MikeL wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In order to win the republican nomination, a candidate need to represent the views of its many constituencies:

Racists/Misogynysts/Homophobes/Xenophobes/Isolationists/Libertarians/Teabaggers

Crime Hardasses Only for the Poor and Minorities

Evangelicals/Pro-Life Doctor Murderers/Abstinance Promulgators/Vaginal Probers/Fundamentalist Science Deniers

Plutocrats/Corporate Welfare Queens/Free Market Advocates/Polluters

Fiscal Hawks/Tax Cutters/Small Government Advocates

Warmongers/Mass Murderers/Gun Huggers

Did I miss any?

How about these:
- militia men - racists - xenophobes – birthers - klan members
- Confederate reenacters - middle school dropouts - rednecks
- draft dodging war mongers - seniors on 'social' security who hate 'social'ism
- lovers of unfettered capitalism on food stamps - closeted homophobes
- morons - Sean Hanninazis - gun clutchers - white seperatists - goldbugs
- paranoid homeschoolers - Limbaugh dittoheads - minute men
- tongues chanting snake handlers - bible bangers who like to watch lesbian bondage
- flat earthers - ruby ridge secessionists - greedy pricks - Sarah's theocratic Paliban
- bored retirees who long for the days of white only water fountains
- global warming deniers – survivalists - faux news $h!t kickers - neofascists
- Ayn Randians born on 3rd base who think they hit a triple - creationists
- wingnut yokels – reactionaries - neocon chickenhawks - GlennBeck bots
- John Birchers - red baiters
- and illiterate goobers who think Jesus rode on the back of a triceratops

Anonymous wrote:In order to win the republican nomination, a candidate need to represent the views of its many constituencies:

Racists/Misogynysts/Homophobes/Xenophobes/Isolationists/Libertarians/Teabaggers

Crime Hardasses Only for the Poor and Minorities

Evangelicals/Pro-Life Doctor Murderers/Abstinance Promulgators/Vaginal Probers/Fundamentalist Science Deniers

Plutocrats/Corporate Welfare Queens/Free Market Advocates/Polluters

Fiscal Hawks/Tax Cutters/Small Government Advocates

Warmongers/Mass Murderers/Gun Huggers

Did I miss any?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In order to win the republican nomination, a candidate need to represent the views of its many constituencies:

Racists/Misogynysts/Homophobes/Xenophobes/Isolationists/Libertarians/Teabaggers

Crime Hardasses Only for the Poor and Minorities

Evangelicals/Pro-Life Doctor Murderers/Abstinance Promulgators/Vaginal Probers/Fundamentalist Science Deniers

Plutocrats/Corporate Welfare Queens/Free Market Advocates/Polluters

Fiscal Hawks/Tax Cutters/Small Government Advocates

Warmongers/Mass Murderers/Gun Huggers

Did I miss any?

another "tolerant" leftist, I see

Why would anyone tolerate that?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hate filled folks are the republicans in OP's post.

You need to get working on that research paper on which you have been procrastinating. Your teacher is expecting it after spring break.

Abstract: Disputes between those holding differing political views are ubiquitous and deep-seated, and they often follow common, recognizable lines. The supporters of tradition and stability, sometimes referred to as conservatives, do battle with the supporters of innovation and reform, sometimes referred to as liberals. Understanding the correlates of those distinct political orientations is probably a prerequisite for managing political disputes, which are a source of social conflict that can lead to frustration and even bloodshed. A rapidly growing body of empirical evidence documents a multitude of ways in which liberals and conservatives differ from each other in purviews of life with little direct connection to politics, from tastes in art to desire for closure and from disgust sensitivity to the tendency to pursue new information, but the central theme of the differences is a matter of debate. In this article, we argue that one organizing element of the many differences between liberals and conservatives is the nature of their physiological and psychological responses to features of the environment that are negative. Compared with liberals, conservatives tend to register greater physiological responses to such stimuli and also to devote more psychological resources to them. Operating from this point of departure, we suggest approaches for refining understanding of the broad relationship between political views and response to the negative. We conclude with a discussion of normative implications, stressing that identifying differences across ideological groups is not tantamount to declaring one ideology superior to another.

Anonymous wrote:Hate filled folks are the republicans in OP's post.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What exactly do you guys get out of these anti-Republican two-minute-hate rituals?

It's not "us guys". It's one poster.

Evidently, a very angry, hate-filled poster.
Wonder how many true friends this person has.
Probably not many.

Anonymous wrote:This thread is a sad example of the state of politics in this country.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Add: Welfare-recipient farmers who support ag-gag, decry all government, and receive close to 100% of their feed, water, and capital liquidity from the Government.

Of course, there are dramatic overlaps among all the indicated groups. But since self-identified Democrats typically don't vote ...

President Obama was elected to lead the United States twice. Since democrats don't vote, was he elected by republicans?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In order to win the republican nomination, a candidate need to represent the views of its many constituencies:

Racists/Misogynysts/Homophobes/Xenophobes/Isolationists/Libertarians/Teabaggers

Crime Hardasses Only for the Poor and Minorities

Evangelicals/Pro-Life Doctor Murderers/Abstinance Promulgators/Vaginal Probers/Fundamentalist Science Deniers

Plutocrats/Corporate Welfare Queens/Free Market Advocates/Polluters

Fiscal Hawks/Tax Cutters/Small Government Advocates

Warmongers/Mass Murderers/Gun Huggers

Did I miss any?

another "tolerant" leftist, I see

Anonymous wrote:In order to win the republican nomination, a candidate need to represent the views of its many constituencies:

Racists/Misogynysts/Homophobes/Xenophobes/Isolationists/Libertarians/Teabaggers

Crime Hardasses Only for the Poor and Minorities

Evangelicals/Pro-Life Doctor Murderers/Abstinance Promulgators/Vaginal Probers/Fundamentalist Science Deniers

Plutocrats/Corporate Welfare Queens/Free Market Advocates/Polluters

Fiscal Hawks/Tax Cutters/Small Government Advocates

Warmongers/Mass Murderers/Gun Huggers

Did I miss any?

Anonymous wrote:

Racists/Misogynysts/Homophobes/Xenophobes/Isolationists/Libertarians/Teabaggers

Crime Hardasses Only for the Poor and Minorities

Evangelicals/Pro-Life Doctor Murderers/Abstinance Promulgators/Vaginal Probers/Fundamentalist Science Deniers

Plutocrats/Corporate Welfare Queens/Free Market Advocates/Polluters

Fiscal Hawks/Tax Cutters/Small Government Advocates

Warmongers/Mass Murderers/Gun Huggers

Funny how these viewpoints make up the totality of republican policy.

Decency is MIA in the gop.

Gay discrimination law anybody?

Anonymous wrote:

Racists/Misogynysts/Homophobes/Xenophobes/Isolationists/Libertarians/Teabaggers

Crime Hardasses Only for the Poor and Minorities

Evangelicals/Pro-Life Doctor Murderers/Abstinance Promulgators/Vaginal Probers/Fundamentalist Science Deniers

Plutocrats/Corporate Welfare Queens/Free Market Advocates/Polluters

Fiscal Hawks/Tax Cutters/Small Government Advocates

Warmongers/Mass Murderers/Gun Huggers

Funny how these viewpoints make up the totality of republican policy.

Decency is MIA in the gop.

Gay discrimination law anybody?