If you are moderate Dem, would you consider an establishment Republican in 2024? Why/why not

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. I’m a moderate Democrat who has voted Republican in the past, though not since the insane, Trumpist end of the party took power. I’d vote for a reasonable Republican but I don’t think there are any on the national scale now. De Santis seems too fascist to me.

I feel increasingly alienated from the Democrat party as well because of their wholesale embrace of misogyny. I expected that from Republicans but it hurts more from Democrats. I can’t vote Republican so long as their extremist, anti-choice wing remains in control, but I may just start sitting out of elections entirely depending on who is running.

I am also a mODerAte DeMOcraT

But seriously if you really think that banning abortion is equivalent to not liking the vibe of some Dems, then you really lack critical thinking skills, Ms mODerAte

You can’t gaslight me any more, my partisan friend. I just don’t buy what you are selling.

No kidding! And here I thought you were so persuadable, mODerAte DeMOcraT

[Anonymous]

Given that polling shows that QAnon wackjob Mike Lindell is the current leader for RNC Chair, there is no longer any such thing as "moderate" or "establishment" Republicans. The lunatics are in a plurality of control.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Given that polling shows that QAnon wackjob Mike Lindell is the current leader for RNC Chair, there is no longer any such thing as "moderate" or "establishment" Republicans. The lunatics are in a plurality of control.

+1
Every few weeks we’re treated to another “what [established, moderate, mainstream] Republicans do you support,” frequently the Democratic-voter focused variation featured on this thread. I don’t know if it’s new pps or if there are just one or two people who really believe that a sane Republican candidate could win enough Democratic votes and keep posting.

There are no establishment, moderate, sane or normal Republicans. They’re gone. Every last Republican who could be held up as a “moderate” has effectively co-signed the worst their party has done, meaning they’re no more moderate than the crazies. The GOP is dead. It’s a zombie party and will limp along for a while, but it’s done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m a lifelong, Occupy Wall Street type Democrat. By pre-2016 standards, I’m ultra, ultra liberal. Nonetheless, I’d definitely take a good look at any non-Trump Republican in 2024. We have two highly problematic, anti-American parties each of whom has taken terrible positions on different social issues. Ds are crazy on gender ideology. Rs are crazy on abortion. Neither party deserves any trust or loyalty.

Please, I'd love you to explain how some Democrats' feelings about gender are in any way parallel to Republicans literally banning abortion. I guess I missed the law that makes all kids have to transition, or something.

No longer content to pose as “MoDeRaTe DeMs,” republicans here have decided to go whole hog and pretend to be “Occupy Wall Street” types. Basically: ignore them.

Uh yeah. I'm a moderate Dem and absolutely loathed the whole occupy wall street types. I voted for Hogan in his last election and Moore in the latest. My wife and I would love a moderate Republican to come along that could tame the crazies. Hogan was fine and kept the worst tendencies of the Democratic legislature in check. If we had a Republican like Charlie Baker or perhaps Phil Scott, I imagine I'd carefully consider them. What's the commonality here? It's a Republican elected in a very blue state.

The problem is what positions do they take to tame the worst elements of the Republican Party? We don't need more tax cuts. We don't need massive deregulation. We don't need more defense spending. We need to protect abortion rights as well as the rights of minorities.

I'd love a functioning Republican Party that negotiated in good faith, was willing to compromise, and recognized that when they lose, Democrats are legitimate governing party. Unfortunately, every election cycle just tosses out whoever was most moderate in the primaries. If you want a moderate Republican (i.e., your Reagan Democrat in 80s), look to the Democratic Party. They need to fix gerrymandering and/or penalize the extremists. Unfortunately, until there are consistent consequences for elected Republican officials, I don't see things changing.

Also, just for recollection - OWS was a decade ago. I remember because I covered it as a journalist then. I don't even hear echoes of OWS today, let alone feeling as if it got started and took over forever.

The OWS people I know voted for Bernie and then for Trump. They’re not generally moderate Democrats IME.

I can totally see OWS people voting for Bernie, but any OWS people who actually voted for Trump are IMHO unhinged and have completely lost the plot.

There is overlap at the far left and the far right.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Given that polling shows that QAnon wackjob Mike Lindell is the current leader for RNC Chair, there is no longer any such thing as "moderate" or "establishment" Republicans. The lunatics are in a plurality of control.

+1
Every few weeks we’re treated to another “what [established, moderate, mainstream] Republicans do you support,” frequently the Democratic-voter focused variation featured on this thread. I don’t know if it’s new pps or if there are just one or two people who really believe that a sane Republican candidate could win enough Democratic votes and keep posting.

There are no establishment, moderate, sane or normal Republicans. They’re gone. Every last Republican who could be held up as a “moderate” has effectively co-signed the worst their party has done, meaning they’re no more moderate than the crazies. The GOP is dead. It’s a zombie party and will limp along for a while, but it’s done.

This right here. Which is why I will not vote for any Republican who is alive right now. Not even at the local level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m a lifelong, Occupy Wall Street type Democrat. By pre-2016 standards, I’m ultra, ultra liberal. Nonetheless, I’d definitely take a good look at any non-Trump Republican in 2024. We have two highly problematic, anti-American parties each of whom has taken terrible positions on different social issues. Ds are crazy on gender ideology. Rs are crazy on abortion. Neither party deserves any trust or loyalty.

Please, I'd love you to explain how some Democrats' feelings about gender are in any way parallel to Republicans literally banning abortion. I guess I missed the law that makes all kids have to transition, or something.

No longer content to pose as “MoDeRaTe DeMs,” republicans here have decided to go whole hog and pretend to be “Occupy Wall Street” types. Basically: ignore them.

Uh yeah. I'm a moderate Dem and absolutely loathed the whole occupy wall street types. I voted for Hogan in his last election and Moore in the latest. My wife and I would love a moderate Republican to come along that could tame the crazies. Hogan was fine and kept the worst tendencies of the Democratic legislature in check. If we had a Republican like Charlie Baker or perhaps Phil Scott, I imagine I'd carefully consider them. What's the commonality here? It's a Republican elected in a very blue state.

The problem is what positions do they take to tame the worst elements of the Republican Party? We don't need more tax cuts. We don't need massive deregulation. We don't need more defense spending. We need to protect abortion rights as well as the rights of minorities.

I'd love a functioning Republican Party that negotiated in good faith, was willing to compromise, and recognized that when they lose, Democrats are legitimate governing party. Unfortunately, every election cycle just tosses out whoever was most moderate in the primaries. If you want a moderate Republican (i.e., your Reagan Democrat in 80s), look to the Democratic Party. They need to fix gerrymandering and/or penalize the extremists. Unfortunately, until there are consistent consequences for elected Republican officials, I don't see things changing.

Also, just for recollection - OWS was a decade ago. I remember because I covered it as a journalist then. I don't even hear echoes of OWS today, let alone feeling as if it got started and took over forever.

The OWS people I know voted for Bernie and then for Trump. They’re not generally moderate Democrats IME.

I can totally see OWS people voting for Bernie, but any OWS people who actually voted for Trump are IMHO unhinged and have completely lost the plot.

Dp- yes and no. They wanted to burn it all down. Well nothing says the system should be destroyed quite like voting for Donald Trump.
Stupid? Sure. But I think people who were just voting for “change” in 2016 definitely gravitated to Trump.

+1 There was a whole narrative in 2016 that Trump understood “the swamp” because he had been profiting from it and that he was the only one who could fix it. It was complete BS but a lot of people swallowed it.

[Anonymous]

At this time, no. I was an R until 2016 when it was clear that Trump was the nominee. It was like my blinders were removed. I do feel like I don't belong to a party as Dems are too socially extreme for me on so many things.

That said, I'm a woman still in childbearing years but finished having children. I have four teenagers, two of which are girls. I don't feel that anyone should have a say in the personal lives of another. I've been through enough and am a Labor and Delivery nurse. The number of things that go wrong in pregnancy...people overlook it or are just ignorant. I live in a Red state and women will die because they are forced to wait until they are septic or nearly septic to receive necessary care. Full disclosure, I was 100% pro life just 12 years ago. Then it happened to me.

Unless you've been there, who are you to dictate what happens to my body? I'm a Christian and a nurse and my conscience is clear.

[Anonymous]

Ok, fair enough. Certainly do not condone anyone getting threats of violence/rape. And I work in the affordable housing space, so I can 100% appreciate that argument.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can you explain the misogyny and racism of the far left?

This is a genuine question, I promise.

This is a very complex topic, and I can’t give the subject nearly enough fair airtime here. Sometimes I think it is easier to talk about examples, so here are a few that come to mind:

Misogyny:
- I […]

The difference between the “far left” and the “far right” is that the “far left” is still far. It’s not mainstreamed, it’s a lot of people on twitter and in coffeehouses. The “far right” is the GOP. When you bOtH sIdEs complex topics into a flat plane, you’re doing a massive disservice to the actual issue. What you’re doing is effectively gaslighting. Horseshoe theory is real, but again: the “far right” is now the GOP; the same can’t be said of the far left and the Democrats.

And I actually hate a lot of the verbiage around trans issues. Nope, sorry, if a doctor refers to me, a pregnant woman, as a pregnant person, I will flipping hit the fan. But at least the doctors and medical scholars using those idiotic phrases (“chest feeding,” “menstruating person”) are trying to be expansive for the trans people who are maligned and frequently subject to violence. The Democratic Party is the only one trying to protect womens rights while the GOP wants us barefoot and pregnant, unable to make any decisions about our own lives.

Tl;dr: you’re flattening a complex issue in an attempt to… seem open minded? Be a political edge lord? The GOP is effed. Dead.

I am the one who said there's overlap in the far left and the far right, and I see it in a number of areas. Immigration is one, isolationism, reflexive anti-Israelism. There are others, too. Look what Tulsi Gabbard stands for an you'l'll find some of it.

I am fervently pro-trans rights and also bristle at the term "pregnant person" - I think some of these issues are complicated, socially and legally, and at least on the left we're doing our best to get to the most humane and fair place, while on the right it's just nasty regressive bigoted nonsense. Intent matters, I think.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:At this time, no. I was an R until 2016 when it was clear that Trump was the nominee. It was like my blinders were removed. I do feel like I don't belong to a party as Dems are too socially extreme for me on so many things.

That said, I'm a woman still in childbearing years but finished having children. I have four teenagers, two of which are girls. I don't feel that anyone should have a say in the personal lives of another. I've been through enough and am a Labor and Delivery nurse. The number of things that go wrong in pregnancy...people overlook it or are just ignorant. I live in a Red state and women will die because they are forced to wait until they are septic or nearly septic to receive necessary care. Full disclosure, I was 100% pro life just 12 years ago. Then it happened to me.

Unless you've been there, who are you to dictate what happens to my body? I'm a Christian and a nurse and my conscience is clear.

That should be the motto of Planned Parenthood. I was 100% pro life -- then it happened to me.

Also "I was 100% pro-2A -- then a lunatic shot up my kid's school."

So many Republicans have staunch opinions, until life happens to them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can you explain the misogyny and racism of the far left?

This is a genuine question, I promise.

This is a very complex topic, and I can’t give the subject nearly enough fair airtime here. Sometimes I think it is easier to talk about examples, so here are a few that come to mind:

Misogyny:
- I […]

The difference between the “far left” and the “far right” is that the “far left” is still far. It’s not mainstreamed, it’s a lot of people on twitter and in coffeehouses. The “far right” is the GOP. When you bOtH sIdEs complex topics into a flat plane, you’re doing a massive disservice to the actual issue. What you’re doing is effectively gaslighting. Horseshoe theory is real, but again: the “far right” is now the GOP; the same can’t be said of the far left and the Democrats.

And I actually hate a lot of the verbiage around trans issues. Nope, sorry, if a doctor refers to me, a pregnant woman, as a pregnant person, I will flipping hit the fan. But at least the doctors and medical scholars using those idiotic phrases (“chest feeding,” “menstruating person”) are trying to be expansive for the trans people who are maligned and frequently subject to violence. The Democratic Party is the only one trying to protect womens rights while the GOP wants us barefoot and pregnant, unable to make any decisions about our own lives.

Tl;dr: you’re flattening a complex issue in an attempt to… seem open minded? Be a political edge lord? The GOP is effed. Dead.

I am the one who said there's overlap in the far left and the far right, and I see it in a number of areas. Immigration is one, isolationism, reflexive anti-Israelism. There are others, too. Look what Tulsi Gabbard stands for an you'l'll find some of it.

I am fervently pro-trans rights and also bristle at the term "pregnant person" - I think some of these issues are complicated, socially and legally, and at least on the left we're doing our best to get to the most humane and fair place, while on the right it's just nasty regressive bigoted nonsense. Intent matters, I think.

See, I don’t think intent matters at all. The only thing that matters is actual outcome and actual results. To use a historical example discussed in this thread, progressives who promoted eugenics as recently as the 1930s and 40s certainly had what they considered good intent, but the actual outcome was horrific. Does it matter if someone who promoted eugenics did it because they genuinely thought they were making the world better? Of course not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can you explain the misogyny and racism of the far left?

This is a genuine question, I promise.

This is a very complex topic, and I can’t give the subject nearly enough fair airtime here. Sometimes I think it is easier to talk about examples, so here are a few that come to mind:

Misogyny:
- I […]

The difference between the “far left” and the “far right” is that the “far left” is still far. It’s not mainstreamed, it’s a lot of people on twitter and in coffeehouses. The “far right” is the GOP. When you bOtH sIdEs complex topics into a flat plane, you’re doing a massive disservice to the actual issue. What you’re doing is effectively gaslighting. Horseshoe theory is real, but again: the “far right” is now the GOP; the same can’t be said of the far left and the Democrats.

And I actually hate a lot of the verbiage around trans issues. Nope, sorry, if a doctor refers to me, a pregnant woman, as a pregnant person, I will flipping hit the fan. But at least the doctors and medical scholars using those idiotic phrases (“chest feeding,” “menstruating person”) are trying to be expansive for the trans people who are maligned and frequently subject to violence. The Democratic Party is the only one trying to protect womens rights while the GOP wants us barefoot and pregnant, unable to make any decisions about our own lives.

Tl;dr: you’re flattening a complex issue in an attempt to… seem open minded? Be a political edge lord? The GOP is effed. Dead.

I am the one who said there's overlap in the far left and the far right, and I see it in a number of areas. Immigration is one, isolationism, reflexive anti-Israelism. There are others, too. Look what Tulsi Gabbard stands for an you'l'll find some of it.

I am fervently pro-trans rights and also bristle at the term "pregnant person" - I think some of these issues are complicated, socially and legally, and at least on the left we're doing our best to get to the most humane and fair place, while on the right it's just nasty regressive bigoted nonsense. Intent matters, I think.

I'm a lifelong lesbian who's been in a committed relationship with the same woman for 30 years, and when we got married in 1998 I "bristled" at using the term "wife."

I don't anymore. Because I evolved.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can you explain the misogyny and racism of the far left?

This is a genuine question, I promise.

This is a very complex topic, and I can’t give the subject nearly enough fair airtime here. Sometimes I think it is easier to talk about examples, so here are a few that come to mind:

Misogyny:
- I […]

The difference between the “far left” and the “far right” is that the “far left” is still far. It’s not mainstreamed, it’s a lot of people on twitter and in coffeehouses. The “far right” is the GOP. When you bOtH sIdEs complex topics into a flat plane, you’re doing a massive disservice to the actual issue. What you’re doing is effectively gaslighting. Horseshoe theory is real, but again: the “far right” is now the GOP; the same can’t be said of the far left and the Democrats.

And I actually hate a lot of the verbiage around trans issues. Nope, sorry, if a doctor refers to me, a pregnant woman, as a pregnant person, I will flipping hit the fan. But at least the doctors and medical scholars using those idiotic phrases (“chest feeding,” “menstruating person”) are trying to be expansive for the trans people who are maligned and frequently subject to violence. The Democratic Party is the only one trying to protect womens rights while the GOP wants us barefoot and pregnant, unable to make any decisions about our own lives.

Tl;dr: you’re flattening a complex issue in an attempt to… seem open minded? Be a political edge lord? The GOP is effed. Dead.

I am the one who said there's overlap in the far left and the far right, and I see it in a number of areas. Immigration is one, isolationism, reflexive anti-Israelism. There are others, too. Look what Tulsi Gabbard stands for an you'l'll find some of it.

I am fervently pro-trans rights and also bristle at the term "pregnant person" - I think some of these issues are complicated, socially and legally, and at least on the left we're doing our best to get to the most humane and fair place, while on the right it's just nasty regressive bigoted nonsense. Intent matters, I think.

I'm a lifelong lesbian who's been in a committed relationship with the same woman for 30 years, and when we got married in 1998 I "bristled" at using the term "wife."

I don't anymore. Because I evolved.

Why did you bristle at the term?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can you explain the misogyny and racism of the far left?

This is a genuine question, I promise.

This is a very complex topic, and I can’t give the subject nearly enough fair airtime here. Sometimes I think it is easier to talk about examples, so here are a few that come to mind:

Misogyny:
- I […]

The difference between the “far left” and the “far right” is that the “far left” is still far. It’s not mainstreamed, it’s a lot of people on twitter and in coffeehouses. The “far right” is the GOP. When you bOtH sIdEs complex topics into a flat plane, you’re doing a massive disservice to the actual issue. What you’re doing is effectively gaslighting. Horseshoe theory is real, but again: the “far right” is now the GOP; the same can’t be said of the far left and the Democrats.

And I actually hate a lot of the verbiage around trans issues. Nope, sorry, if a doctor refers to me, a pregnant woman, as a pregnant person, I will flipping hit the fan. But at least the doctors and medical scholars using those idiotic phrases (“chest feeding,” “menstruating person”) are trying to be expansive for the trans people who are maligned and frequently subject to violence. The Democratic Party is the only one trying to protect womens rights while the GOP wants us barefoot and pregnant, unable to make any decisions about our own lives.

Tl;dr: you’re flattening a complex issue in an attempt to… seem open minded? Be a political edge lord? The GOP is effed. Dead.

I am the one who said there's overlap in the far left and the far right, and I see it in a number of areas. Immigration is one, isolationism, reflexive anti-Israelism. There are others, too. Look what Tulsi Gabbard stands for an you'l'll find some of it.

I am fervently pro-trans rights and also bristle at the term "pregnant person" - I think some of these issues are complicated, socially and legally, and at least on the left we're doing our best to get to the most humane and fair place, while on the right it's just nasty regressive bigoted nonsense. Intent matters, I think.

I'm a lifelong lesbian who's been in a committed relationship with the same woman for 30 years, and when we got married in 1998 I "bristled" at using the term "wife."

I don't anymore. Because I evolved.

Why did you bristle at the term?

Why bristle at how others identify themselves? Who cares?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can you explain the misogyny and racism of the far left?

This is a genuine question, I promise.

This is a very complex topic, and I can’t give the subject nearly enough fair airtime here. Sometimes I think it is easier to talk about examples, so here are a few that come to mind:

Misogyny:
- I […]

The difference between the “far left” and the “far right” is that the “far left” is still far. It’s not mainstreamed, it’s a lot of people on twitter and in coffeehouses. The “far right” is the GOP. When you bOtH sIdEs complex topics into a flat plane, you’re doing a massive disservice to the actual issue. What you’re doing is effectively gaslighting. Horseshoe theory is real, but again: the “far right” is now the GOP; the same can’t be said of the far left and the Democrats.

And I actually hate a lot of the verbiage around trans issues. Nope, sorry, if a doctor refers to me, a pregnant woman, as a pregnant person, I will flipping hit the fan. But at least the doctors and medical scholars using those idiotic phrases (“chest feeding,” “menstruating person”) are trying to be expansive for the trans people who are maligned and frequently subject to violence. The Democratic Party is the only one trying to protect womens rights while the GOP wants us barefoot and pregnant, unable to make any decisions about our own lives.

Tl;dr: you’re flattening a complex issue in an attempt to… seem open minded? Be a political edge lord? The GOP is effed. Dead.

I am the one who said there's overlap in the far left and the far right, and I see it in a number of areas. Immigration is one, isolationism, reflexive anti-Israelism. There are others, too. Look what Tulsi Gabbard stands for an you'l'll find some of it.

I am fervently pro-trans rights and also bristle at the term "pregnant person" - I think some of these issues are complicated, socially and legally, and at least on the left we're doing our best to get to the most humane and fair place, while on the right it's just nasty regressive bigoted nonsense. Intent matters, I think.

I'm a lifelong lesbian who's been in a committed relationship with the same woman for 30 years, and when we got married in 1998 I "bristled" at using the term "wife."

I don't anymore. Because I evolved.

Why did you bristle at the term?

Why bristle at how others identify themselves? Who cares?

So people should not care about Rachel Dolezal and Jessica Krug? Got it. That’s a colonialist take you can have, I guess.