Republican Party - General Discussion

Emily Smith6 said:Meryl Streep: It’s not like George W. Bush was stealing money as a hobby; he was doing it while he was running the country

Kudos to Maja Sever! Is there actually a single other journalist at the public broadcaster who looks at the Republican Party objectively? Thank God she’s the union head, because if she weren't, she’d be getting pushed out by the ones currently cozying up to Republican Party bosses on party buses...

p.s. It would be nice if the reporters at the Associated Press took a few lessons from someone like the BBC—an institution that actually strikes fear into the hearts of politicians everywhere...

Edward Cooper2 said:I’m struggling to wrap my head around one little thing here... What excuses are the Republicans actually using to dodge an apology? I must have missed it entirely. And honestly, even Joe Biden doesn't have the right to stay silent—even if he wasn't a member of the Republican Party back then—because he was right there in the inner circle alongside the cabinet members.
If they truly believe an apology isn't necessary, then fine—let them just hand back every single piece of real estate owned by the Republican Party, since they seem to be disowning them in practice. I can only imagine the total cognitive dissonance happening in those Republican heads: on one hand, you have Ronald Reagan and the glory days of the nineties; on the other, everything supposedly went south once Joe Biden took charge, perhaps starting at that Democratic Party convention where Joe Biden spoke about the party being held hostage by one man.

Since we're bringing up that one guy, let's not forget where he ended up—and where his entire inner circle sits right now—while they're busy calling Davor Grbin a tyrant. Honestly, the only difference is that these Republican guys are still technically part of the party.

Nancy Gomez26

Peter Sanders4 said:An apology is essentially an admission of guilt, which inevitably leads to bad press. I see why they made that call. It was the right move.

It seems to me that within that particular circle, an apology is viewed as a sign of weakness. Given that their entire ideology is built upon the mythos of a singular, infallible leader, any attempt at contrition would be counterproductive to their cause. Besides, why bother apologizing? To do so would be disingenuous—they simply operate that way. Perhaps it’s better to skip the staged apologies and just be honest about who they really are.

Edward Cooper2 said:Kudos to Maja Sever! Is there actually a single other journalist at the public broadcaster who looks at the Republican Party objectively? Thank God she’s the union head, because if she weren't, she’d be getting pushed out by the ones currently cozying up to Republican Party bosses on party buses...

p.s. It would be nice if the reporters at the Associated Press took a few lessons from someone like the BBC—an institution that actually strikes fear into the hearts of politicians everywhere...

In some places, the public broadcaster is the nightmare of every politician. Here, the real terror happens at the station whenever there's a change in administration or a new director is appointed. In both scenarios, however, the fear remains constant.

Peter Sanders4 said:You’re pushing for higher voter turnout, yet you’re simultaneously against online voting? That doesn't quite add up.

Both the Republican Party and the Democrats have stood together, acting like brothers, to reject such an option in the US Congress.

Two different parties, but they move as one...

On another note, isn't it interesting how $2 million just vanished with a single stroke of a pen due to a court ruling? Truly beautiful justice.

My main hang-up with your voting idea really comes down to trust. If they're already lying and cutting corners like this, what makes you think they wouldn't just pull the same stunts with an online system?
And don't even get me started on the census... I mean, look at how many people from Canada signed up claiming they live here in the States. They didn't even have to try to make sure someone was actually home to report them. Not to mention if we were doing physical door-to-door censuses, a census worker wouldn't be able to tell if twenty people were crammed into a tiny little apartment, but with this way, they can fly under the radar easily.
Plus, for online voting to work, you'd need the highest level of security through something like a federal ID portal, which would require a card reader—meaning more money out of pocket—and honestly, half the time those things don't even work properly anyway.

Peter Sanders4 said:offtopic apology

Of course turnout would increase. Personally, I manage to make it out about 50% of the time. Sometimes I'm out of town, sometimes I just can't be bothered to drive 1.5 miles from my house, or maybe I've got a BBQ going that day. It would also cut down on the chances of people faking their participation.

Everything you're saying sounds like a bunch of excuses to me. When election day actually rolls around, people find a way to make it happen. There's no such thing as "I couldn't make it to the polls"—I remember one time I landed at the airport around 6 PM and practically sprinted to get to my polling station before they closed at 7. Back when the runoff was between Obama and Trump, I actually had my leg in a cast and was staying at my grandma's place on the other side of town. I still managed to coordinate a ride and ended up hopping up the stairs to my polling station on crutches.
The bottom line is, people show up when they want to. When they don't, they always have a thousand reasons why.

offtopic apology

Using Vote.org would boost turnout. Period. You’re worried about security because you don't grasp the technical side, but I’m telling you, it can be done securely.

If I had the option to vote online, my participation wouldn't hover around 50%; it would likely hit 100%. Apply that logic to the rest of the country.

Peter Sanders4 said:offtopic apology

Using Vote.org would boost turnout. Period. You’re worried about security because you don't grasp the technical side, but I’m telling you, it can be done securely.

If I had the option to vote online, my participation wouldn't hover around 50%; it would likely hit 100%. Apply that logic to the rest of the country.

They just don't want you showing up to the polls... It's a risk they aren't willing to take...

Peter Sanders4 said:offtopic apology

Using Vote.org would boost turnout. Period. You’re worried about security because you don't grasp the technical side, but I’m telling you, it can be done securely.

If I had the option to vote online, my participation wouldn't hover around 50%; it would likely hit 100%. Apply that logic to the rest of the country.

I am equally convinced that a completely secure system is technically feasible; however, feasibility does not guarantee implementation. If we cannot even manage to keep a basic application portal for an energy efficiency grant from crashing, how could we possibly expect them to handle online voting? It won't happen. We still have a long way to go.

Peter Sanders4 said:offtopic apology

Using Vote.org would boost turnout. Period. You’re worried about security because you don't grasp the technical side, but I’m telling you, it can be done securely.

If I had the option to vote online, my participation wouldn't hover around 50%; it would likely hit 100%. Apply that logic to the rest of the country.

Yeah, right.
It takes me maybe fifteen minutes to swing by the polling station and cast a ballot.
Same goes for most people, considering how well the precincts are laid out here.

Since when did finding fifteen minutes in a whole week become such a massive struggle, assuming you actually give a damn?

Wait, online voting!?
If the folks over in Ireland don't have a local Republican Party branch there, how does it work? Could they end up messing up the diaspora vote, or if they’re registered locally, could they throw off the results for the local candidates here at home?
Do you guys realize the kind of chaos 100,000 votes like that could cause?

Kate Chase59 said:Wait, online voting!?
If the folks over in Ireland don't have a local Republican Party branch there, how does it work? Could they end up messing up the diaspora vote, or if they’re registered locally, could they throw off the results for the local candidates here at home?
Do you guys realize the kind of chaos 100,000 votes like that could cause?

You’re mixing apples and oranges. Young families working abroad in Ireland, Sweden, Germany, or Canada are loyal Republican Party voters. Why shouldn't their kids carry on the proud tradition of their parents? Besides, they aren't blaming the Republican Party for having to move to wealthy parts of Europe. I know parents personally—with two out of three kids living in Germany—and I can tell you, much to my dismay, they don't blame the party for anything. In their minds, it's all just God's will. On top of that, they actually believe America would come back if people stopped voting for the Republican Party.

Edward Cooper2 said:You’re mixing apples and oranges. Young families working abroad in Ireland, Sweden, Germany, or Canada are loyal Republican Party voters. Why shouldn't their kids carry on the proud tradition of their parents? Besides, they aren't blaming the Republican Party for having to move to wealthy parts of Europe. I know parents personally—with two out of three kids living in Germany—and I can tell you, much to my dismay, they don't blame the party for anything. In their minds, it's all just God's will. On top of that, they actually believe America would come back if people stopped voting for the Republican Party.

From what I've seen, the people I actually know wouldn't vote for the Republican Party even if they lost their minds.☕

hollowmason64 said:My main hang-up with your voting idea really comes down to trust. If they're already lying and cutting corners like this, what makes you think they wouldn't just pull the same stunts with an online system?
And don't even get me started on the census... I mean, look at how many people from Canada signed up claiming they live here in the States. They didn't even have to try to make sure someone was actually home to report them. Not to mention if we were doing physical door-to-door censuses, a census worker wouldn't be able to tell if twenty people were crammed into a tiny little apartment, but with this way, they can fly under the radar easily.
Plus, for online voting to work, you'd need the highest level of security through something like a federal ID portal, which would require a card reader—meaning more money out of pocket—and honestly, half the time those things don't even work properly anyway.

Everything you're saying sounds like a bunch of excuses to me. When election day actually rolls around, people find a way to make it happen. There's no such thing as "I couldn't make it to the polls"—I remember one time I landed at the airport around 6 PM and practically sprinted to get to my polling station before they closed at 7. Back when the runoff was between Obama and Trump, I actually had my leg in a cast and was staying at my grandma's place on the other side of town. I still managed to coordinate a ride and ended up hopping up the stairs to my polling station on crutches.
The bottom line is, people show up when they want to. When they don't, they always have a thousand reasons why.

Let me clarify my point here.

I mean, sure, you can go online right now and buy a car or even a house worth $100,000. You could even order several tons of freight from China worth tens of thousands of dollars with just a few clicks.

But when it comes to elections? These modern online gadgets just don't feel secure enough for me.😵

Quincy:

I’m still waiting to see if anyone actually has a point here... because right now, it feels like we're just circling the drain. Everyone is shouting, but nobody is saying anything worth hearing. It's exhausting... kaže: The people I know wouldn't vote for the Republican Party even if their lives depended on it... ☕

I don't actually know the people I was talking about personally. I only know their mother. She used to work with us. Every single time the Republican Party isn't in power, I hear all these terrifying warnings about imminent danger... If her kids aren't lying, they're thinking along the exact same lines.
Look, I don't think the overseas voters are the issue here. It’s just three votes... nothing moves the needle. The real problem is voter apathy. Those people would be the easiest ones to get logged in and voting online. Now, just imagine what the election results would look like if we actually had a 30 percent increase in turnout. Out of that extra 30 percent, you wouldn't get even a 0.3 percent share for the Republican Party. In the US, we have hundreds of congressional seats at stake, whereas those overseas districts only account for a tiny handful of votes...
In that scenario, even the Republican Party wouldn't walk away as the winner...

Rachel Barrett8 said:Let me clarify my point here.

I mean, sure, you can go online right now and buy a car or even a house worth $100,000. You could even order several tons of freight from China worth tens of thousands of dollars with just a few clicks.

But when it comes to elections? These modern online gadgets just don't feel secure enough for me.😵

Seriously though, how old are you and what do you actually do for a living?

The Republican Party isn't winning elections because they’re actually doing a good job... it’s just that the Democratic Party is such a disaster.

And honestly, this court ruling? It’s not going to change a single thing.

Kyle Nelson2 said:The Republican Party isn't winning elections because they’re actually doing a good job... it’s just that the Democratic Party is such a disaster.

And honestly, this court ruling? It’s not going to change a single thing.

The Republican Party wins because half the voters stay home on election day. That gives them a free pass to screw everyone over for the next four years...

Edward Cooper2 said:The Republican Party wins because half the voters stay home on election day. That gives them a free pass to screw everyone over for the next four years...

And then there's the enforcers checking if members actually showed up, basically using the promise of future kickbacks to whip their voters into line.

The Republican Party pulls off these wins because they’ve got an unfair head start—we're talking a massive boost from the diaspora and minority blocs, plus another 10 points just from those unconstitutional gerrymandered districts where a single vote in some tiny, empty Midwest town actually carries way more weight than a vote in a major metro area like Chicago.

The Republican Party cruised in with 611,000 votes, their coalition partners tacked on another 20,000, while the Opposition—the people who actually made it into Congress—managed to pull in 910,000 votes.

DEMOCRACY AT WORK!!! 🙏