Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
Republicans

Journal damn_registrars's Journal: Has the GOP signed their own death warrant? 35

Journal by damn_registrars
The US House just voted in the affirmative on possibly the most lop-sided tax bill in the history of our country. The US Senate is waiting to vote on it, and VP Pence is standing at the ready in case the vote comes down 50-50 and needs a tie-breaker.

However, the longer the contents of this monster are known the less the people like it. Normal US citizens are starting to realize that they will almost certainly get reamed on this deal while the wealthiest in our country will make off like bandits. Even Fox News viewers and GOP affiliated voters are starting to come to the light on just how awful this bill is. If the bill passes and becomes law, the voters will remember that the GOP passed this alone, without the slightest bit of an attempt to work with the other party. The GOP will then find themselves needing to answer to that in under 11 months when the mid-term elections come along.

Even if the GOP manages to rid itself of President Drumpf before then, they will still almost certainly have Pence around and the voters will remember how anxious he was to vote on the bill.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Has the GOP signed their own death warrant? More

Has the GOP signed their own death warrant?

Comments Filter:
  • After all, they've set up the popular stuff to sunset right in the middle of what will most likely be a Dem White House, so they haven't completely lost their touch.

  • Besides, what are they gonna do? Go crawling back to the democrats in another rerun of their bullshit? Yep, here we go again. The ant mill runs indefinitely... Congratulations on your victorious November next year... 2006 here we come! Or was that 1986? Who cares? Third time (in 30 years) a charm? Maybe we should move the elections to odd numbered years. What other option is there?

    So, let's say your democrats retake congress. You're going to tell me with a straight face that they will take any initiate to r

    • Maybe we should move the elections to odd numbered year

      Is that your latest initiative to encourage people to not vote? We already have voting numbers that are the laughing stock of most democracies. Do you believe that something magical will happen if we can drive participation below 20%?

      Of course not, the democrats' objective is gridlock

      How do you convince yourself of that? It's not like they've been invited to the discussion. If the "true conservatives" from the GOP weren't so worried about pleasing their owners they would take a stand against this bill for its lack of transparency and how it rapes our

      • Is that your latest initiative to encourage people to not vote?

        Still channeling Mr. Trump you are... Your own party does not need me to discourage people from voting. Their own banal corruption does that quite well, and you express your self denial of your own support for them with your little lies there, something to make you feel better. It's one of those *psychological* things. And you are simply being just as tribal as your average Trump supporter, lies and all.

        Clinton wasn't the only democrat to lose.

        • Clinton wasn't the only democrat to lose. A whole bunch of others went down with her, and we all know why.

          Down-ballot voting. A very large number of people went out to vote not for Trump but against Hillary. While they were in the booth they went ahead and voted against everyone who had a (D) after their name as well.

    • Go crawling back to the democrats in another rerun of their bullshit?

      Hmm, I was unaware that the Democrats had a history of wanting to simplify the tax code, wanted to help gut SS and Medicare/Medicaid, and had an insane hate boner for the estate tax. You learn something new every day!

      What other option is there?

      I don't know, but whining about odd-numbered election years is probably not it.

      You're going to tell me with a straight face that they will take any initiate to reverse this?

      Nah, th

      • Of course not, the democrats' objective is gridlock

        Wait, I thought it was pleasing Wall Street?

        It was something you mentioned just a little while back about having to settle. That is what they do best. Either way, they can do both. They do have to please their financiers, or it's back to the farm. Conspiracy? Only in your head. Since when is quid pro quo a conspiracy? In the real world, it's called business.

        The Dems won a +28 GOP state

        Yeah? So what? Very few people changed their votes. It just meant more democrat voters showed up despite the hopeless mediocrity of the candidate. His qualifications d

        • Sorry, I can't hear you over the sound of you pussing out because you don't even have the courage of your own convictions.
          • The courage of his own convictions? He works harder for his goal - of discouraging people from voting - than most for their own goals. Does he have a plan for what to do if he ever somehow drives voter participation below some threshold that he aspires to see? I very strongly doubt it. Even if voter turnout fell to single digits the results wold still get certified and we'd be stuck with whatever those people selected.

          • That because you confuse observation with advocacy. A very common practice for its power of distraction.

            • That because you confuse observation with advocacy.

              Tomayto, tomahto. Your observations are as shit as your advocacy. I say that not because they're made from unicorn farts, but because you abandon them so easily.

              • They are unbiased. Not that you would recognize such a thing.. Thus your response... All the confusion and contradictions, you create yourself.

                • They are unbiased.

                  Sure thing. So is actual shit, incidentally. So it turns out we're both right!

                  • So is actual shit, incidentally.

                    Well, you definitely outproduce me there. I can see why you're so anxious to offload it..

                    • Well, you definitely outproduce me there.

                      I'm cool with that. Still a better flaw than running away at the first sign of conflict, ya big puss.

                    • I never ran away. That's just another one of your fantasies. I can't force you to read what I wrote, but the answers to all of your questions are all there. It is you that runs away from them with all your hand waving and lame attempts to offend. You follow the template to a tee. After all, you have a narrative to defend, at all costs.

                    • I never ran away.

                      Sure you did. You claimed the Democrats weren't going to do a damn thing about this tax bill once in office, all while snarling about our "straight face." I went you one better and offered you a bet. You spent your next post without one mention of said bet or the certainty of the prediction that lay behind it. You then spent your remaining commenting time either avoiding the subject or going "Nu-huh, you ran away!"

                      You can call it whatever you want, it's a free country. I call it

                    • Well, I suppose I could offer up what t the dems did up during the Reagan (and Carter, and Bush II, and even during Obama)) years as proof of concept during even the most recent history (going back any further, and it's all George Wallace, etc), but you would just wave that off also. There's just no point of putting any effort into this. Heckling is all that's left to do. Going beyond that is a waste. So, *do what you wanna do* (that video wasn't so random as you like to think). And, to add further redundan

                    • Well, I suppose I could offer up

                      Uggghhh, what a weak dodge. Come on puss, don't puss out. The Dems aren't going to do shit once they're back in power, remember? Own it. You know you want to, you cowardly fuck.
                    • There is a huge difference between cowardice and intentional obstruction of legislation. Have the democrats squandered a large number of opportunities over the years for no obvious gain or logic? Certainly. Can you show why they did it? Certainly not.

                    • What is there to "dodge"?? I have not "dodged" anything. You are so strange... No, scratch that, you are so normal, protecting your dear leader, obsessed with superficial distractions. Once again you confirm you are a facsimile of the people you think you oppose.

                      The Dems aren't going to do shit once they're back in power

                      Damn right. They won't. I'll bet you a dollar. I'll even give 2 to 1 odds. You have nothing to prove they will. They serve the same money as the republicans. Or what? Did you already forget

                    • Can you show why they did it? Certainly not.

                      You certainly can! [opensecrets.org] At least you get a small glimpse of how things work in this business. It is indeed very logical, and they have gained a lot, and continue to do so, so you won't find any incentive for "change" there. Maybe, someday, you will recognize that they play a completely different game than you do.

                    • Can you show why they did it? Certainly not.

                      You certainly can! At least you get a small glimpse of how things work in this business.

                      Congratulations! You showed the existence of a web site, and that you apparently know enough HTML to make a link. I can do that too! [playboy.com]. Does the site actually show that the democrats actively worked to do nothing but obstruct attempts at passing legislation over all these decades, and that as you claim they had no agenda of their own? You certainly didn't make any effort to support that argument of yours by only linking to the front page of a site.

                    • I'll even give 2 to 1 odds.

                      Fantastic! What are we wagering?

                    • A dollar. Or didn't you see that up there either?

                    • No, it simply indicates who they serve. That would explain why they do the things they do. The rotating villain [urbandictionary.com] is just one of their methods. You are simply being obstinate, tribal even, in their defense, an appeal to authority perhaps. It is proof that your problem is not a political one. It is universal amongst all the fervent party fanbois such as yourself and my other friend there.

                    • Whaaaaat? Fucking puss. One measly dollar? Not to mention that by the time it comes due, fuck knows how much your currency is going have to have slid into the crapper. Guess you're not that confident then.

                    • It's a wager, not an investment. Have you mistaken me for someone who gives a damn? You follow the promises, I follow the money.

      • If ever there was a reason to upmoderate a comment in a JE, you likely just provided it there (although there won't be enough readers of this JE for it to matter if moderation is still about bringing more viewers to the best comments)

        • :-) Your tribalism precedes you

          • You like to use that word. At what point do you expect that it will start to mean what you want it to mean, rather than what it actually means? The actual meaning of it does not help your argument.

            • You, among others here, define it. And I would be disappointed if you didn't deny it. Your support for your team is irrational, animal, tribal, with no reason or logic aside from the primitive animal psychology issues. Yes (CS), the elephant is in the room, and it is you who doesn't want to see it, which leads you to intentionally misinterpret (lie) what was written by me because it doesn't suit your desired narrative. Or at the very least, think it doesn't apply to you. But actually you exemplify it, and h

Slashdot Top Deals

UNIX is hot. It's more than hot. It's steaming. It's quicksilver lightning with a laserbeam kicker. -- Michael Jay Tucker

Close