Donald Trump 2019

[hayden_horn 11362]

also, hilariously, on the 5G topic, at&t doing at&t things. i subscribe to them for my mobile. a couple of weeks ago, 5GE appeared on my phone...

https://www.engadget.com/2019/02/08/att-5g-sprint-lawsuit/

Quote

After AT&T decided to start rolling out "5G Evolution" branding on phones and networks that use 4G LTE Advanced technology, competitors have had to make decisions on how to respond. While T-Mobile mocked it with a sticker, Verizon (Engadget's parent company) fired off a letter. So what is Sprint going to do? It has filed a lawsuit in federal court, seeking an injunction to prevent AT&T from using 5GE tags on its devices or advertising.

lulz.

[Jack Straw 2954]

1 hour ago, jimmyjazz said:

I'm willing to give any individual a chance until they prove themselves unworthy.  I know people who remain staunch Republicans because of one single issue -- abortion.  They truly reject the bigotry of the current Republican leaders, but in their mind they have to make that compromise.  I think it's flawed thinking, as I don't think Trump or any (many?) Republican leaders actually give a shit about abortion, they just use it as a tool to divide, but I can't honestly vilify someone for whom that's such an important issue.

yeah, about those folks - who want to use the government, the courts, and legislation to shove their religious beliefs down the throats of others - fuck them too.  fuck them especially, in fact.  

[yaqdum 182]

19 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Ring that bell.  That is the biggest "tell" on the issue.  If you are TRULY "pro-life," then you take that stance consistently, AND you work to address the issue at the source, to minimize the desire for abortion or other actions that endanger life.  The doesn't just fail to do so -- they consistently oppose anything along those lines.

As just one counter-example, contrast that with the Catholic church, which is at least consistent with its "pro-life" stance -- it is anti-abortion, anti-death penalty, and dedicated to protecting refugees and asylum seekers.

In today's GOP, abortion is a facade.  It allows party supporters to falsely claim some sort of moral high ground, while supporting cruelty (remember, the cruelty IS the point these days).  Watch the discussion.  Watch them refuse to defend the actual cruelty espoused and practiced by the party, only to deflect with "oh yeah, what about ABORTION?!?!"  Every.  Single.  Time.  They use abortion as a shield, behind which they hide and commit and support pure cruelty.  That also tells you the end game -- the abortion debate is never going away (that is, the GOP leadership never actually wants to kill Roe v. Wade), because they don't want to be left without their shield.

dammit.  why can't we upvote twice?

[retread 2951]

The scariest/saddest part of the average R voters is how conditioned they've become to one or two word cues. Rush/FoxNews has programmed them to the point that Pavlovian whistles like abortion, socialism, welfare, death panels, etc. creates an immediate response in the voters' ears. Anything after that word is ignored as an attack on mom, apple pie, and Ronald Reagan.

[TexArcher 37774]

Just now, retread said:

The scariest/saddest part of the average R voters is how conditioned they've become to one or two word cues. Rush/FoxNews has programmed them to the point that Pavlovian whistles like abortion, socialism, welfare, death panels, etc. creates an immediate response in the voters' ears. Anything after that word is ignored as an attack on mom, apple pie, and Ronald Reagan.

Bingo.  And the irony is that they call everyone who disagrees "sheeple."

[F250 28775]

1 hour ago, jimmyjazz said:

I'm willing to give any individual a chance until they prove themselves unworthy.  I know people who remain staunch Republicans because of one single issue -- abortion.  They truly reject the bigotry of the current Republican leaders, but in their mind they have to make that compromise.  I think it's flawed thinking, as I don't think Trump or any (many?) Republican leaders actually give a shit about abortion, they just use it as a tool to divide, but I can't honestly vilify someone for whom that's such an important issue.

The rest of 'em can rot in hell, and no, I'm not willing to listen.  I've listened plenty.

I know more than a few people that are Republican or Democrat straight ticket voters that do not follow politics at all except for political ads. A lot of people are like that I assume. There are a lot of uninterested voters out there which is probably why low information tactics works in politics so well.

Anyways, yeah, I usually give most people a pass except anarchists. Fuck those guys.

[Brisketexan 105139]

1 minute ago, F250 said:

I know more than a few people that are Republican or Democrat straight ticket voters that do not follow politics at all except for political ads. A lot of people are like that I assume. There are a lot of uninterested voters out there which is probably why low information tactics works in politics so well.

Anyways, yeah, I usually give most people a pass except anarchists. Fuck those guys.

 

F250?

[jimmyjazz 45953]

30 minutes ago, Loco said:

Great, your "friend" is a single issue voter?  (aka simpleton)    How does your friend feel about robust sex education starting in 5th grade?  How about universal free pre-k?  How about access to condoms and family planning?

What your "friend" doesn't get (or doesn't want to get) is that no one wants more abortions...  no one.   The GOP has defunded and attacked PROVEN teen pregnancy prevention strategies because it's not their religiously base Abstinence Only policy.   They are willing to let others suffer in ignorance and poverty because of their own beliefs.

Your "friend" is likely not very informed or willfully ignorant of the many of issues surrounding and shaping their "single issue"

Challenge your "friend" to understand the drivers of unwanted pregnancy and attack those with equal vigor.

Why the air quotes?  Why "friend" in the singular?  I clearly indicated that I know PEOPLE who fall in this camp.  Fuck you for the implication that it's me.

I'll give you an example:  a friend (no quotes) who is an Aggie, an engineer (and a GREAT engineer at that) who is what most would say is somewhat conservative but who supports gay marriage, supports trans rights, is not bigoted in the least, and is against the death penalty, but as a devout Catholic cannot abide abortion, so he holds his nose and votes (R).  It's that important to him and the compromise bothers him.

Again, fuck you, in case I wasn't clear.  I wrote what I meant and I meant what I wrote.

Edited February 21, 2019 by jimmyjazz

[Eggo 3977]

1 minute ago, jimmyjazz said:

Why the air quotes?  Why "friend" in the singular?  I clearly indicated that I know PEOPLE who fall in this camp.  Fuck you for the implication that it's me.

I'll give you an example:  a friend (no quotes) who is an Aggie, an engineer (and a GREAT engineer at that) who is politically conservative but who supports gay marriage, supports trans rights, is not bigoted in the least, and is against the death penalty, but who as a devout Catholic cannot abide abortion, so he holds his nose and votes (R).  It's that important to him and the compromise bothers him.

Again, fuck you, in case I wasn't clear.  I wrote what I meant and I meant what I wrote.

Sounds like a Ron Paul supporter. "Do whatever the fuck you want with your body but don't kill another human in the process." 

[jimmyjazz 45953]

1 minute ago, Eggo said:

Sounds like a Ron Paul supporter. "Do whatever the fuck you want with your body but don't kill another human in the process." 

Eh, he's pretty mild-mannered.  I don't think that applies to most Ron Paul supporters.

[Loco 3752]

2 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Why the air quotes?  Why "friend" in the singular?  I clearly indicated that I know PEOPLE who fall in this camp.  Fuck you for the implication that it's me.

I'll give you an example:  a friend (no quotes) who is an Aggie, an engineer (and a GREAT engineer at that) who is socially conservative but who supports gay marriage, supports trans rights, is not bigoted in the least, and is against the death penalty, but who as a devout Catholic cannot abide abortion, so he holds his nose and votes (R).  It's that important to him and the compromise bothers him.

Again, fuck you, in case I wasn't clear.  I wrote what I meant and I meant what I wrote.

To be clear, your friend is the adult equivalent of Simple Jack...  and you, being his friend, should call him out on it.

[safe sex 11727]

I'm sorry, but that is fucking infuriating, and I don't think I could remain friends with someone like that. 

[RomaVicta 29907]

15 hours ago, retread said:

It's hard to imagine a return to normalcy without a lot of Rs going to jail.

[jimmyjazz 45953]

2 minutes ago, Loco said:

To be clear, your friend is the adult equivalent of Simple Jack...  and you, being his friend, should call him out on it.

Well, no, but thanks for trying.  And fuck you (again).

[DigglerontheHoof 21199]

I have friends and family that span the political spectrum but do limit my exposure to those on the extremes.   Those can indeed be extremely infuriating. 

[jimmyjazz 45953]

3 minutes ago, trauma babe said:

I'm sorry, but that is fucking infuriating, and I don't think I could remain friends with someone like that. 

Really?  Well, I guess that's your prerogative, but I think it's incredibly short-sighted to let a meaningless vote in the state of Texas get in the way of a friendship.  I guess that's why I'm better than some of you.  (Seriously, I couldn't give a fuck what you'd do -- your ability to pronounce judgment calls your standards more into question than mine.)

[4th&Five 41552]

 

[tucker 238]

59 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

lulz, no. 

hilariously, i'm on a call about this exact topic at this exact moment.

it was a joke, but it is telling that AT&T and others are so far behind from a technology standpoint. US monopolies have been protected, and other countries adoption of China technology will only continue to accelerate unless US policy changes to force US companies to innovate instead of being protected.

Edited February 21, 2019 by tucker

[Loco 3752]

3 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Well, no, but thanks for trying.  And fuck you (again).

Hey, you're the one getting heated.  If you can't talk to your friends about anything without alienating them, then I feel sorry for you.

I have friends and we challenge each others ideas and world views, we argue and I can't help but be influenced by their better arguments/positions.  My positions have evolved and sometimes they come around to my position.  It's not like choosing red or black...     It's too bad you don't have those types of relationships.

[Chuckie Finster 22694]

I know a number of folks who openly admitted that they did not like Trump, but were holding their nose and voting for him because of the abortion issue.  Whatever, I may disagree, but we each have our reasons.

What's infuriating is that a few of these people have slowly become big Trump fans over the past two years.  The obvious flaws that bothered them in 2016 haven't gone away, but these people have all lowered their standards of what is acceptable solely in the name of supporting the team, and now they are buying into all of the right-wing propaganda.

Abortion is a gateway drug in transforming otherwise reasonable folks into the stereotypical Fox News monsters.

[jimmyjazz 45953]

5 minutes ago, Loco said:

Hey, you're the one getting heated.  If you can't talk to your friends about anything without alienating them, then I feel sorry for you.

I have friends and we challenge each others ideas and world views, we argue and I can't help but be influenced by their better arguments/positions.  My positions have evolved and sometimes they come around to my position.  It's not like choosing red or black...     It's too bad you don't have those types of relationships.

What on earth makes you think we haven't had many in-depth discussions about these things?  You are one highly presumptuous person.  Get over thyself.

[Player 4575]

1 hour ago, HenryJames said:

 

1 hour ago, retread said:

Shiny object of the day. Glad there's nothing else going on in the world so he can push 6G. Why not 7G???

 

1 hour ago, Eggo said:

Fuck it. Give me 69G.

This is the type of enthusiastic support we should all be giving to dotard on this. With any luck at all...

...he'll OG. 

[Brian Fantana 6687]

1 hour ago, hayden_horn said:

also, hilariously, on the 5G topic, at&t doing at&t things. i subscribe to them for my mobile. a couple of weeks ago, 5GE appeared on my phone...

https://www.engadget.com/2019/02/08/att-5g-sprint-lawsuit/

lulz.

Yeah they just slapped a 5GE logo on their 4G LTE service, it's basically fraud. As someone that works on and researches wireless technologies, fuck ATT and Trump's stupid ass.

[safe sex 11727]

I just cannot fathom placing the welfare of a fetus over the welfare of living, breathing people who are attempting to thrive in a world where the people your friend votes for actively work to make life for difficult for them. I truly can't.

I'm okay with being a judgy bitch in this instance. Your friend actively votes against my welfare, all so poor girls can have back alley or self-induced abortions instead of having a doctor perform an otherwise standard and safe procedure. But, hey, aggy, am I right?

[safe sex 11727]

Sorry, no more detail from me

[4th&Five 41552]

 

[Eggo 3977]

1 minute ago, Brian Fantana said:

Yeah they just slapped a 5GE logo on their 4G LTE service, it's basically fraud. As someone that works on and researches wireless technologies, fuck ATT and Trump's stupid ass.

Sprint started ringing the bell on this Feb 8th

https://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/news/2019/02/19/at-t-will-move-faster-than-hoped-on-sprint-5g.html

[lemonlime 5503]

22 minutes ago, 4th&Five said:

 

FFS.  He's now said more about some stupid hoax, than about pipe bombs being sent to two ex-presidents, George Soros, and news organizations.

[Longhorn94 2448]

14 hours ago, ChiTownDoc said:

That's the thing,  we are NOT all on the same team.  Any R that's truly for America has left the party...raises hand.  Those who are left would MUCH rather join arms with Russians who also hate browns, gays etc.  So your point sounds great until you break down what exactly is going on.  Not saying deport them, but sure as hell don't coddle them and give some 'yay team' BS...that won't play. 

the funny thing about those Rs that would rather join Russians is they dont realize Russia has the highest instance of abortions in the world and is also has some of the most restrictive gun control laws. Its like their 2 biggest points on their platforms - SAVE THE BABIES! and NOT MUH GUNS! - the Russians are like meh... we will kill the babies and take your guns. Its insane how much they will contort the truth to fit their narrative.

[shnsajax 3591]

FFS.  He's now said more about some stupid hoax, than about pipe bombs being sent to two ex-presidents, George Soros, and news organizations.

Any mention of the coast guard from yesterday?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jimmyjazz 45953]

10 minutes ago, trauma babe said:

I just cannot fathom placing the welfare of a fetus over the welfare of living, breathing people who are attempting to thrive in a world where the people your friend votes for actively work to make life for difficult for them. I truly can't.

I'm okay with being a judgy bitch in this instance. Your friend actively votes against my welfare, all so poor girls can have back alley or self-induced abortions instead of having a doctor perform an otherwise standard and safe procedure. But, hey, aggy, am I right?

I get the arguments.  I've made them.  He understands the rationale.  His bottom line is that abortion is wrong and he can't abide it.  

I find it highly unlikely that everyone bitching me out on this has no friends or family members with whom they fundamentally disagree on a key issue.  Whatever.  The real world is complicated -- some of you might consider joining up at some point.

[hayden_horn 11362]

25 minutes ago, tucker said:

it was a joke, but it is telling that AT&T and others are so far behind from a technology standpoint. US monopolies have been protected, and other countries adoption of China technology will only continue to accelerate unless US policy changes to force US companies to innovate instead of being protected.

no, i understood that it was a joke.

but i feel compelled to ask: exactly which US companies offer mobile infrastructure? 

and because i'm not trying to be a dick, i know that the answer is zero, unless you want to count tiny cisco market share. we have no home grown infrastructure, and, as you point out, we are (probably rightfully) elbowing chinese vendors out of our market. 

5G is supposed to solve all the problems. i understand that. but i'd rather focus more resource on rural broadband than i would on 5G upgrades. my 4G works pretty well. meanwhile, my mom has trouble checking her email. but i understand that the economics of urban 5G are more enticing to the at&ts of the world than rural broadband. and from a business perspective, it makes perfect sense.

[Eggo 3977]

Just now, jimmyjazz said:

I get the arguments.  I've made them.  He understands the rationale.  His bottom line is that abortion is wrong and he can't abide it.  

I find it highly unlikely that everyone bitching me out on this has no friends or family members with whom they fundamentally disagree on a key issue.  Whatever.  The real world is complicated -- some of you might consider joining up at some point.

I think has more to do with Internet tough guys claiming some sort of homogenous social circle while posting on a forum than any real life occurrence. If I had a friend constantly trying to get me to picket Planned Parenthood, I'd probably stop being friends with them. Your friend doesn't sound that abrasive. 

[Longhorn94 2448]

1 hour ago, Loco said:

Great, your "friend" is a single issue voter?  (aka simpleton)    How does your friend feel about robust sex education starting in 5th grade?  How about universal free pre-k?  How about access to condoms and family planning?

What your "friend" doesn't get (or doesn't want to get) is that no one wants more abortions...  no one.   The GOP has defunded and attacked PROVEN teen pregnancy prevention strategies because it's not their religiously base Abstinence Only policy.   They are willing to let others suffer in ignorance and poverty because of their own beliefs.

Your "friend" is likely not very informed or willfully ignorant of the many of issues surrounding and shaping their "single issue"

Challenge your "friend" to understand the drivers of unwanted pregnancy and attack those with equal vigor.

its almost as if they want more teens to get pregnant so there will be more abortions...

[hayden_horn 11362]

6 minutes ago, shnsajax said:

 

Any mention of the coast guard from yesterday?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

and you know why this is. 

it's because that the president WANTS to stoke the violent edges of society. i've never seen anything like it.

[SimonBolivar 10958]

4 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

  The real world is complicated -- some of you might consider joining up at some point.

I thought you said your friend was Catholic?

[David Dennison 18860]

6 minutes ago, lemonlime said:

FFS.  He's now said more about some stupid hoax, than about pipe bombs being sent to two ex-presidents, George Soros, and news organizations.

He knows his audience. It is comprised largely of white people who feel like they are victims of social forces they claim not to understand. It's a form of collective denial and ignorance that seeks to wash away any guilt associated with history.

[Brisketexan 105139]

2 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

and you know why this is. 

it's because that the president WANTS to stoke the violent edges of society. i've never seen anything like it.

This.  The CG terrorist is Trumpworld functioning as desired.  Why would he condemn something that's going according to his desires?

[Eggo 3977]

3 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

no, i understood that it was a joke.

but i feel compelled to ask: exactly which US companies offer mobile infrastructure? 

and because i'm not trying to be a dick, i know that the answer is zero, unless you want to count tiny cisco market share. we have no home grown infrastructure, and, as you point out, we are (probably rightfully) elbowing chinese vendors out of our market. 

5G is supposed to solve all the problems. i understand that. but i'd rather focus more resource on rural broadband than i would on 5G upgrades. my 4G works pretty well. meanwhile, my mom has trouble checking her email. but i understand that the economics of urban 5G are more enticing to the at&ts of the world than rural broadband. and from a business perspective, it makes perfect sense.

For what it's worth, 6G technology uses satellites to enhance global coverage. Rather than invest billions trying to push older tech to sparser population areas, wait for the new tech. 

[tucker 238]

3 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

no, i understood that it was a joke.

but i feel compelled to ask: exactly which US companies offer mobile infrastructure? 

and because i'm not trying to be a dick, i know that the answer is zero, unless you want to count tiny cisco market share. we have no home grown infrastructure, and, as you point out, we are (probably rightfully) elbowing chinese vendors out of our market. 

5G is supposed to solve all the problems. i understand that. but i'd rather focus more resource on rural broadband than i would on 5G upgrades. my 4G works pretty well. meanwhile, my mom has trouble checking her email. but i understand that the economics of urban 5G are more enticing to the at&ts of the world than rural broadband. and from a business perspective, it makes perfect sense.

Fuck rural America. Innovation requires adequate infrastructure and the US continues to fall behind. We could try to innovate to make the geographic issues for rural America less cost prohibitive but no company is going to invest in that R&D because the economics for return aren't there which means government funds. The next wave of innovation requires 5G and other upgrades so the lack of in major cities means that the US will fall further behind in technology, because we won't have the domestic market for it.  

[jimmyjazz 45953]

9 minutes ago, SimonBolivar said:

I thought you said your friend was Catholic?

That actually made me laugh.

[Born to Run 6569]

This shaped my political thinking in my formative years and led to my falling in line with other Reaganesqe ideas of the time.  The "party" lost me at the tail end of the Bush II administration due to the Gulf war shenanigans and the increase in commodities prices.  But that also gave me pause to think about what was going on with abortion, which I am still opposed to.  It was for me, as you say, realizing that republicans "did not give a shit" about it, but only used it as a political wedge while never adequately addressing issues that could minimize its use indirectly.  For me, in a perfect world, abortion would be legal up to a certain time, but almost no one would take that option because the stigma would be removed, a support system would be in place for the newborn and parents, the preventive measures in place would keep the conception from occurring, and people would be  generally excluding it as an option, not because of shame or sin or punishment from god, but because it is counter to  our natural drive to procreate.  Then at the end of the day if someone wanted to go ahead with the procedure, then that would be their decision and if there were any supernatural consequences , that would be between them and their creator/higher power. and I would be left out of it. 

Well said. I can’t think of one Conservative that has ever done anything to reduce abortions other than vote to court stack and protest people who’ve already made the decision. They don’t work in the community, adopt, or press issues forward that might actually reduce the “need” for abortions. They don’t even discuss it. It’s a wedge that gave us Trump.

There was a conservative on NPR that went through all the reasons he was critical of Trump - policy, morality etc. He was against Most everything he’s done. Basically he will support Trump because abortion. That’s it.

[4th&Five 41552]

 

[High Plains Drifter 11049]

15 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

We were here first!

 

Serious answer: We aren't traitors.

[Yuk 1532]

14 minutes ago, Born to Run said:

 

Well said. I can’t think of one Conservative that has ever done anything to reduce abortions other than vote to court stack and protest people who’ve already made the decision. They don’t work in the community, adopt, or press issues forward that might actually reduce the “need” for abortions. They don’t even discuss it. It’s a wedge that gave us Trump.

There was a conservative on NPR that went through all the reasons he was critical of Trump - policy, morality etc. He was against Most everything he’s done. Basically he will support Trump because abortion. That’s it.

 

The abortion issue is largely virtue signaling.  If you had an anti-abortion, centrist Democrat on the ballot against a pro-choice Republican, you know they'd still vote Republican.  It's almost as if being a Republican is more about cultural identity than specific policy.  Who would've guessed?

[Jiggy-Z 3432]

5 minutes ago, Born to Run said:

 

Well said. I can’t think of one Conservative that has ever done anything to reduce abortions other than vote to court stack and protest people who’ve already made the decision. They don’t work in the community, adopt, or press issues forward that might actually reduce the “need” for abortions. They don’t even discuss it. It’s a wedge that gave us Trump.

There was a conservative on NPR that went through all the reasons he was critical of Trump - policy, morality etc. He was against Most everything he’s done. Basically he will support Trump because abortion. That’s it.

 

Yes, and the irony is that all of that other stuff is the low hanging fruit of protecting the unborn, the newly born, the mothers, and believe it or not the fathers.  Certainly easier than stacking the court and hoping for a reversal of Roe v. Wade.  Not only does it take a long time, judges can change their views, and in the meantime you end up potentially trashing the constitution on other issues that may end up costing more lives.

Growing up and well into my 20s and 30s, my immediate family and an aunt or uncle or two and their families would regularly protest abortion clinics.  I guess that is OK for drawing attention to the cause, but by then it just ends up shaming and turning off potential "rescues" as well as kind of being reactionary and too little too late.  Their heart is in the right place but it is just not effective.  Really about as effective as hoping to turn the SCOTUS on Roe v. Wade.  46 years and counting.  If it were going to be done, it would be done by now.

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3861]

This board re abortion:

"Single issue voters are not actually single issue voters.  They are pretending they are single issue voters in order to vote for other things.  You switch that single issue to the other party, and they wouldn't switch votes"

and

"Politicians pretend they care about this single issue because they know they will get all the single issue voters who will absolutely vote for whoever favors this single issue."

[Brisketexan 105139]

12 minutes ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

This board re abortion:

"Single issue voters are not actually single issue voters.  They are pretending they are single issue voters in order to vote for other things.  You switch that single issue to the other party, and they wouldn't switch votes"

and

"Politicians pretend they care about this single issue because they know they will get all the single issue voters who will absolutely vote for whoever favors this single issue."

A couple things: first, both things can be and are true, depending on the voter.  As to your first statement, I don't think that many of those voters are pretending.  They don't realize what they're doing.  If you switched that issue to the other party, they'd be confused AF, and they'd have a hard time figuring out what to do.  The typical angry/scared GOP voter....what would they do if their choice was a platform of "pro-choice, anti-immigrant, pro-cop and draconian criminal laws, love tax cuts, oppose single payer healthcare because socialism" vs. "pro-life, pro humane immigration policy, pro strong legal protections against police and criminal law abuses, pro social spending, pro single payer healthcare?"  Seriously, there'd be a lot of brainlock.

And second.....EXCEPT among those folks who really ARE single-issue voters.....they'd follow the abortion issue to wherever it ended up living.  It would be a fascinating social experiment.

But it came about because of a chicken-and-the-egg history -- with respect to these issues, the parties weren't always as entrenched in their positions as they are today.  And voters evolved along with them.  Some bailed on the party as it changed, others went along for the ride and became more strident in their beliefs.

Edited February 21, 2019 by Brisketexan

[Yuk 1532]

7 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

A couple things: first, both things can be and are true, depending on the voter.  As to your first statement, I don't think that many of those voters are pretending.  They don't realize what they're doing.  If you switched that issue to the other party, they'd be confused AF, and they'd have a hard time figuring out what to do.  The typical angry/scared GOP voter....what would they do if their choice was a platform of "pro-choice, anti-immigrant, pro-cop and draconian criminal laws, love tax cuts, oppose single payer healthcare because socialism" vs. "pro-life, pro humane immigration policy, pro strong legal protections against police and criminal law abuses, pro social spending, pro single payer healthcare?"  Seriously, there'd be a lot of brainlock.

And second.....EXCEPT among those folks who really ARE single-issue voters.....they'd follow the abortion issue to wherever it ended up living.  It would be a fascinating social experiment.

But it came about because of a chicken-and-the-egg history -- with respect to these issues, the parties weren't always as entrenched in their positions as they are today.  And voters evolved along with them.  Some bailed on the party as it changed, others went along for the ride and became more strident in their beliefs.

See Civil Rights Act of 1964 for subsequent southern realignment.

[Longhorn94 2448]

12 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

A couple things: first, both things can be and are true, depending on the voter.  As to your first statement, I don't think that many of those voters are pretending.  They don't realize what they're doing.  If you switched that issue to the other party, they'd be confused AF, and they'd have a hard time figuring out what to do.  The typical angry/scared GOP voter....what would they do if their choice was a platform of "pro-choice, anti-immigrant, pro-cop and draconian criminal laws, love tax cuts, oppose single payer healthcare because socialism" vs. "pro-life, pro humane immigration policy, pro strong legal protections against police and criminal law abuses, pro social spending, pro single payer healthcare?"  Seriously, there'd be a lot of brainlock.

And second.....EXCEPT among those folks who really ARE single-issue voters.....they'd follow the abortion issue to wherever it ended up living.  It would be a fascinating social experiment.

But it came about because of a chicken-and-the-egg history -- with respect to these issues, the parties weren't always as entrenched in their positions as they are today.  And voters evolved along with them.  Some bailed on the party as it changed, others went along for the ride and became more strident in their beliefs.

when you say "pro cop" are you referring to the jack booted federal thugs that go after those innocent politicians and white collar "criminals"? or the nice local police officers that keep the browns and blacks in line? i need to know before i make my choice.