Liz Cheney: Conservatives may need a new party
Source: The Hill
09/21/24 5:07 PM ET
Former Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) indicated in an interview at The Capital Times Idea Fest in Madison, Wisc., that conservatives could end up forming a new kind of conservative party, arguing that far too much has happened thats too damaging in the Republican Party.
There is certainly going to be a big shift, I think, in how our politics work I dont know exactly what that will look like. I dont think it will just simply be
the Republican party is going to put up a new slate of candidates and off to the races, Cheney, an outspoken Trump critic, told The New York Times Peter Baker. I think far too much has happened thats too damaging, she added.
When asked by Baker whether she was suggesting that conservatives unhappy with the current state of the GOP will have to create a new party, she said, It may well be.
Cheney, who said earlier this month that she would be voting for Vice President Harris in November, added that she thinks most Americans dont want someone like Donald Trump to be the president.
Read more: https://thehill.com/blogs/in-the-know/4892415-liz-cheney-new-republican-party/
FakeNoose
(41,634 posts)ailsagirl
(24,287 posts)Last edited Sun Sep 22, 2024, 06:48 PM - Edit history (1)
that it will prove to be a veritable groundswell of support.
But, again-- who can really say??
Montauk6
(9,339 posts)JHB
(38,213 posts)Can't find the source, but it was attributed to Charlie Pierce of Esquire Magazine, regarding Never-Trumpers and other former Republicans.
Montauk6
(9,339 posts)msongs
(73,754 posts)groundloop
(13,849 posts)Surely conservatives can find someone else to get behind who's not a:
constant liar
serial adulterer
rapist
convicted felon
full blown racist
lowlife who makes fun of disabled people
pedophile
draft dodger
6 times bankrupt "businessman"
puppet of Putin
And what did I leave out?
Chellee
(2,300 posts)You can't forget that he's really, shockingly, stupid.
JoseBalow
(9,489 posts)It should be at the top of the list

AZ8theist
(7,377 posts)
AllaN01Bear
(29,496 posts)LiberalFighter
(53,544 posts)moreland01
(870 posts)The other 15% are just true Republican believers that will vote that "platform" regardless of who is representing them in office.
It's those 15% that Kamala and Tim are attempting to appeal to. Especially the women amongst them. And I really think there is hope, considering that a ton of the well-known people that those 15% respect are bailing on trump.
Now if the Republican Attorney Generals are in that 15%, there is truly hope.
Anyone who is holding out hope for Florida, don't hold your breath. ALL of the people overseeing the election at the state level (and most counties) are among the 30%.
FakeNoose
(41,634 posts)... and it's a much smaller number that even tolerates him anymore.
There are Repukes in this country who will do "anything" to win and those are the only ones who are listening to Chump these days. Most are ridiculing him behind his back, some will hold their noses and vote for him.
But a lot of them won't even do that. It's not exactly an open revolt against their candidate, but many will quietly leave the ballot blank for the "President" or some will actually vote for Harris/Walz. They're just not talking about it out loud.
Just because the MAGAs are loud and annoying, don't mistake their noise for actual votes. It's just meaningless noise. There are too many Rs who don't want Chump back in the White House, and they won't vote for him.
mucholderthandirt
(1,783 posts)If the regular, center to sort-of-right leaning people leave, his base is maybe 25%. Probably half that. The problem has always been that Republicans stick to party, no matter what. Democrats will split off, go third party or stay home. That hurts even though we have the better platform. We run the wrong people, take too long to explain our beliefs and never fight back. Go high, right? Where has that gotten us? Vote blue, no matter who. Where has that gotten us? Put up crap "conservative" Dems for offices because they're the only way we get the seat, and then they turn against us. Hello, Joe Manchin. Hello Joe Liberman. Yeah. That's the ticket. snort
TommieMommy
(2,902 posts)notroot
(267 posts)The Republican Party dwindles into electoral irrelevance like the Whigs of yesteryear over the course of a decade. The Overton Window shifts so far left over the course of three decades that Democrats become the new conservatives. A new, as yet nonexistent progressive party becomes the new liberal party and slowly builds up electoral victories over the course of another couple decades.
After 50 years, what we think of as "conservative" in 2024 would be the new "Nazi scum" of 2074. Those of us still alive won't recognize our own party as the Overton Window continues its inexorable leftward drift.
Let's play the long game, y'all. Let's change the world so much we become the next irrelevant thing, and leave it to our grandchildren to rule themselves, the way our grandparents refused to do for us.
slightlv
(7,790 posts)that we're going to end up with four to six parties. But I can totally get behind the idea of the Maga party going the way of the Whigs! I do believe that we'll end up with one political party - the Democratic Party - but that it will branch out into different factions, one of which will be fiscally conservative republicans. The other end of that spectrum might well be social democrats, of which I'll probably register to join. Or, it could be the anarchists form a branch on the far-far left. One thing I do know is that social conservatism will die an ugly death. I believe the majority of people are sick to death of the culture wars; even some of whom were the most dedicated religious fanatics may be awakening to the hypocrisy and danger; decreasing church member numbers sure seem to point in that direction. They may never reach the "live and let live" motto that we live our lives by, but I think the culture wars will fade into the background, overtaken by fiscal propaganda.
I pray the Overton Window does start moving radically left, and that the "center" is what we'd call far left today. It's only at that point, IMO, that we can really begin to make progress in creating a more perfect union for all of us.
travelingthrulife
(5,179 posts)I hope economic policy education is improved so that 'fiscal conservatives' also disappear, or at least become what they pretend to be.
Montauk6
(9,339 posts)After all, 'fiscal conservatism' seems more about zipping the wallet on programs that can help out middle and not-so-middle class Americans because those funds would be best spent for, say, tax cuts and loopholes for the wealthiest and let's not forget that starving, struggling military-industrial complex.
bucolic_frolic
(55,141 posts)Republicans since Reagan and really back to the 1950s, have been only about profits for themselves. Big Business is softening in some respects, but greed remains the primary force. We need TrustBusting.
FakeNoose
(41,634 posts)"Privatizing the profits while socializing the costs and risks."
It's going to destroy us if we don't right the ship immediately.
AZ8theist
(7,377 posts)Once Dotard is dead, the Repukes need to split up.
The sane ones, like Cheney, can form an actual "conservative" party, leaving behing the Magats like Empty headed Greene, Biggs, Bobo, etc..
Over time more and more Repukes will slither over to the new party while the Magats will become more and more marginalized.
While the racists and Nazis will remain beholden to the Magats, without their cult god they will be much more unfocussed, and not nearly the threat they are now. By then Cheney and others can actually form POLICIES that can be debated. The current Magat cult offers no such thing as "policy", only hate, fear, treason and abject stupidity.
At least, this is my hope for the future.
elleng
(141,926 posts)Wednesdays
(22,603 posts)First, a major party needs major donors, and that's tied up with the present GOP.
Second, 75 percent of "conservatives" are worshipers of TCF, and they ain't leaving him.
usonian
(25,324 posts)
Karma. It often comes too late, and sometimes it lands like a nuclear sledgehammer.
How about two right wing parties, splitting 40% of the popular vote and zero states?
.
ouija
(465 posts)Last edited Sat Sep 21, 2024, 08:04 PM - Edit history (1)
Conservatives will join the Democratic Party, the Democratic Party will cleave. The Republican Party is too far gone.
Autumn
(48,962 posts)Younger progressives know that moderates and their incremental steps will not save the planet, there's not enough time left. We are going into an era of exciting change. If someone had told me twenty years ago that it would be our beloved Joe Biden who kickstarted that change I would have said they were crazy. Yet here we are. I have never been so optimistic in my life.
Think. Again.
(22,456 posts)slightlv
(7,790 posts)but I take exception to the "current drift to the right." What's happening today isn't a "drift"... it's being actively pushed by malignant characters... hell bent on changing the world to their agenda. They have no ideal that's good for all; like trump, they are all transactionally based. What's good for *them* is absolutely good for all in their minds. And if it ends up being the opposite, oh well, so be it, in their minds. Just my NSHO.
Think. Again.
(22,456 posts)LilElf70
(1,569 posts)I really like Liz, but, gee, ya think? What was your first clue?
Trump has totally destroyed the GOP. There's no going back for them now. It's time for a new party, new vision. What's there today is a total disaster.
rpannier
(24,924 posts)Has great initials BS
LilElf70
(1,569 posts)rubbersole
(11,223 posts)...give us a shout when you get things figured out. We'll be taking care of the American people in the meantime.
PS - please give Darth Vader a message from the Founding Fathers...🖕
BumRushDaShow
(169,761 posts)
BlueKota
(5,346 posts)here and to be honest I am not quite sure where I land on that scale. I did see a clip of him about the Darth Cheney endorsement. He said while it's good he endorsed Harris and not Trump, he was still behind an unnecessary war, so Stewart said this doesn't absolve him of that. He added a "fuck that guy," and kept interspersing it for quite awhile.
BumRushDaShow
(169,761 posts)where they seemed to continually "miss" Bin Laden. And Obama had to clean up that mess.
And then the finality of getting out of there, where Biden was forced to finish it after more GOP mismanagement, where they turned around and manufactured a "Benghzi!!11!!1!!" redux out of it to lay at the feet of Democrats.
As a side note, we are STILL trying to get out of Iraq.
BlueKota
(5,346 posts)before Trump. He just made it even worse.
BumRushDaShow
(169,761 posts)and many continue to support him to this day.
former9thward
(33,424 posts)Who is stopping us? Isn't Biden the CIC?
BumRushDaShow
(169,761 posts)Aren't you supposed to be a lawyer?
Another Civics 101 lesson is apparently needed.
The Legislative Branch (CONGRESS) determines the boundaries for what the Executive Branch can or shall or cannot and shall not do when it comes to the military.
That is also why the base at Guantanamo Bay is STILL open - because CONGRESS refuses to authorize the funds to shut it down.
(snip)
Section 8.
The Congress shall have power
(snip)
To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;
To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;
To provide and maintain a navy;
To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;
(snip)
https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articlei
NEWS FLASH - THIS is still in effect (despite attempts to get an "ISIL-specific AUMF" that never materialized) and was used for what became "Operation Inherent Resolve" - S.J.Res.23 - Authorization for Use of Military Force
By Reuters
December 9, 2021 12:20 PM EST Updated 3 years ago
BAGHDAD, Dec 9 (Reuters) - U.S.-led forces have ended their combat mission in Iraq, a move that transfers all remaining troops into a training and advising role, Iraqi military commanders and officials from the coalition led by the United States said on Thursday.
Western security officials and diplomats say privately that this will make little difference to the number of troops stationed in the country - currently more than 2,000 - since those forces have had limited involvement in any combat operations for the last couple of years.
The U.S.-led coalition began its mission in 2014 to defeat Islamic State, after the militants took over vast areas of Iraq and neighbouring Syria.
(snip)
"As we complete our combat role, we will remain here to advise, assist, and enable the ISF (Iraqi security forces), at the invitation of Republic of Iraq," coalition commander Major General John W. Brennan, Jr. said in a statement.
(snip)
https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/iraq-security-adviser-says-international-coalition-ends-combat-mission-no-us-2021-12-09/
By Timour Azhari and Ahmed Rasheed
September 6, 2024 4:37 PM EDT Updated 16 days ago
(snip)
The U.S. has approximately 2,500 troops in Iraq and 900 in neighbouring Syria as part of the coalition formed in 2014 to combat Islamic State as it rampaged through the two countries.
The group once held roughly a third of Iraq and Syria but was territorially defeated in Iraq at the end of 2017 and in Syria in 2019. Iraq had demonstrated its ability to handle any remaining threat, Alaaldin said.
The U.S. initially invaded Iraq in 2003, toppling dictator Saddam Hussein before withdrawing in 2011, but returned in 2014 at the head of the coalition to fight Islamic State.
Other nations, including Germany, France, Spain, and Italy, also contribute hundreds of troops to the coalition.
(snip)
https://www.reuters.com/world/us-iraq-deal-would-see-hundreds-troops-withdraw-first-year-sources-say-2024-09-06/
All of this stuff, based on plans submitted by DOD, had to be reported to and funded by Congress. I.e., there is a "process" that has to happen and it doesn't happen at the snap of the fingers of a President.
former9thward
(33,424 posts)Article II of the Constitution gives full power to the president to command the U.S. military. 100%. It does not make exceptions for Congress. Congress is able to cut off funds for an operation, but it cannot demand an operation continues.
Not only that but the government of Iraq has constantly said they want the U.S. out.
Iraq Militia Battling US Troops Is 'Not Convinced' Biden Ready To Withdraw
An Iraqi militia that has played a leading role in attacks against U.S. troops in an effort to expel them from the nation has told Newsweek that the group was skeptical of recent reports suggesting President Joe Biden's administration had reached a deal with Baghdad to withdraw forces.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/iraq-militia-battling-us-troops-is-not-convinced-biden-ready-to-withdraw/ar-AA1qUJrZ
Get the U.S. out now! They are nothing but sitting ducks just as those in Afghanistan were.
BumRushDaShow
(169,761 posts)OMG. Why do you keep doing this year after year after year?
(snip)
Section 9.
(snip)
No money shall be drawn from the treasury, but in consequence of appropriations made by law; and a regular statement and account of receipts and expenditures of all public money shall be published from time to time.
(snip)
https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articlei
I.e., the Executive Branch MUST GET MONEY FROM CONGRESS to carry out its mission and the President's requests.
I just highlighted what you wrote that you summarily dismissed and is what is critical here when it comes to war-making.
We just WENT through this with Ukraine and getting funding for the military assistance. The Pentagon had been trying to "reprogram" funded programs to move some of their existing stuff to Ukraine, but ultimately, anything "military" requires Congressional action.
This is what they ultimately did to authorize the funding for Ukraine (and Israel and other things) -
H.R.815 - Making emergency supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2024, and for other purposes.
The National Defense Authorization Act explictly tells the Executive Branch what it can and cannot do with the Executive Branch's military presence, posture, and vision. The current one is here - H.R.2670 - National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024
They don't even have the one for FY2025 yet. A Senate draft his here - S.4638 - National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025
If the President says "I want to do 'X'" and Congress refuses to fund it or defunds it, then guess what?
Iraq Militia Battling US Troops Is 'Not Convinced' Biden Ready To Withdraw
An Iraqi militia that has played a leading role in attacks against U.S. troops in an effort to expel them from the nation has told Newsweek that the group was skeptical of recent reports suggesting President Joe Biden's administration had reached a deal with Baghdad to withdraw forces.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/iraq-militia-battling-us-troops-is-not-convinced-biden-ready-to-withdraw/ar-AA1qUJrZ
I included 2 articles in my reply that mentioned this. And that is underway, but it STILL requires Congressional authorization to complete.

former9thward
(33,424 posts)To say that money has to be passed to get 2500 troops out of a country is beyond ridiculous. But keep cut and pasting articles which have no relevance to the issue.
BumRushDaShow
(169,761 posts)have no clue how the government works.
News flash - if a base closure has not been "authorized", it ain't happening.
Example -
By David D. Kirkpatrick and David M. Herszenhorn
May 23, 2009
(snip)
Senate Democrats, who last week broke with their president to join a 90-to-6 vote against funds to close Guantánamo, faulted the White House for failing to provide political cover by reassuring the public that he had a clear plan the for the prisoners. The Democrats left open the possibility of authorizing the money later this year, once Mr. Obama provides a detailed plan.
(snip)
https://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/24/us/politics/24gitmo.html
Operation Inherent Resolve
The latest -
Defeat ISIS Mission in Iraq and Syria for January June 2024
USCENTCOM
July 16,2024
Release 20240716 - 01
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
TAMPA, Fla. From January to June 2024, ISIS has claimed 153 attacks in Iraq and Syria. At this rate, ISIS is on pace to more than double the total number of attacks they claimed in 2023. The increase in attacks indicates ISIS is attempting to reconstitute following several years of decreased capability.
To continue the effort to defeat ISIS and prevent its ability to conduct external attacks, United States Central Command, along with our Defeat ISIS partners, Iraqi Security Forces and the Syrian Democratic Forces, conducted 196 Defeat ISIS Missions resulting in 44 ISIS operatives killed and 166 detained in the first half of 2024. In Iraq, 137 partnered operations resulted in 30 ISIS operatives killed and 74 ISIS operatives detained. In Syria, 59 operations conducted alongside the SDF and other partners resulted in 14 ISIS operatives killed and 92 ISIS operatives detained.
The above operations resulted in eight senior ISIS leaders killed and 32 captured in both Iraq and Syria. These leaders include those responsible for planning of operations outside of Syria and Iraq, recruiting, training, and weapons smuggling. The removal of these individuals from their leadership positions further degrades ISIS capabilities to conduct external operations in the U.S. and allied nations.
The continued pursuit of the approximately 2,500 ISIS fighters at large across Iraq and Syria is a critical component to the enduring defeat of ISIS. Equally important are the ongoing international efforts to repatriate more than 9,000 ISIS detainees in detention facilities in Syria, and the repatriation, rehabilitation, and reintegration of more than 43,000 individuals and families from the Al Hol and Al Roj camps. This is down from the peak of over 70,000 in 2019.
The global enduring defeat of ISIS relies on combined efforts of the Coalition and partners to remove key leaders from the battlefield and the repatriation, rehabilitation, and reintegration of families from Al Hol and Al Roj, said Gen. Michael Erik Kurilla, commander of U.S. Central Command. We continue to focus our efforts on specifically targeting those members of ISIS who are seeking to conduct external operations outside of Iraq and Syria and those ISIS members attempting to break out ISIS members in detention in an attempt to reconstitute their forces.
https://www.centcom.mil/MEDIA/PRESS-RELEASES/Press-Release-View/Article/3840981/defeat-isis-mission-in-iraq-and-syria-for-january-june-2024/
CENTCOM Forces Partner with Syrian Democratic Forces to Capture ISIS Leader and Assist in Operation to Recapture Escaped ISIS Fighters
USCENTCOM
Sept. 2, 2024
Release Number 202400902 - 01
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
TAMPA, Fla U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) forces, partnered with Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), captured an ISIS leader, who was assessed as helping ISIS fighters after escape from a Raqqah Detention Facility in Syria.
During the early morning hours of Sept. 1, CENTCOM forces and SDF captured Khaled Ahmed al-Dandal, an ISIS facilitator assessed to be aiding efforts of detained ISIS fighters to include recently escaped fighters.
Previously, on Aug. 29, five ISIS Foreign Terrorist Fighter detainees (Two Russians, two Afghans, and one Libyan) escaped from the Raqqah Detention Facility. SDF recaptured two escapees: Imam Abdulwahed Akhwan (Russian) and Muhammad Noh Muhammad (Libyan). The search continues for the three who remain at large: Timor Talbrken Abdash (Russian) and Shuab Muhammad Al-Abdli and Atal Khaled Zar (both Afghans).
A primary objective of ISIS remains to free their fighters currently held in detention and subsequently fuel an ISIS revival. CENTCOM forces, in coordination with SDF, will continue to mitigate threats of future escapes and to ensure the enduring defeat of ISIS.
Over 9,000 ISIS detainees remain in over 20 SDF detention facilities in Syria, a literal and figurative ISIS Army in detention. If a large number of these ISIS fighters escaped, it would pose an extreme danger to the region and beyond. We will continue to work with the international community to repatriate these ISIS fighters to their countries of origin for final adjudication, said Gen. Michael Erik Kurilla, Commander, U.S. Central Command.
CENTCOM remains committed to supporting our SDF partners to ensure the enduring defeat of ISIS and to promote regional stability.
https://www.centcom.mil/MEDIA/PRESS-RELEASES/Press-Release-View/Article/3891985/centcom-forces-partner-with-syrian-democratic-forces-to-capture-isis-leader-and/
And from the State Department - https://www.state.gov/the-islamic-state-five-years-later-persistent-threats-u-s-options/
Transition of Operation Inherent Resolve to U.S.-Iraq Bilateral Security Partnership to be Announced Next Week, Officials Say
Sept. 20, 2024 | By Matthew Olay, DOD News |
The United States is on track to announce next week the transition of the military's anti-ISIS mission in Iraq to a bilateral defense partnership between the two countries, a pair of officials close to the matter told the media today.
The announcement would come 10 years after the U.S.' establishment of the multi-national Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS and its military component, Combined Joint Task Force Operation Inherent Resolve.
Talks about transitioning the military mission to a bilateral defense partnership began between the U.S. and Iraq in April. Although specific details concerning transitioning from CJTF-OIR to a bilateral partnership are still evolving, a senior administration official said that there is a broad consensus between all coalition members that the coalition will continue with its work well into the future.
"[The commission does] extraordinary work in terms of counter-terrorist financing, counter-foreign fighter flow sharing information [and] sharing intelligence," the official said, adding that the transition to a bilateral partnership is a way to deepen and enhance the coalition and cooperation between its member countries, as well as a means of strengthening the U.S.' relationship with Iraq.
The official also made clear that, no matter what shape the future bilateral agreement takes and regardless of whether other coalition countries move on from Iraq after 10 years the U.S. remains committed to defeating ISIS.
"I think it's fair to say we've had great success in territorially defeating ISIS in the core regions of Iraq and Syria. However, we are all very aware that with ISIS, you can [often] say [they're] down, but they're never quite out," the official said.
"We remain fully committed to the defeat of ISIS That is what we're working on in Iraq and northeast Syria," the official continued. "[It's] something that is ongoing every day, and that will very much continue in the future."
As one example of that, the Pentagon announced yesterday that U.S. and Syrian Democratic Forces launched a raid in Syria that killed four ISIS operatives.
The raid was designed to disrupt and degrade the terrorist organization's ability "to organize and conduct attacks against civilians as well as U.S. citizens, allies and partners throughout the region and beyond," Deputy Pentagon Press Secretary Sabrina Singh said.
"The United States is the core [of the coalition], and we very much intend to continue to prosecute this mission against ISIS over the coming years," the senior administration official said.
As the announcement of the transition of the coalition's military mission in Iraq draws closer, one senior defense official said the U.S. will be "deepening the conversation" with Iraq regarding the nature of the bilateral security partnership.
"We believe [the talks] will be quite deep and quite intense because that's what both sides want," the official told reporters, adding that the Iraqis have made clear that they are committed to continuing to work to shape a strong bilateral security agreement with the U.S. and to ensure the enduring defeat of ISIS.
"We already have gotten fairly advanced into those discussions about what that looks like in terms of the kinds of trainings, the kinds of presence [and] the kinds of support for [Iraq's] capabilities," the official said.
"But this is an iterative conversation that will continue through and beyond the announcement that we hope we'll be in a position to make at the end of next week," he added.
Stay tuned.
czarjak
(13,639 posts)"And neither do we." W's contribution may never go away?
JoseBalow
(9,489 posts)COL Mustard
(8,222 posts)But Ill give her major props for standing so firmly against Trump.
We can sort out the policy differences later, but right now shes on the right side!!
caraher
(6,359 posts)Giving the conservatives who don't like the taste of MAGA Kool Aid an alternative more palatable to them may have bled enough Trump support to make keeping him out of the White House a slam dunk rather than the current white knuckle affair.
Blue Full Moon
(3,485 posts)They were Whigs and then morphed into Republican. I guess they went from worrying that the catholics would take over to actually helping the catholics to take over.
czarjak
(13,639 posts)The base is exact.
RainCaster
(13,717 posts)We only have one. The GOP has become the Party of Trump - him and all the MAGAts like MTG, Bobo, JD, Gym Jordan, etc. There are so few adults left in the GOP - our country needs a responsible second party, and this may be how it happens.
Skittles
(171,716 posts)she can fuck right off
Elessar Zappa
(16,385 posts)Old Republicans were 90% bad but 10% good because at least they supported our form of governance. The MAGAs want to destroy the whole system and put in a dictatorship.
Skittles
(171,716 posts)that "10%" VERY MUCH HELPED get us where we are today
they can ALL go fuck themselves
Elessar Zappa
(16,385 posts)Ive always hated Republicans. I just think the ones now are even MORE horrible.
ailsagirl
(24,287 posts)Great to hear!!
JoetheShow
(155 posts)They can form a conservative party and take their trickle down foolishness somewhere else. I will miss the Lincoln Project people and really don't want them against us, but we've gotta take the bad with the good.
BlueKota
(5,346 posts)was a conservative who preached against trickle down economics. He always said his fellow Republicans misinterpreted Adam Smith. He said that while Smith did support a free market economy, that didn't mean that meant there should be no rules. He said Smith believed in well regulated Capitalism where the government made sure business weren't undermining their competition unfairly. He also believed workers should be treated well.
He was trying to get this across to higher ups in the national party, but unfortunately not enough listened. Sadly the professor died in his mid 30s.
JoetheShow
(155 posts)And it wouldn't degenerate into yelling. We might have even found a lot of agreement. No wonder he couldn't get any of the national folks to listen. Too much money fighting the sanity he was trying to spread.
BlueKota
(5,346 posts)The college I attended was a smaller private one and as a result we got to know our professors well and they knew us.
czarjak
(13,639 posts)Regarding the Bush Years. If he can be swayed, maybe there's hope?
rubbersole
(11,223 posts)Knowing tsf won't win anything, he's probably just hedging his bets. tsf hurting the down ticket repubs across the country won't help his rich buddies being able to continue avoiding taxes. Or it could be as simple as Darth still wants the title of 'Worst American Ever' and tsf stole it from him.
JHB
(38,213 posts)As recently as 2019, Liz was accusing Democrats of promoting the killing of babies after birth, the same thing people are aghast at Trump saying. How sane is that?
See for yourself. You can skip to the 19 second mark.
Novara
(6,115 posts)This whole political ideology got its start when Reagan Ruined Everything. That's when the toxic masculinity crept into the party and openly began the feminist backlash, trying to push women back into the kitchen, barefoot and pregnant.
It took 40 years for the seeds that Reagan planted to get us here, where women don't have a say in their own healthcare, where the party openly advocates for women to be breeders (oh, but I can already hear the whining from toxic men because the wife is at home with the children and he can't make enough money to support a family on his own).
It took 40 years to bring the hate of the Nazi party out into the open.
It took 40 years to finally make hate a political party platform.
You motherfuckers built this, GOP. You all could have stood against the convicted felon but you caved or ran away from the party with your tail between your legs because you got whipped. He won. This is what you allowed to happen to YOUR party. You could have fought back. But you allowed him to take over completely. You gave him the keys. You quit rather than fought.
I often wonder if the Dems would have followed a destructive leader to the point where we couldn't recognize our own party anymore. I don't think so; we're not sheep.
Cheney is trying hard to be relevant again. She will fail. They will not trust her.
JoetheShow
(155 posts)But the Powell Memo is not well known (deliberately hidden?) and was more of a How-To manual, so we'll go with Reagan. I think of them both as the beginnings of an avalanche. Not too bad at the beginning but picking up steam as vast amounts of money and power got behind them. In my more discouraged moments, I almost admire TSF for hijacking the movement when he realized prejudice and hatred could be saddled to redirect all that money and power to his own ends. They were always present, but he brought them front and center so the bigots and crazies could leave their basements and wave their confederate flags and swastikas.
JHB
(38,213 posts)...that put Movement Conservatives in control of the Republican Party and normalized what had previously been Hard/Nutso Right.
JoetheShow
(155 posts)Reagan was the "kind face" of the used car salesman that sold the American people the lemon of conservatism. He told people "the government isn't the solution, it's the problem" and then Republicans spent every opportunity screwing with the machinery of government to prove it. The MSM owned and operated by big business never pointed out what was happening and most people didn't have time to dig around to figure it out.
Warpy
(114,615 posts)besides the obscene wealth grabbed by billionaires.
Otherwise, they're radical reactionaries who want to turn women into slaves, children into obedient little robots, and men into tyrabnts who own both, while restricting what everybody is allowed to see, read, say, and think.
And I put Liz Cheney into that category.
However, we'll eventually get that second party, whether through a purge at the GOP (unlikely) or its collapse followed by the rise of one of the right wing splinter parties.
Klarkashton
(5,293 posts)And public education.
Liz is no friend to the public other than hating trump.
DownriverDem
(7,014 posts)repubs and Dems worked together to pass bills. It was hard fought, but compromise was a big part of it. They weren't into the culture war either then. They supported environmental issues. They were sane.
LudwigPastorius
(14,725 posts)Maybe you and the Trumpists can fight yourselves into oblivion.
dai13sy
(570 posts)I don't know where they have put that party
onandup
(701 posts)nm
Jack Valentino
(5,011 posts)of the current Republican party in national elections, by splitting their vote....
Down-ballot candidates would also be necessary.
Afterwards they might return and reclaim the party and its name,
but their best strategy now is to vote against Republicans
by voting for Democrats!
Aussie105
(7,920 posts)GOP: "We are mean and cruel and dumb as rocks and only here to make a profit!
And proud of it!"
Not exactly a good look for a political party, is it?
The Progressive Conservative Party (PCP), headed by Bernie perhaps?
Biglinda 52
(129 posts)is not the result of Trump. Trump bastardized it, but the change came way before. Trump is a symptom of the party. It started with Newt Gingrich with his "Take no prisoners" mentality with his hatred of the Clintons. Then the party started gerrymandering so that the crazies would easily be re-elected. Then they brought in the abortion issue and used the evangelicals to get elected.
Liz Chaney is not a moderate Republican. Kinzinger is not a moderate Republican. The GOP needs to move closer to the middle-where it used to be. The Left did not get radical. The Right moved to such extremes, the Middle became radical. We will need at least 20 years of Democratic control to allow the GOP to come back to the fiscal conservative party it used to be sans the rest of its BS.
There are a whole generation of voters who know nothing about what a moderate GOP looks like. What a shame.
Bristlecone
(11,111 posts)Liz can start all the grass roots conservative parties she wants. Once the smell of sweet cash wafts, it will attract the same quality of self-serving candidates and theocratic ideology - its just an extension of the passed hat or the alms plate; But to the tune of millions. These folks seem like carnival barkers or revival tent conmen for a reason. They are just that.
And while I m at it, as long as we continue to sell our political, and literal souls to big business and special & foreign interests under the guise of money is speech and corporations are people, the system will continue to rot.
JHB
(38,213 posts)It was conservatives who set the GOP onto the path to its present sorry state. "Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice" and all that, remember? It was conservatives that courted religions zealots and bigots, and fostered perpetual grievance, to get them voting Republican. Every GOP victory since 1980 has surfed in on a wave of foam. It's what gave them their margin of victory.
So now she wants to form a new party to split the GOP's voting block? Does she have any plan to win elections with a platform that's not particularly popular -- that's why conservatives brought what we're now calling "Trumpism" into their fold in the first place. A new conservative party guarantees that both it and a legacy GOP will both lose, leaving Democrats on top.
I mean, I'm fine with that. The only thing that can be done to save the GOP is to torpedo it and keep doing so for the foreseeable future. Long enough that extremists no longer look at it as a viable vehicle to carry out their agenda. But their policies still aren't popular, so how does she propose to avoid repeating the same problem under a new name?
betsuni
(29,078 posts)Those ideas don't work.
Grins
(9,459 posts)rpannier
(24,924 posts)That one carries a lot of history. And is highly respec...
Okay.
Maybe not
Other suggestion... she keeps Republican Party and the MAGA can have AfD
Layzeebeaver
(2,286 posts)If we take flight of fancy and forget about all the trump and MAGAS bullshit over the past 10 years on the other side - what do we have left?
(OH wait... let's include everything Regan...)
Fucking Conservatives.
Nothing changes.
They will still find ways to destroy our social fabric - I guarantee it.
Deminpenn
(17,506 posts)of disaffected Rs like Kinzinger and centrist/conservative Ds like Gottheimer, Himes, Blue Dogs Dems, "problem solvers", etc. The party will be moderate to agnostic on social issues and focused on business-friendly policies. The Cheneys would be the rw flank of that new coaltion. Maybe the can call themselves the Constitutionalists.
The Rs will be left with the anti-govt tea party types, theocrats and white nationalists. Ultimately they'll become a fringe party like the Libertarians, Greens, and so on.
PatrickforB
(15,426 posts)because she sees the Trump MAGA cult really can't be an organized party. Knowing the Cheneys as we do, I'm wondering if they don't like a bunch of what is in Project 2025. They just aren't saying much about that. Just trying to oust the Trump MAGA people.
BumRushDaShow
(169,761 posts)The "establishment" GOP were primaried by the loons - first by the teabaggers and later by the MAGats, who dubbed them "RINOs" (which was her and Kinzinger's case).
I remember one of the earliest shots across the bow in 2010 when Mike Lee (R-UT), took out Bob Bennett (R-UT) a-then long-time, very conservative establishment incumbent. The only reason why RMoney is still there today is because of his $$$$.
Even fiscal firebrand Jeff Flake, former Senator (R-AZ), who was previously in the House for years, couldn't take the MAGat invasion, and chose to not run again (he eventually became Biden's Ambassador to Turkey).
But almost ALL of them, with some exceptions, facilitated the takeover of their party by foaming-at-the-mouth provocateurs, going along with the crazy loon CT by not calling it out as false, and more notably, continually engaging in the disrespectful name-calling (e.g., calling the "Democratic Party" the "Democrat Party" as a slur, etc.).
JHB
(38,213 posts)They're fine with it, or at least most of it. The main thing that Cheney and other establishment conservatives have against Trump is that they're not the ones in charge. They bred the Republican voter base to respond only to their hot-button issues, and they lost control when a bigger charlatan could mash those buttons better than they could. What they mainly see is a Trump dictatorship cutting them out entirely.
Nothing is more definitively conservative than thinking only "the right people" should be in charge, and they get testy when "the wrong people" run the show.
PatrickforB
(15,426 posts)Kashkakat v.2.0
(1,940 posts)the fascistic white supremacist getting pushed back into the fringes from whence it came. That then frees the progressive left / Democratic party to go back to pursuing progressive left goals and dreams instead of having to be in emergency mode saving the constitution and the very foundation of US representative democracy. Gotta say, the last 10-20 yrs (its been about 15 yrs since repubs took over WI ) have made me appreciate the value of a functioning two party system, one party serving as checks/balances to the other. Sure a parliatmentary system or run off voting would be good, but like it or not we have what we have - at least until we are able to change it !
poozwah
(413 posts)the party, including cheney, went along with trump and his brand of corrupt conservatism. they wanted a permanent one party rule. their xenophobia and racism blinded them to the demographics which, had they looked, show an ever expanding minority population that would in a short time become the majority. while i admire ms cheney for her courageous political stance, that admiration is tempered by the fact that she waited until january 6th, 2021 to condemn trump. that condemnation should have been delivered long before that day.
RobertDevereaux
(2,037 posts)Yes, the so-called Conservative GOP should abandon RINO-GQP, form their own fucked-up Lincoln party, and partner with us Dems to undo all things Trumpian. Times a-wasting.
JoetheShow
(155 posts)We can blame a lot of things (MSM, lack of civics classes, talk radio,...) but at the end of the day, 40+% of the voting public will vote for these ignorant, racist, misogynist, FASCISTS!! If it was a poison brand to them, why are they voting for them? Suicide?
Bolo Boffin
(23,872 posts)Maybe you can get it done as quick as the Whigs became the Republicans, but we'll see.
dchill
(42,660 posts)..."What's ours is ours - in perpetuity, with interest - regardless of how we got it."
Montauk6
(9,339 posts)I mean, maybe the memo fell behind the copier or got caught in my spam filter, but what BESIDES TONE would be the difference between the Trumpies and this new incarnation, POLICYWISE? They all genuflect to the same think tanks that crafted Project 2025, they all pretty much wanted an end to Roe v Wade, they all want more tax cuts, they all subscribe to toxic austerity, mmm maybe they don't subscribe to some of the wackier conspiracy theories but what am I missing here?
WarGamer
(18,613 posts)I appreciate the anti-Trump help ok...
BUT... she's a complete fraud.
I can't wait until 11/6 when we can tell all these neocon ass kissers to fuck the hell off.
Scrivener7
(59,522 posts)positions, but I can see that she paid a VERY high price to stand up for what she thought was right - and in that particular position I agree with her.
I disagree with her fundamentally, but I can respect her commitment to our Democracy.
WarGamer
(18,613 posts)She's a devoted neocon.
They have very specific political aspiration and their definition of Democracy is unique to them.
She is butt hurt about Trump because he destroyed their movement.
Scrivener7
(59,522 posts)WarGamer
(18,613 posts)NEOCONSERVATISM by Justin Vaisse...
You'll understand what she is and WHY she's doing what she's doing. It's obvious...
Trust me... if it were a crowd at the capitol rioting for Jeb Bush, she'd be on the steps with a can of bear spray in her hands.
Scrivener7
(59,522 posts)Scrivener7
(59,522 posts)government to mind it's own business with respect to religion and personal decisions, we want our legislators to govern in ways that improve the lives of their constituents, we want everyone to pay their fair share, and we understand that a measure of a decent government is how well the citizens treat those in need.
That used to be the Republican platform.
Qutzupalotl
(15,824 posts)The Republican party is slowly getting destroyed, and they deserve it.
Let's speed it up a little
JustABozoOnThisBus
(24,681 posts)If we had three parties now, possibly none would have a majority of the electoral votes. In that case, the president is selected by the House of Representatives, with each state having one vote. A democrat would have no chance of winning that vote.
alarimer
(17,146 posts)So, yes, start another. By all means.
mucholderthandirt
(1,783 posts)The only way the party stays relevant at any point in the future is to strip out the MAGA idiot troops and shift center, go basically where they were in the 50s.
Even then, with them and the MAGAs running against the Dems, it will be a generation before they ever hold significant offices to be of a worry to normal people. We'll have to watch them every second, keep them from building back up again from the ground level. So, no R behind any name winning any office, no matter how small.
I read somewhere that it takes 80 years before people forget history. I can live with that. I'll be dead long before then, so will my kids, and the grandson. Those growing up in that era will have to be hawks and never let the Republicans have this kind of power and influence ever again.
Irish_Dem
(81,271 posts)It is history in the making.
FakeNoose
(41,634 posts)But the "new" Republicans Party needs a mechanism for refusing membership to certain troublemaking elements, or they will end up the same way they are now.
Irish_Dem
(81,271 posts)OAITW r.2.0
(32,140 posts)It's his brand now and I am sure that they will run future candidates who express fealty to Trump. A new Party of Never Trumpers will need to organize at local and state levels,,,,that'll take a decade to build out. In the meantime, Democrats should have a huge advantage as these parties split the conservative vote.
republianmushroom
(22,326 posts)May ??