Cheney Crushed
-
@Jolly said in Cheney Crushed:
@Horace said in Cheney Crushed:
She had an interview on a national tv show this morning where she indicated she may pursue the presidency.
She wants it so bad, she can taste it.
If she had voted to impeach Trump, then shut her mouth and not stepped all over the national messaging of the GOP, she might have had a chance in the future. I think she's shit in the bed on any future aspirations.
In politics, though, never say never.
If the national messaging of the GOP had been policy based rather than assuaging a butt-hurt fragile loser she would have fine too.
@jon-nyc said in Cheney Crushed:
@Jolly said in Cheney Crushed:
@Horace said in Cheney Crushed:
She had an interview on a national tv show this morning where she indicated she may pursue the presidency.
She wants it so bad, she can taste it.
If she had voted to impeach Trump, then shut her mouth and not stepped all over the national messaging of the GOP, she might have had a chance in the future. I think she's shit in the bed on any future aspirations.
In politics, though, never say never.
If the national messaging of the GOP had been policy based rather than assuaging a butt-hurt fragile loser she would have fine too.
That's your opinion.
It is not the opinion of GOP leadership trying to craft a message in opposition to Mr. Biden's policies he was trying to get through Congress.
-
-
@Jolly said in Cheney Crushed:
Sometimes, you lurch into idiotdom.
Cheney may be the Darling of Northern Virginia, but she's DOA in a Republican primary in most states.
I'm not saying she would win, I would just like to see more politicians like her.
@89th said in Cheney Crushed:
@Jolly said in Cheney Crushed:
Sometimes, you lurch into idiotdom.
Cheney may be the Darling of Northern Virginia, but she's DOA in a Republican primary in most states.
I'm not saying she would win, I would just like to see more politicians like her.
Not if Trump continues his purge of conservatives in the GOP. The DNC unfortunately succumbed to left wing populist bullshit some years ago. Trump is doing everything he can to replace conservatism with his right wing brand of populist nonsense in the GOP.
Pattern seems to be happening elsewhere in the world as well but without quite the same degree of “in your fucking face” kitschy bravado and macho bluster as Stateside.
-
I just don't get it. Her only "sin" was not to kiss the shoes of President Trump.
Her voting record was very very conservatively.
Many people say that they are not a single issue voter, but in this case, it seems like they were.
Long term, the Republican "fawning" and absolute devotion of President Trump is a bad strategy.
-
-
I just don't get it. Her only "sin" was not to kiss the shoes of President Trump.
Her voting record was very very conservatively.
Many people say that they are not a single issue voter, but in this case, it seems like they were.
Long term, the Republican "fawning" and absolute devotion of President Trump is a bad strategy.
@taiwan_girl said in Cheney Crushed:
I just don't get it. Her only "sin" was not to kiss the shoes of President Trump.
Her voting record was very very conservatively.
Many people say that they are not a single issue voter, but in this case, it seems like they were.
Long term, the Republican "fawning" and absolute devotion of President Trump is a bad strategy.
She was a figurehead and standard bearer for Never Trump sentiment. A sentiment which, obviously, was at odds with her constituency. Do you seriously have difficulty understanding that? Do you think the person WY chose over her will have more conservative policies, less conservative, or do you have no clue?
Education is extremely important.
-
@taiwan_girl said in Cheney Crushed:
I just don't get it. Her only "sin" was not to kiss the shoes of President Trump.
Her voting record was very very conservatively.
Many people say that they are not a single issue voter, but in this case, it seems like they were.
Long term, the Republican "fawning" and absolute devotion of President Trump is a bad strategy.
She was a figurehead and standard bearer for Never Trump sentiment. A sentiment which, obviously, was at odds with her constituency. Do you seriously have difficulty understanding that? Do you think the person WY chose over her will have more conservative policies, less conservative, or do you have no clue?
@Horace said in Cheney Crushed:
@taiwan_girl said in Cheney Crushed:
I just don't get it. Her only "sin" was not to kiss the shoes of President Trump.
Her voting record was very very conservatively.
Many people say that they are not a single issue voter, but in this case, it seems like they were.
Long term, the Republican "fawning" and absolute devotion of President Trump is a bad strategy.
She was a figurehead and standard bearer for Never Trump sentiment. A sentiment which, obviously, was at odds with her constituency. Do you seriously have difficulty understanding that? Do you think the person WY chose over her will have more conservative policies, less conservative, or do you have no clue?
It is that single issue which caused her to lose. It is not her voting record, that is for sure. So, for the most majority of the voters, they were voting on a single issue.
As for her opponent, I dont really know much about her. (This is probably mean to say, but I guess that half of the voters probably dont know much about her either, only that she said she had President Trumps endorsement and Rep. Cheney did not)
-
@Horace said in Cheney Crushed:
@taiwan_girl said in Cheney Crushed:
I just don't get it. Her only "sin" was not to kiss the shoes of President Trump.
Her voting record was very very conservatively.
Many people say that they are not a single issue voter, but in this case, it seems like they were.
Long term, the Republican "fawning" and absolute devotion of President Trump is a bad strategy.
She was a figurehead and standard bearer for Never Trump sentiment. A sentiment which, obviously, was at odds with her constituency. Do you seriously have difficulty understanding that? Do you think the person WY chose over her will have more conservative policies, less conservative, or do you have no clue?
It is that single issue which caused her to lose. It is not her voting record, that is for sure. So, for the most majority of the voters, they were voting on a single issue.
As for her opponent, I dont really know much about her. (This is probably mean to say, but I guess that half of the voters probably dont know much about her either, only that she said she had President Trumps endorsement and Rep. Cheney did not)
@taiwan_girl said in Cheney Crushed:
@Horace said in Cheney Crushed:
@taiwan_girl said in Cheney Crushed:
I just don't get it. Her only "sin" was not to kiss the shoes of President Trump.
Her voting record was very very conservatively.
Many people say that they are not a single issue voter, but in this case, it seems like they were.
Long term, the Republican "fawning" and absolute devotion of President Trump is a bad strategy.
She was a figurehead and standard bearer for Never Trump sentiment. A sentiment which, obviously, was at odds with her constituency. Do you seriously have difficulty understanding that? Do you think the person WY chose over her will have more conservative policies, less conservative, or do you have no clue?
It is that single issue which caused her to lose. It is not her voting record, that is for sure. So, for the most majority of the voters, they were voting on a single issue.
As for her opponent, I dont really know much about her. (This is probably mean to say, but I guess that half of the voters probably dont know much about her either, only that she said she had President Trumps endorsement and Rep. Cheney did not)
So for all you know there is no substantive difference between the two candidates other than whether they support Trump. But you criticize the voters for making their decision based on the only difference you’re aware of.
The reason you lack respect for these voters is because you disagree with them about Trump. But you frame it like you’re opposed to simplistic single issue thinking. That’s unfair to those voters, the vast majority of whom know more about what they’re voting for than you do. I hope you can try to be more respectful of others. It is an important part of being a good citizen of this world we all share.
-
@Horace said in Cheney Crushed:
@taiwan_girl said in Cheney Crushed:
I just don't get it. Her only "sin" was not to kiss the shoes of President Trump.
Her voting record was very very conservatively.
Many people say that they are not a single issue voter, but in this case, it seems like they were.
Long term, the Republican "fawning" and absolute devotion of President Trump is a bad strategy.
She was a figurehead and standard bearer for Never Trump sentiment. A sentiment which, obviously, was at odds with her constituency. Do you seriously have difficulty understanding that? Do you think the person WY chose over her will have more conservative policies, less conservative, or do you have no clue?
It is that single issue which caused her to lose. It is not her voting record, that is for sure. So, for the most majority of the voters, they were voting on a single issue.
As for her opponent, I dont really know much about her. (This is probably mean to say, but I guess that half of the voters probably dont know much about her either, only that she said she had President Trumps endorsement and Rep. Cheney did not)
@taiwan_girl said in Cheney Crushed:
@Horace said in Cheney Crushed:
@taiwan_girl said in Cheney Crushed:
I just don't get it. Her only "sin" was not to kiss the shoes of President Trump.
Her voting record was very very conservatively.
Many people say that they are not a single issue voter, but in this case, it seems like they were.
Long term, the Republican "fawning" and absolute devotion of President Trump is a bad strategy.
She was a figurehead and standard bearer for Never Trump sentiment. A sentiment which, obviously, was at odds with her constituency. Do you seriously have difficulty understanding that? Do you think the person WY chose over her will have more conservative policies, less conservative, or do you have no clue?
It is that single issue which caused her to lose. It is not her voting record, that is for sure. So, for the most majority of the voters, they were voting on a single issue.
As for her opponent, I dont really know much about her. (This is probably mean to say, but I guess that half of the voters probably dont know much about her either, only that she said she had President Trumps endorsement and Rep. Cheney did not)
Nope.
She's been active in the Wyoming GOP for years and lost a run for governor last go-round.
-
LEt me give a hypothetic:
Lets say you own an Apple phone. You have been happy with the apple phone, it does what you want, no problems with it.
Now, there is a new company who comes out with something they call the Orange phone. They claim it is as good as the Apple phone, but you have never used it, none of your friends have used it, and it is selling for the same price as your Apple phone. You have been happy with the Apple phone. It does what you want it to do, and it fits your needs quite well.
You do know that the Orange phone was marketed a year or two ago, but the majority of people did not like it and did not want to switch to it.
Why would you change to the Orange phone? Unknown quality, same price, people were not willing to switch to it earlyer, etc. :woman-shrugging:
Oh yeah, your favorite celebrity comes out and says she likes the Orange phone and hates the Apple phone. Doesn't really give any reasons why the Orange phone is better, just that Apple phone is bad!!
But, when you look past that, you see that the Apple phone has been very reliable, does exactly what you want and expect, and based on the long history of the Apple phone and its previous generations of phones from the same company, there is no reason to expect that suddenly the operating system or the phone will change in any significant way.
Is the fact that your favorite celebrity doesn't like the Apple phone enough for you to switch?
Maybe it is. For the voters of Wyoming, it obviously was enough. That is democracy in action. Personally, I dont think it is a good enough reason to switch phones, but it is definitely showing that democracy works.
-
@taiwan_girl said in Cheney Crushed:
I just don't get it. Her only "sin" was not to kiss the shoes of President Trump.
Her voting record was very very conservatively.
Many people say that they are not a single issue voter, but in this case, it seems like they were.
Long term, the Republican "fawning" and absolute devotion of President Trump is a bad strategy.
She was a figurehead and standard bearer for Never Trump sentiment. A sentiment which, obviously, was at odds with her constituency. Do you seriously have difficulty understanding that? Do you think the person WY chose over her will have more conservative policies, less conservative, or do you have no clue?
@Horace said in Cheney Crushed:
@taiwan_girl said in Cheney Crushed:
I just don't get it. Her only "sin" was not to kiss the shoes of President Trump.
Her voting record was very very conservatively.
Many people say that they are not a single issue voter, but in this case, it seems like they were.
Long term, the Republican "fawning" and absolute devotion of President Trump is a bad strategy.
She was a figurehead and standard bearer for Never Trump sentiment. A sentiment which, obviously, was at odds with her constituency. Do you seriously have difficulty understanding that? Do you think the person WY chose over her will have more conservative policies, less conservative, or do you have no clue?
Totally get that. It is not how I wish things were, but it's undeniable.
-
@taiwan_girl said in Cheney Crushed:
I just don't get it. Her only "sin" was not to kiss the shoes of President Trump.
Her voting record was very very conservatively.
Many people say that they are not a single issue voter, but in this case, it seems like they were.
Long term, the Republican "fawning" and absolute devotion of President Trump is a bad strategy.
She was a figurehead and standard bearer for Never Trump sentiment. A sentiment which, obviously, was at odds with her constituency. Do you seriously have difficulty understanding that? Do you think the person WY chose over her will have more conservative policies, less conservative, or do you have no clue?
@Horace said in Cheney Crushed:
She was a figurehead and standard bearer for Never Trump sentiment.
She voted for Trump twice.
Her loss was due to being a standard bearer for the Never Coup movement, which is unpopular among swathes of the GOP today.
“Don’t make me repeat myself”
- history
-
@Horace said in Cheney Crushed:
She was a figurehead and standard bearer for Never Trump sentiment.
She voted for Trump twice.
Her loss was due to being a standard bearer for the Never Coup movement, which is unpopular among swathes of the GOP today.
@jon-nyc said in Cheney Crushed:
@Horace said in Cheney Crushed:
She was a figurehead and standard bearer for Never Trump sentiment.
She voted for Trump twice.
Her loss was due to being a standard bearer for the Never Coup movement, which is unpopular among swathes of the GOP today.
I claim nothing about her behavior before her January 6 moral panic set in. A moral panic she believes she might be able to ride to the presidency, and which aligns perfectly with the Never Trumpers. But that's just coincidence, she has no social climbing goals to cultivate here. Her stance is pure principle, and her loss in WY a pure sacrifice of a job she'd have gladly kept for the rest of her life.
-
LEt me give a hypothetic:
Lets say you own an Apple phone. You have been happy with the apple phone, it does what you want, no problems with it.
Now, there is a new company who comes out with something they call the Orange phone. They claim it is as good as the Apple phone, but you have never used it, none of your friends have used it, and it is selling for the same price as your Apple phone. You have been happy with the Apple phone. It does what you want it to do, and it fits your needs quite well.
You do know that the Orange phone was marketed a year or two ago, but the majority of people did not like it and did not want to switch to it.
Why would you change to the Orange phone? Unknown quality, same price, people were not willing to switch to it earlyer, etc. :woman-shrugging:
Oh yeah, your favorite celebrity comes out and says she likes the Orange phone and hates the Apple phone. Doesn't really give any reasons why the Orange phone is better, just that Apple phone is bad!!
But, when you look past that, you see that the Apple phone has been very reliable, does exactly what you want and expect, and based on the long history of the Apple phone and its previous generations of phones from the same company, there is no reason to expect that suddenly the operating system or the phone will change in any significant way.
Is the fact that your favorite celebrity doesn't like the Apple phone enough for you to switch?
Maybe it is. For the voters of Wyoming, it obviously was enough. That is democracy in action. Personally, I dont think it is a good enough reason to switch phones, but it is definitely showing that democracy works.
@taiwan_girl said in Cheney Crushed:
Is the fact that your favorite celebrity doesn't like the Apple phone enough for you to switch?
Maybe it is. For the voters of Wyoming, it obviously was enough. That is democracy in action. Personally, I dont think it is a good enough reason to switch phones, but it is definitely showing that democracy works.It is absurd to consider Trump support or opposition, for a politician, to be cosmetic rather than substantive. Whether she supports, for the presidency, the same person her constituents support, or whether she actively tries to subvert that person, is an important part of the job her constituents are deciding whether to hire her for.
You expect voters to simultaneously support one politician, while supporting another politician who actively and prominently opposes that first politician. Because, in your mind, "one thing has nothing to do with the other thing". The only reason this even makes sense to you is that you dislike Trump, and are unable to respect anybody who doesn't share your dislike. In calmer, less emotional contexts, you would easily admit that politics has to do with politics. That's why they are the same word.
-
LEt me give a hypothetic:
Lets say you own an Apple phone. You have been happy with the apple phone, it does what you want, no problems with it.
Now, there is a new company who comes out with something they call the Orange phone. They claim it is as good as the Apple phone, but you have never used it, none of your friends have used it, and it is selling for the same price as your Apple phone. You have been happy with the Apple phone. It does what you want it to do, and it fits your needs quite well.
You do know that the Orange phone was marketed a year or two ago, but the majority of people did not like it and did not want to switch to it.
Why would you change to the Orange phone? Unknown quality, same price, people were not willing to switch to it earlyer, etc. :woman-shrugging:
Oh yeah, your favorite celebrity comes out and says she likes the Orange phone and hates the Apple phone. Doesn't really give any reasons why the Orange phone is better, just that Apple phone is bad!!
But, when you look past that, you see that the Apple phone has been very reliable, does exactly what you want and expect, and based on the long history of the Apple phone and its previous generations of phones from the same company, there is no reason to expect that suddenly the operating system or the phone will change in any significant way.
Is the fact that your favorite celebrity doesn't like the Apple phone enough for you to switch?
Maybe it is. For the voters of Wyoming, it obviously was enough. That is democracy in action. Personally, I dont think it is a good enough reason to switch phones, but it is definitely showing that democracy works.
@taiwan_girl said in Cheney Crushed:
LEt me give a hypothetic:
Lets say you own an Apple phone. You have been happy with the apple phone, it does what you want, no problems with it.
Now, there is a new company who comes out with something they call the Orange phone. They claim it is as good as the Apple phone, but you have never used it, none of your friends have used it, and it is selling for the same price as your Apple phone. You have been happy with the Apple phone. It does what you want it to do, and it fits your needs quite well.
You do know that the Orange phone was marketed a year or two ago, but the majority of people did not like it and did not want to switch to it.
Why would you change to the Orange phone? Unknown quality, same price, people were not willing to switch to it earlyer, etc. :woman-shrugging:
Oh yeah, your favorite celebrity comes out and says she likes the Orange phone and hates the Apple phone. Doesn't really give any reasons why the Orange phone is better, just that Apple phone is bad!!
But, when you look past that, you see that the Apple phone has been very reliable, does exactly what you want and expect, and based on the long history of the Apple phone and its previous generations of phones from the same company, there is no reason to expect that suddenly the operating system or the phone will change in any significant way.
Is the fact that your favorite celebrity doesn't like the Apple phone enough for you to switch?
Maybe it is. For the voters of Wyoming, it obviously was enough. That is democracy in action. Personally, I dont think it is a good enough reason to switch phones, but it is definitely showing that democracy works.
Bad analogy. In your scenario, the Apple phone quit calling and texting for me, and did those functions for people 2000 miles away. The orange phone does what it is supposed to do.
