Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Liz Cheney Is Begging Democrats To Save Her Career In Upcoming Wyoming Primary

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
    So then why is she insisting on humiliating herself by getting turned out by her own party by what looks to be a 30 to 45 point wipeout?

    This would have been the time to announce your retirement.
    I'm not saying her decision is smart, but it is rational, provided that the end goal is trying to win the election you are far behind in.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by CivilDiscourse View Post

      I'm not saying her decision is smart, but it is rational, provided that the end goal is trying to win the election you are far behind in.
      Wait. Rational is now defined as continuing to do what has driving your support away because you need to get more of their support to win? How does that make a lick of sense?

      I'm always still in trouble again

      "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
      "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
      "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
        Wait. Rational is now defined as continuing to do what has driving your support away because you need to get more of their support to win? How does that make a lick of sense?
        Rational is a step taken that you believe will help you achieve your end goal. It doesn't mean it is correct, but makes sense...from a certain point of view.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by CivilDiscourse View Post

          Rational is a step taken that you believe will help you achieve your end goal. It doesn't mean it is correct, but makes sense...from a certain point of view.
          So just deluded.

          I'm always still in trouble again

          "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
          "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
          "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by rogue06 View Post

            So just deluded.
            No.

            Let's say that I want to buy a playstation5. I go out and donate blood, pick up scrap, and earn the money. That are all rational steps to take to earn money to meet my end goal of earning $500 to buy the game console.

            However, my family is also struggling. We have trouble putting food on the table. When looked at from that perspective, all that work to buy a game console that doesn't feed my family is irrational. However, that doesn't change the fact that to meet my endgoal of buying a playstation, the actions that I took were not rational. It just means that my priorities are out of whack.

            Cheyney has hurt her chances to win the republican primary and keep her seat. That is now a fact. If she were to switch parties to Democrats, her chances of winning become practically nil. So, she's got the choice of either bowing out (which doesn't win re-election), Try to appeal to republicans only (with who she is deeply unpopular due to her anti-trump actions), or try to get enough democrats to "switch parties" and vote in the republican primary to make up for the lost support from republicans, knowing that by doing so, she'll likely erode away more. Her best, most rational option, to meet her goal of winning, is to go with the last option, and hope she can win more democratic votes than lost Republican ones, and squeak out a win. It's a long shot, but it makes sense given that you know she wants to win the election, and is already in serious danger of failing to do that.

            (All of this "rational" goes back to economics:
            Rational choice theory can apply to a variety of areas, including economics, psychology and philosophy. This theory states that individuals use their self-interests to make choices that will provide them with the greatest benefit. People weigh their options and make the choice they think will serve them best.)

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by CivilDiscourse View Post

              No.

              Let's say that I want to buy a playstation5. I go out and donate blood, pick up scrap, and earn the money. That are all rational steps to take to earn money to meet my end goal of earning $500 to buy the game console.

              However, my family is also struggling. We have trouble putting food on the table. When looked at from that perspective, all that work to buy a game console that doesn't feed my family is irrational. However, that doesn't change the fact that to meet my endgoal of buying a playstation, the actions that I took were not rational. It just means that my priorities are out of whack.

              Cheyney has hurt her chances to win the republican primary and keep her seat. That is now a fact. If she were to switch parties to Democrats, her chances of winning become practically nil. So, she's got the choice of either bowing out (which doesn't win re-election), Try to appeal to republicans only (with who she is deeply unpopular due to her anti-trump actions), or try to get enough democrats to "switch parties" and vote in the republican primary to make up for the lost support from republicans, knowing that by doing so, she'll likely erode away more. Her best, most rational option, to meet her goal of winning, is to go with the last option, and hope she can win more democratic votes than lost Republican ones, and squeak out a win. It's a long shot, but it makes sense given that you know she wants to win the election, and is already in serious danger of failing to do that.

              (All of this "rational" goes back to economics:
              Rational choice theory can apply to a variety of areas, including economics, psychology and philosophy. This theory states that individuals use their self-interests to make choices that will provide them with the greatest benefit. People weigh their options and make the choice they think will serve them best.)
              In February she was already down 30 points

              She wants to be re-elected

              So she doubles down on the behavior that caused her to be down by 30 points hoping it will lead to victory.

              As i said, deluded.

              I'm always still in trouble again

              "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
              "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
              "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

              Comment


              • #22
                The only difference between Liz Cheney and a road apple is how they are spelled.
                "You should just assume going forward that if I am ever wrong it is a typo" - Backup
                "
                Reality simply does not change based upon consensus or desire." - rogue

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Sparko View Post

                  Then why do they keep voting her in? Her being a RINO has been going on for many years.
                  I don't think she was a RINO before Trump changed the meaning of "Republican".

                  https://www.thebulwark.com/what-make...blican-a-rino/

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Stoic View Post

                    I don't think she was a RINO before Trump changed the meaning of "Republican".

                    https://www.thebulwark.com/what-make...blican-a-rino/
                    She's never been a conservative. Just a carpetbagger riding on her father's name, who wants the US to play perpetual 'world cop' and wanted to see the Afghanistan occupation last forever.

                    https://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/31/u...ouse-seat.html
                    "You should just assume going forward that if I am ever wrong it is a typo" - Backup
                    "
                    Reality simply does not change based upon consensus or desire." - rogue

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Ronson View Post

                      She's never been a conservative.
                      The substantive positions for which Trump praised Hageman—on oil drilling, guns, crime, and border enforcement—were no different from Cheney’s. In fact, according to the American Conservative Union, Cheney’s voting record is far more conservative than the record of Rep. Elise Stefanik, who, at Trump’s behest, replaced her last year as chair of the House Republican Conference.

                      In his speech, Trump called Cheney a “lapdog” for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. But that accusation, too, is bogus: Cheney has voted against Pelosi’s positions more consistently than have the top three officials in the House Republican Conference.


                      Just a carpetbagger riding on her father's name,
                      Fair enough.

                      who wants the US to play perpetual 'world cop' and wanted to see the Afghanistan occupation last forever.
                      Just like the Republican Party before Trump.

                      In Wyoming, Trump excoriated Cheney and Sen. Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania—another “RINO,” according to the former president—on three issues. One was the use of military force. Trump called Cheney and her father “globalists and warmongers.” He condemned the American wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and complained that Liz Cheney had “voted no on bringing our troops back home from Syria.”

                      You can disagree with Cheney or her father about their positions on these conflicts. But you can’t argue that Trump’s position, compared to theirs, is more “Republican.” For 15 years, Afghanistan, Iraq, and the global struggle against terrorism defined the GOP. The 2012 Republican platform—the last platform before Trump seized control of the party—resolved to “employ the full range of military and intelligence options to defeat Al Qaeda and its affiliates.” The platform opposed troop withdrawals from Afghanistan and pledged that “future decisions by a Republican President will never subordinate military necessity to domestic politics or an artificial timetable.”

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Stoic View Post

                        The substantive positions for which Trump praised Hageman—on oil drilling, guns, crime, and border enforcement—were no different from Cheney’s. In fact, according to the American Conservative Union, Cheney’s voting record is far more conservative than the record of Rep. Elise Stefanik, who, at Trump’s behest, replaced her last year as chair of the House Republican Conference.

                        In his speech, Trump called Cheney a “lapdog” for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. But that accusation, too, is bogus: Cheney has voted against Pelosi’s positions more consistently than have the top three officials in the House Republican Conference.


                        Fair enough.

                        Just like the Republican Party before Trump.
                        The Republican RINO party before Trump. Many Republicans (AFAIK) were against these recent incursions. Before switching to Libertarian in 1994 - in part because of the Iraq War - I and many others were anti-militaristic. Rand Paul has been a vocal one.

                        In Wyoming, Trump excoriated Cheney and Sen. Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania—another “RINO,” according to the former president—on three issues. One was the use of military force. Trump called Cheney and her father “globalists and warmongers.” He condemned the American wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and complained that Liz Cheney had “voted no on bringing our troops back home from Syria.”

                        You can disagree with Cheney or her father about their positions on these conflicts. But you can’t argue that Trump’s position, compared to theirs, is more “Republican.” For 15 years, Afghanistan, Iraq, and the global struggle against terrorism defined the GOP. The 2012 Republican platform—the last platform before Trump seized control of the party—resolved to “employ the full range of military and intelligence options to defeat Al Qaeda and its affiliates.” The platform opposed troop withdrawals from Afghanistan and pledged that “future decisions by a Republican President will never subordinate military necessity to domestic politics or an artificial timetable.”
                        I can't argue too deeply on this because I'm not a Republican and I don't have my finger in their pulse, so to speak. But Liz Cheney is a turncoat that is only being embraced by Democrats because of her Trump stance. She should realize she's only being used, and will be quickly discarded if she doesn't change parties.
                        "You should just assume going forward that if I am ever wrong it is a typo" - Backup
                        "
                        Reality simply does not change based upon consensus or desire." - rogue

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Ronson View Post
                          .....
                          I can't argue too deeply on this because I'm not a Republican and I don't have my finger in their pulse, so to speak. But Liz Cheney is a turncoat that is only being embraced by Democrats because of her Trump stance. She should realize she's only being used, and will be quickly discarded if he doesn't change parties.
                          EGGzackly! The only GOOD Republican to the media is a backstabbing Republican.

                          The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Ronson View Post

                            The Republican RINO party before Trump. Many Republicans (AFAIK) were against these recent incursions. Before switching to Libertarian in 1994 - in part because of the Iraq War - I and many others were anti-militaristic. Rand Paul has been a vocal one.
                            You can't really have the majority of the Republican Party be RINOs. Cheney was not a RINO before Trump, because she was in the majority.

                            I can't argue too deeply on this because I'm not a Republican and I don't have my finger in their pulse, so to speak. But Liz Cheney is a turncoat that is only being embraced by Democrats because of her Trump stance. She should realize she's only being used, and will be quickly discarded if she doesn't change parties.
                            It appears that your definition of RINO is something like, "Someone who claims to be Republican, but puts country ahead of party."

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by rogue06 View Post

                              In February she was already down 30 points

                              She wants to be re-elected

                              So she doubles down on the behavior that caused her to be down by 30 points hoping it will lead to victory.

                              As i said, deluded.
                              Neocons lost their mind when the American public insulted them by electing Trump. I half expect Liz Cheney to show up at Mar-A-Lago wearing a suicide vest and detonating herself shouting "Jeb Akbar" if she loses.



                              (free amen for first person to correctly guess what original picture is from)
                              "As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths." Isaiah 3:12

                              There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Stoic View Post
                                You can't really have the majority of the Republican Party be RINOs. Cheney was not a RINO before Trump, because she was in the majority.

                                It appears that your definition of RINO is something like, "Someone who claims to be Republican, but puts country ahead of party."
                                It depends on what the party claims it stands for. My understanding was that they would be low taxes, states rights, weak federal government, non interventionist (militarily), and certainly not globalistic. It didn't matter about the majority or minority of the candidates running for office or where they stood. But my world view is much more libertarian than Republican so maybe I have the wrong read. But one thing I know for certain, Liz Cheney sidling up to Democrats is going to end her career - unless she ends up switching parties.
                                "You should just assume going forward that if I am ever wrong it is a typo" - Backup
                                "
                                Reality simply does not change based upon consensus or desire." - rogue

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by Gondwanaland, Yesterday, 05:22 PM
                                2 responses
                                28 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post CivilDiscourse  
                                Started by CivilDiscourse, Yesterday, 03:37 PM
                                4 responses
                                36 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post CivilDiscourse  
                                Started by Gondwanaland, 09-28-2022, 08:05 PM
                                30 responses
                                175 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post CivilDiscourse  
                                Started by Cow Poke, 09-28-2022, 02:14 PM
                                16 responses
                                79 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Cow Poke  
                                Started by Sparko, 09-28-2022, 01:35 PM
                                10 responses
                                65 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Working...
                                X