawns will start lining up on their own. You’re definitely underestimating the Republican Party; they're really just a group of incompetent folks who would starve without a seat in US Congress. For them, holding onto a spot in Congress is quite literally a matter of survival. We also shouldn't forget that Berin’s political mentor was none other than Ubersakupljač, the master of handing out favors, and that Bero has been consistently underestimated until now. He’s actually at his most effective when he's pulling strings to place family, friends, or partners into key positions—which is exactly how the whole patronage system works.

I suspect I am underestimating them far less than you are underestimating them. We can debate the Republican Party's motives all we want, but at its core, this is an organization with a rigid structure—one that members, in principle, follow with disciplined precision. A textbook example of how party discipline begins to erode would be Coley; his decision to back a rival presidential candidate without facing any subsequent sanctions suggests their internal standards are fraying. That decay is exactly what will cost them in the long run. Essentially, they populate their ballots with people who will raise their hands on command and serve the party interests faithfully. Whether the motivation behind that loyalty is purely political or something more transactional is almost beside the point. As Schlesinger openly admitted, they look out for "their own" people—generally speaking. And looking at the electorate, there are plenty of voters willing to accept those kinds of arrangements; the system has functioned quite smoothly up to this point. There are always those who refuse to cooperate, but they are mostly outliers—black sheep. In an environment like this, it is relatively easy to paint them as "unstable" elements of society. If necessary, the party can even settle scores through various means to ensure the public sees exactly what happens to those who refuse to join the machine.
Of course, this exact system impoverishes society as a whole. The decline—materially, morally, and in every other sense—is undeniable. Yet, for the party's inner circle, it works perfectly fine, provided they continue to extract more than everyone else around them. As long as their individual perks remain intact, they frame their political privilege as if it were some sort of personal merit. We shouldn't underestimate the mechanics of such a system; in a nation already hollowed out by a lack of spirit and integrity, it serves as an incredibly potent lever of power. The Republican Party functions essentially as an organization built around the material interests of its members. For some, that means a cushy pension or a certain social status; for others, it’s a guaranteed bureaucratic position within the federal government, or perhaps even a highly lucrative contract with the state. At the very top, you have those who simply want to feel the weight of authority in their hands—but in that regard, they aren't any different from any other political leaders.
Anyone attempting to rationalize this government apparatus must first dismantle the entire system of party patronage. It’s a two-sided trap: one side relies entirely on state resources, while the other remains tethered to providing political and material support to the Republican Party. If you leave that specific crew embedded within the civil service, all you'll have is a group of quiet partisan saboteurs. They will act as internal brakes, obstructing any rational initiative simply because their primary objective is to protect their own interests whenever the opposition takes power.
You are deeply mistaken if you believe this entire organization came into existence by "accident," or that its leaders are simply incompetent. They operate under a specific set of values, a structured hierarchy, and a powerful motivation for their actions. For us voters today, the fundamental question isn't about their competence, but rather whether there is a political force strong enough to dismantle this system—either from within or from the outside—without falling into the same trap of abusing power themselves, much like how the Republican Party currently exploits its position at the expense of the country.
copperdrifter26 copperdrifter26 Active Member
53 messages
joined Feb 2012
#1471 ·
"Quote:"
Tyler Vaughn7 said:Just look at Margaret Thatcher and how hard they worked to respect those female quotas while trying to freshen up their candidate lists...
She’s basically the poster child for what "youthful" election rosters are supposed to look like.🤣

Maybe she was thinking about how the average age over at Microsoft 365 is around 67.
Charles Brown9 Charles Brown9 Member
49 messages
joined Jan 2019
#1472 ·

Nancy Gomez26 said:I suspect I am underestimating them far less than you are underestimating them. We can debate the Republican Party's motives all we want, but at its core, this is an organization with a rigid structure—one that members, in principle, follow with disciplined precision. A textbook example of how party discipline begins to erode would be Coley; his decision to back a rival presidential candidate without facing any subsequent sanctions suggests their internal standards are fraying. That decay is exactly what will cost them in the long run. Essentially, they populate their ballots with people who will raise their hands on command and serve the party interests faithfully. Whether the motivation behind that loyalty is purely political or something more transactional is almost beside the point. As Schlesinger openly admitted, they look out for "their own" people—generally speaking. And looking at the electorate, there are plenty of voters willing to accept those kinds of arrangements; the system has functioned quite smoothly up to this point. There are always those who refuse to cooperate, but they are mostly outliers—black sheep. In an environment like this, it is relatively easy to paint them as "unstable" elements of society. If necessary, the party can even settle scores through various means to ensure the public sees exactly what happens to those who refuse to join the machine.
Of course, this exact system impoverishes society as a whole. The decline—materially, morally, and in every other sense—is undeniable. Yet, for the party's inner circle, it works perfectly fine, provided they continue to extract more than everyone else around them. As long as their individual perks remain intact, they frame their political privilege as if it were some sort of personal merit. We shouldn't underestimate the mechanics of such a system; in a nation already hollowed out by a lack of spirit and integrity, it serves as an incredibly potent lever of power. The Republican Party functions essentially as an organization built around the material interests of its members. For some, that means a cushy pension or a certain social status; for others, it’s a guaranteed bureaucratic position within the federal government, or perhaps even a highly lucrative contract with the state. At the very top, you have those who simply want to feel the weight of authority in their hands—but in that regard, they aren't any different from any other political leaders.
Anyone attempting to rationalize this government apparatus must first dismantle the entire system of party patronage. It’s a two-sided trap: one side relies entirely on state resources, while the other remains tethered to providing political and material support to the Republican Party. If you leave that specific crew embedded within the civil service, all you'll have is a group of quiet partisan saboteurs. They will act as internal brakes, obstructing any rational initiative simply because their primary objective is to protect their own interests whenever the opposition takes power.
You are deeply mistaken if you believe this entire organization came into existence by "accident," or that its leaders are simply incompetent. They operate under a specific set of values, a structured hierarchy, and a powerful motivation for their actions. For us voters today, the fundamental question isn't about their competence, but rather whether there is a political force strong enough to dismantle this system—either from within or from the outside—without falling into the same trap of abusing power themselves, much like how the Republican Party currently exploits its position at the expense of the country.

The only reason Coley and his group stay so quiet is because the Republican Party is in power and holds the keys to the budget. Without that control over the funds, people like Coley wouldn't even be in the picture.

I wasn't saying the leaders of the Republican Party are incompetent idiots. My point is that many of their future congressional candidates are chosen specifically because they are easy to control—they tend to drift toward whoever is holding the purse strings. While the party certainly looks out for its own, if there's even a slight hint of a snap election where the Republican Party might lose ground, you'll see a stampede of people rushing to embrace Baron's winning side. The party can secure local seats in various counties and towns all they want, but at the end of the day, a seat in Congress and a pension come before everything else. Those weak-willed Republicans heading to Washington aren't foolish enough to trade those perks for party loyalty or some sense of imaginary principle.
Emily Smith6 Emily Smith6 Active Member
228 messages
joined Feb 2023
#1473 ·
Steven Mnuchin: Healthcare debt has hit $1.4 billion
http://hr.n1info.com/Vijesti/a518708...ardi-kuna.html

Beroš Villa: The Republican Party has a plan for healthcare's financial sustainability
http://hr.n1info.com/Vijesti/a518710...zdravstva.html
Nancy Gomez26 Nancy Gomez26 Regular
787 messages
joined Jan 2018
#1474 ·
Charles Brown9 said:The only reason Coley and his group stay so quiet is because the Republican Party is in power and holds the keys to the budget. Without that control over the funds, people like Coley wouldn't even be in the picture.

I wasn't saying the leaders of the Republican Party are incompetent idiots. My point is that many of their future congressional candidates are chosen specifically because they are easy to control—they tend to drift toward whoever is holding the purse strings. While the party certainly looks out for its own, if there's even a slight hint of a snap election where the Republican Party might lose ground, you'll see a stampede of people rushing to embrace Baron's winning side. The party can secure local seats in various counties and towns all they want, but at the end of the day, a seat in Congress and a pension come before everything else. Those weak-willed Republicans heading to Washington aren't foolish enough to trade those perks for party loyalty or some sense of imaginary principle.

That group of "yes-men" is tightly controlled, yet they won't step out from under the Republican Party's shadow easily. Perhaps they would defect only if there were a sudden dissolution of the party, leaving them stuck in Congress without any way to contact their floor leader—though I don't expect much initiative from the Democratic Party anyway. This is a group capable of one-way thinking; their priority is simply waiting to see when the floor leader raises his hand—turning the key, so to speak—so they can follow suit. Switching to a different political faction requires far too much mental exertion for this particular crowd. Baron shouldn't count on them.
brightheron64 brightheron64 Regular
408 messages
joined Apr 2016
#1475 ·
But what if Mike Pence pulls an absolute stunner at the polls, leaving the Republican Party to act as nothing more than a mere vehicle for someone else's interests, much like what we saw with the unspecified guy...
Noah Perez5 Noah Perez5 Active Member
61 messages
joined Mar 2023
#1476 ·
brightheron64 said:But what if Mike Pence pulls an absolute stunner at the polls, leaving the Republican Party to act as nothing more than a mere vehicle for someone else's interests, much like what we saw with the unspecified guy...

The old king is dead, long live the king.

The old version of the Republican Party is gone, but long live the Republican Party 2.0!

I suppose if the original iteration of the Republican Party were to fracture into these cheap little political tokens, what we would actually be witnessing is just a seamless transfer of the current, stable, and corrupt network of cronies—essentially a cartel of special interest groups—under a different label. It seems to me that they might just superficially swap their party cards from the Republican Party to the Libertarian Party while keeping the exact same cartel hierarchy intact; in that scenario, almost nothing would truly change, and we would simply end up with a "Republican Party 2.0" in power with only minor cosmetic adjustments.

And if that happens, I wonder how one would even begin to dismantle such a thing?

Perhaps a total state bankruptcy might eventually arrive as a necessary evil for us.
Nancy Gomez26 Nancy Gomez26 Regular
787 messages
joined Jan 2018
#1477 ·
brightheron64 said:But what if Mike Pence pulls an absolute stunner at the polls, leaving the Republican Party to act as nothing more than a mere vehicle for someone else's interests, much like what we saw with the unspecified guy...

That guy reminds me of a single arcade token used in those old pinball machines at a dive bar. You drop it in, play the game, lose everything, then just fish the token back out of the machine to try and cheat the system one more time. 😁
Charles Fox10 Charles Fox10 Regular
352 messages
joined Mar 2009
#1478 ·
Stalin is just a baby😬

Quincey:
The latest masterpiece from the Republican Party. They actually airbrushed Joža Manolić out of the official anniversary photo.
Adam Collins4 Adam Collins4 Regular
502 messages
joined Apr 2013
#1479 ·
So, have they finally tucked their precious leader, George W. Bush, into the party’s official history books?

And what about Condoleezza Rice?

How's that whole crusade for a "better yesterday" going—you know, that classic move of rewriting history just like those old-school communist predecessors used to do?☕
Christian Myers Christian Myers Active Member
100 messages
joined Oct 2024
#1480 ·
Charles Fox10 said:Stalin is just a baby😬

Quincey:
The latest masterpiece from the Republican Party. They actually airbrushed Joža Manolić out of the official anniversary photo.

I'm pretty sure this photo is from the first anniversary of the Republican Party being founded—even some guy on Twitter mentioned it. Honestly, though, I don't see the issue. Why would they need to show the full picture? And why would they include Joe, considering all those lies he—along with George W. Bush—told about Ronald Reagan? Plus, they still left the Pittsburgh Riverhounds SC logo in there😁

You must log in or register to reply here.

Log in Register

🔗 Similar threads