Red Mosquito

If wishes were horses, huh.

One of the worst incumbent losers in history, but I'm sure the Bush era neocons will take back the Republican party any day/month/year/decade/century now.

The only base she has is the never trump crowd, which is why she went from 73% to 30%. Liberal media/Dems have played her up, but the left wouldn’t vote for her. She’s going nowhere.

In raw “professional politician” terms, being talked about as a potential presidential candidate is her best next step. There’s no local office she’s in danger of winning, and fundraising is largely driven by risk/potential.

Cheney’s politics make her a nonstarter with any voters but those most instinctively inclined towards conservatism, and 95% of voters inclined to conservatism are already spoken for.

Maybe she and someone like Flake or Sasse could run as a third party ticket in 2024, but it would be for no purpose other than to build a non-Republican conservative party infrastructure and finance arm.

Rob wrote:The only base she has is the never trump crowd, which is why she went from 73% to 30%. Liberal media/Dems have played her up, but the left wouldn’t vote for her. She’s going nowhere.

Certainly not in the Republican primary, they wouldn't!

Trump-backed R’s taking out more moderate R’s is really, really disappointing. Ugh.

There is nothing moderate about these people, you freaks. She's backed by some of the most powerful and evil people on the planet. People who literally kill large numbers of people for money.

I don't think winning elections anytime soon is really her goal. It's just about weakening Trump or waiting for an opening. I think they're just betting that once Trump dies, his cult will degrade enough that they can make the Republican party safe for the elite again. You know, like they've done with the democrats.

I’m not informed enough about Liz Cheney to agree or disagree.

I’m just disappointed that people still care about Trump so much.

As I post this on a Pearl Jam message board in the year 2022.

tragabigzanda wrote:She’ll run so she can get on a debate stage and call him out. She’s doing this from a sense of ideological purpose. Not very complicated.

The Great Task

Mickey wrote:

Rob wrote:The only base she has is the never trump crowd, which is why she went from 73% to 30%. Liberal media/Dems have played her up, but the left wouldn’t vote for her. She’s going nowhere.

Certainly not in the Republican primary, they wouldn't!

Yea. I meant they play her up now, but who would vote for her in a general? McP said it better, but she has no general election base that can take her anywhere. Not even sure she can play spoiler.

BurtReynolds wrote:There is nothing moderate about these people, you freaks. She's backed by some of the most powerful and evil people on the planet. People who literally kill large numbers of people for money.

Was Herrera Beutler also backed by these powerful and evil people? Was Peter Meijer? And Tom Rice? Were these oppressively powerful and evil people only backing a tight handful of Republican Representatives? A group too small to matter? Was this powerful, evil money also flowing to the various state level Republican incumbents who also got primaried by their party this month?

What specific ideological differences required all four of those Representatives to be targeted for removal? What were their key political differences from the rest of the party? Which Republican Party legislation ambitions did they reject, or which Democrat legislation ambitions did they uniquely support, that made their ejection so crucial?

McParadigm wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:There is nothing moderate about these people, you freaks. She's backed by some of the most powerful and evil people on the planet. People who literally kill large numbers of people for money.

Was Herrera Beutler also backed by these powerful and evil people? Was Peter Meijer? And Tom Rice?

Wouldn't know. You tell me. But they are obviously minor players compared to the daughter of Dick Cheney.

McParadigm wrote:Were these oppressively powerful and evil people only backing a tight handful of Republican Representatives?

I assume they spread their money around, but there is little question what their ideal win scenario is: getting rid of the cult of Trump and reconfiguring the Republican party to be an effective tool for pushing their neoliberal global agenda like it was before Trump (rather than the largely ineffective and chaotic clusterfuck it currently is [this is a good thing]).

McParadigm wrote:Was this powerful, evil money also flowing to the various state level Republican incumbents who also got primaried by their party this month?

I assume so.

McParadigm wrote:What specific ideological differences required all four of those Representatives to be targeted for removal? What were their key political differences from the rest of the party? Which Republican Party legislation ambitions did they reject, or which Democrat legislation ambitions did they uniquely support, that made their ejection so crucial?

It's not ideological. I think Republican voters (rightly) see that these politicians like Cheney don't represent them or their interests, and voters don't care about the spouted positions of these politicians, because they know it's all bullshit. They've completely stopped listening. You laugh at this, but this is actually wise. Does Trump truly represent them? lol no, I don't think so, but they know he doesn't represent them either. Desperate times make people do desperate things. It's not like they have a real choice.

From the perspective of the Bush Republican types, I don't think it has anything to do with ideology (at least not the ideologies of us low level peasants; their ideology operates on a different plain), any more than endless wars in the middle east, or oil prices, or shipping routes... Ideology is just the story they sell us.

When I say that they aren't moderate, I mean that their real beliefs and goals have absolutely nothing to do with the beliefs and goals of most Americans. They are extremely unnaligned. Their allegiance and values lies not with some imagined middle/moderate America, but to an extremely small but powerful group of extremely bad people.

I don't really care about any other conception of extremism vs. moderation. The idea of moderation as some sort of middle ground between the two party platforms is mostly nonsense to me. It's a relative term.

Besides, if moderation is Dick Cheney, then extremism is good and cool.

burt -- whatd do you think of blake masters?

BurtReynolds wrote:
Besides, if moderation is Dick Cheney, then extremism is good and cool.

Agreed. The whole Bush Administration deserves to rot in hell. Trump isn't responsible for nearly as much suffering as W Bush and his cronies.

Malloy wrote:burt -- whatd do you think of blake masters?

I just know he's a Thiel guy - apparently a very close one - and according to the arbiters of truth and justice, he's an evil white supremacist nazi conspiracy theorist, so i assume he's probably not. I vaguely remember seeing a political ad with him and thinking "yeah he's gonna win".

I'm not the guy to ask about specific politicians though (I've also stopped listening.)

But with a name like Blake Masters, you have to be evil, right?

BurtReynolds wrote:

McParadigm wrote:Was Herrera Beutler also backed by these powerful and evil people? Was Peter Meijer? And Tom Rice?

Wouldn't know. You tell me. But they are obviously minor players compared to the daughter of Dick Cheney.

Obviously. Being the daughter of a man nobody wants to talk about has truly imbued Cheney with unspeakable political powers. The others probably just helped her with the incantations.

Do please continue to acknowledge that you "wouldn't know" about the very things you are asserting, though.

McParadigm wrote:Was this powerful, evil money also flowing to the various state level Republican incumbents who also got primaried by their party this month?

I assume so.

"I assume so." Real wizened, clear-eyed insight there, Burt. The best blind loyalist language anyone could ever ask for.

McParadigm wrote:What specific ideological differences required all four of those Representatives to be targeted for removal? What were their key political differences from the rest of the party? Which Republican Party legislation ambitions did they reject, or which Democrat legislation ambitions did they uniquely support, that made their ejection so crucial?

It's not ideological. I think Republican voters (rightly) see that these politicians like Cheney don't represent them or their interests, and voters don't care about the spouted positions of these politicians, because they know it's all bullshit. They've completely stopped listening. You laugh at this, but this is actually wise. Does Trump truly represent them? lol no, I don't think so, but they know he doesn't represent them either. Desperate times make people do desperate things. It's not like they have a real choice.

If Cheney's legislative efforts and voting are identical to those of MAGA Republicans, and if the problem "isn't idealogical," as you say....then what does it mean to say that the "spouted positions of these politicians is all bullshit?" If two politicians have the same voting record and pursue the same goals, how is one successfully representing the party while the other is bullshit?

Liz Cheney does not stand apart from the Republican Party in any definable way, as a legislator. She was a leading advocate for defunding Planned Parenthood. She was a huge proponent of building the wall. She is a more consistent party line voter than nearly 70% of currently serving Republican Senators. The other three incumbents who were MAGA primaried were much the same.

I'm asking you to explain to me in what specific ways they had failed to represent the party. How specifically did they not represent Republican voter interests? How had any of the dozens of state officials who needed to be primaried out not represented their voters' interests? What specific actions or behaviors triggered such a cleansing?

Their allegiance and values lies not with some imagined middle/moderate America, but to an extremely small but powerful group of extremely bad people.

But you just said you didn't know this about most of them, and asked me to tell you?

I don't really care about any other conception of extremism vs. moderation. The idea of moderation as some sort of middle ground between the two party platforms is mostly nonsense to me. It's a relative term.

Besides, if moderation is Dick Cheney, then extremism is good and cool.

You're going to have to take your hands off your Dick for like 5 minutes here, dude. If it was just Liz Cheney, I would get that fixation. But, again, we're talking about three other sitting Representatives and 144 state level officials. Don't give me vagaries and trash statements like "they failed to represent their interests," give me examples that demonstrate this claim.

McParadigm wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

McParadigm wrote:Was Herrera Beutler also backed by these powerful and evil people? Was Peter Meijer? And Tom Rice?

Wouldn't know. You tell me. But they are obviously minor players compared to the daughter of Dick Cheney.

Obviously. Being the daughter of a man nobody wants to talk about has truly imbued Cheney with unspeakable political powers. The others probably just helped her with the incantations.

Do please continue to acknowledge that you "wouldn't know" about the very things you are asserting, though.

Yes! of course being Dick Cheney's daughter has afforded her immense power, regardless of her popularity. Of course! Are you high? Look at her war chest. Look at who her supporters are. No one would know who she was if she wasn't Dick Cheney's daughter. I mean, she's practically royalty. If she were anyone else, she be broke and forgotten and have no future. It may be more accurate to say that she is an obvious avenue through which massive power operates, though in her case it might be both. And I'm not just talking about petty elected offices here. I'm talking about actual power.

One could make the argument that this power behind her is decadent and fading and can't actually do much anymore, but there is no question that they were formally the owners of the Republican party. And good fucking riddance to them if they are dinosaurs.

What do you think of Liz Cheney? Do you think she's on some righteous crusade here?

McParadigm wrote:Was this powerful, evil money also flowing to the various state level Republican incumbents who also got primaried by their party this month?

I assume so.

"I assume so." Real wizened, clear-eyed insight there, Burt. The best blind loyalist language anyone could ever ask for.

And you should spend less time on granular politics, and take a broader view. You can't see the forest for the trees. I'm really not willing to waste my time on this. Sorry.

What's the answer, by the way? you're the expert.

McParadigm wrote:What specific ideological differences required all four of those Representatives to be targeted for removal? What were their key political differences from the rest of the party? Which Republican Party legislation ambitions did they reject, or which Democrat legislation ambitions did they uniquely support, that made their ejection so crucial?

It's not ideological. I think Republican voters (rightly) see that these politicians like Cheney don't represent them or their interests, and voters don't care about the spouted positions of these politicians, because they know it's all bullshit. They've completely stopped listening. You laugh at this, but this is actually wise. Does Trump truly represent them? lol no, I don't think so, but they know he doesn't represent them either. Desperate times make people do desperate things. It's not like they have a real choice.

If Cheney's legislative efforts and voting are identical to those of MAGA Republicans, and if the problem "isn't idealogical," as you say....then what does it mean to say that the "spouted positions of these politicians is all bullshit?" If two politicians have the same voting record and pursue the same goals, how is one successfully representing the party while the other is bullshit?

Liz Cheney does not stand apart from the Republican Party in any definable way, as a legislator. She was a leading advocate for defunding Planned Parenthood. She was a huge proponent of building the wall. She is a more consistent party line voter than nearly 70% of currently serving Republican Senators. The other three incumbents who were MAGA primaried were much the same.

I'm asking you to explain to me in what specific ways they had failed to represent the party. How specifically did they not represent Republican voter interests? How had any of the dozens of state officials who needed to be primaried out not represented their voters' interests? What specific actions or behaviors triggered such a cleansing?

She also relentlessly attacked the figurehead of that movement. She's part of a clique that, for years, paid lip service to conservative causes like immigration while doing nothing about it. Will Hageman's voting record be any different, or will it be even closer to the voter's wishes? Even if Cheney had a great voting record, how is this still not an upgrade from their perspective?

Their allegiance and values lies not with some imagined middle/moderate America, but to an extremely small but powerful group of extremely bad people.

But you just said you didn't know this about most of them, and asked me to tell you?

I'm talking about the people I'm talking about, not every politician that lost that you want to lump together. Beutler is a blue state republican. Is she a "moderate"? I dunno I guess. Who cares?

I don't really care about any other conception of extremism vs. moderation. The idea of moderation as some sort of middle ground between the two party platforms is mostly nonsense to me. It's a relative term.

Besides, if moderation is Dick Cheney, then extremism is good and cool.

You're going to have to take your hands off your Dick for like 5 minutes here, dude. If it was just Liz Cheney, I would get that fixation. But, again, we're talking about three other sitting Representatives and 144 state level officials. Don't give me vagaries and trash statements like "they failed to represent their interests," give me examples that demonstrate this claim.

I was talking about Liz Cheney, and that's what everyone else was talking about. You're the one that barged in and demanded I explain the loss of everyone else. Would it make you feel better if I said they are perceived as not representing what the voters want?

Why do you think Republicans are voting against them? Ideology?

This isn't rocket science. We all know that these people don't work for our interests. You don't need to study their individual stated positions. People grasp intuitively that the system is corrupt. Republican voters know it. Democrat voters know it. The difference is only one side is willing to go scorched Earth to repeatedly purge them when they fail. The other side votes for Joe Biden. And Republicans are supposed to support that as though that is in their best interests? Why are you supporting this?