Republican allies of convenience

[WonderGrunion]

S.E. Cupp, Nicole Wallace, the Lincoln Project, George W Bush, Mitt Romney

Always be aware that their goal isn't to elect Democrats. Their goal is to take back the Republican party from Trump. We can use them through the November elections, but they're going to be adversaries again immediately afterwards. So by all means, promote their attacks on Trump but they will never be true allies.

[I_UndergroundPanther]

1. I agree

Never trust a republican.
They do not have anyones but their own selfish interests at heart..if they had a heart.

Use them than discard them, they'd do it to you.

[TheNewNumberTwo]

2. #firetheliars2020

agreed. And while I'll tolerate a few DINOs here and there, get RID of them too ASAP!

[DownriverDem]

9. You are so wrong

The Dems do not think alike. They never have. So DINOS is insulting. We need all the votes we can get. There is no room for purists.

[TheNewNumberTwo]

22. #f***TheGOPs

there is a big difference between taking oil company money and effectively being a 50s R (rather than a crazy RWR like now) and being an actual D - see Frackenlooper.

There is a big difference between giving away our civil rights and protecting them. talk to Feinstein and Pelosi.

We may need every D vote to get rid of Trump but we don't need internal sellouts anymore than we need Rom-Nuts hypocrisy about Dump (pretending to hate Dump for political convenience while he still votes for everything put out and leading the charge to disembowel Social Security and the rest of the New Deal).

FDR, Truman, LBJ (barring Vietnam) and many others then and since proved you *can* have principles, be progressive and get elected and get things DONE. Howard Dean also proved it with the 50-state-strategy. Sanders and EW have also proved it. Katie Porter, AOC and the rest of The Squad prove it every day. Merkley, Wyden, Feingold, Durbin and Markey prove it all the time.

[bleep] DINO corporate sellouts and stick by our principles - we don't have to be ashamed or afraid of anything!

[soldierant]

20. Mostly I agree, but I believe there may be exceptions.

I'd be very cautious, yes, but if any one or two of them demonstrate that they have actually changed their opinions, then casting them away iis just as closed-minded as the worst of them.

[mopinko]

3. they are welcome to grab and oar. they wont be allowed to steer the ship.

[Solomon]

29. like this analogy very much!

Thank you

[mopinko]

30. feel free to repeat it.

please repeat it.

[OnDoutside]

4. Not quite. Yes many of them remain "small government conservatives" but groups like the

Lincoln Project have stated that the Republican Party as it is currently constituted, needs to be burned to the ground, and a new party take its place.

p.s. I would love an indepth discussion where they have to explain what exactly they mean by "small government conservatives" because it really does sound a shaky anchor to hold on to.

[denbot]

5. Rec x 1,000

And a kick.

[PandoraAwakened]

6. Ditto that...a little background

Last edited Sun Jun 14, 2020, 11:36 AM - Edit history (1)

I have a friend who recently told me how much she liked Nicole Wallace. Shocked, I asked her, "So, all those marches we had in opposition to the Village Idiot Bush KILLING OVER 1 MILLION PEOPLE just to fulfill Daddy Bush"s & Darth Cheney's oil pipeline wetdreams meant absolutely nothing to you?"

She was confused. So I persisted.
I next asked her, "Remember when you got so mad when we learned through whistleblowers that Fux Noise received its broadcast talking points directly from the Bush White House every morning---talking points that were pure propaganda bullshit and that got so many people killed? Remember when you noted that this checked off a critical step on the road to fascism by establishing our country's first true state-run media?"

"Yes, yes," she answered. "But what does that have to do with Nicole Wallace?"

As I reminded her that Wallace was Dipshit Dubya's Communications Director---you know, the head honcho writing the lies, the one coordinating with Fux Noise, the one helping to KILL PEOPLE in the name of fascism by lying over and over and over again---my friend could only say, "Oh shit, oh shit." Yeah...oh shit.

Now Wallace was just one in a string of Bush Communications Directors. If I remember correctly, she slung Bush's shit for a year or two and later went on to propagate McCain's continued war-mongering. However, I remember her as one of the ones who would spit out the batshit craziest of the Bush reign's lies.

Honestly, from my perspective, i.e., that of living memory, Wallace can tut-tut and turn her cackling laugh toward the Orange Turd all she wants. It's useful in the short term for us. But that's as far as it goes.

Wallace's animus to tRump comes from the same place as other "Never-Trumper" Rethuglicans: They're mad at the dolt squatting in the White House because he was too stupid to understand the wink-wink, nod-nod memo, instead blurting the quiet parts out loud. That is ALL they're mad about...period.

But, as they are so skilled at doing, they will wrap that animus under the cloak of the flag and pretend to be good little patriots while kicking tRump in the nuts for being such a dumbass...until such time as they can again seize power, resume scamming the Treasury for personal gain, and maybe, if they play their cards right, knock off two or three million people next time.

So, as the OP says, they're only useful to us up to November. After that, give them no quarter because they are very effective liars schooled in and long-practiced in both the art and science of propaganda. As proof of this, ask yourself one simple question: Did you fall for the Lincoln Project ads, believing the persons behind them must be some kind of "real patriots" or something? If you answered yes, then point proven.

Finally, never ever forget that nothing, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, can ever wipe clean the blood-stained hands of Wallace and company.

Neither their current faked disdain for authoritarianism (which their own histories show them wallowing in with glee) nor their genuine disgust for tRump as a vulgarian will ever erase the callousness and reckless abandon they themselves exhibited when they helped to murder over a million people.

[Beartracks]

16. It's always surprisng to me that even WITHOUT the wink and nod, 40% of Americans...

... still think Republican shit is okay. Oh, that's right: that's because Fox and rightwing radio have told them "everything else is a lie" and this torrent of propaganda blunts the effect that the cheating and lying out in the open would otherwise -- SHOULD otherwise -- have.

==============

[mopinko]

31. i love her because she laughs at him, and when she tries to read his tweets,

she just gives up w an- i just cant.

[Skidmore]

7. Yes, they are needed

but why is it that our side lacks this type of messaging? We had better learn before their skills are turned against us again.

[NNadir]

8. Fine, but we should do less looking a gift horse in the mouth.

A Republican who values his or her country more than the idiot in the White House is fine with me.

We're experiencing, as a nation, the worst threat to our country since the Cuban Missile Crisis, or perhaps since World War II.

In the latter case, we didn't spend the period between 1941 and 1945 cursing Stalin and his goals. We worked with him, because we wanted to win the war first and fight the political battles after it.

We conceivably might have won World War II without the Russians, but it's quite possible that our casualties might have been as high as theirs.

They lost 20 million people.

The reason that the concentration camps were liberated in 1945 rather than in 1952 (if ever) has a lot to do with working with a former and future enemy.

[TheNewNumberTwo]

23. #f***TheGOPs

remember that Stalin actually killed more of his own people than Hitler did by the end. And as bad as Rom-Nuts and similar are - and no question, they certainly are - they aren't building concentration camps, let's keep at least a little perspective here.

We aren't fighting a military 'war' - yet - it is still a war of ideas, budgets, pandemic/plague and now finally, hopefully, admitting the widespread racism in our society.

And despite what we may think about Dump's finger on the button - if he's going to go run crying to his bunker the minute a person in the street out front calls him out, and the generals actually taking him to task in public, starting a war isn't going to be in his playbook - far easier to keep living in denial, mainlining his IV drip of 6pm cheeseburgers and 3am ragetweets, until we drag him back to Florida and throw him in the gator pool.....

[NNadir]

24. So let me guess what your spin on history is.

Stalin was a bad guy; I have no qualms with that.

Roosevelt was an asshole because he allied with Stalin because, um, Stalin was a bad guy. (I actually think it was a wise move.)

We therefore should have fought both Stalin and Hitler, because of our extreme moral superiority to both of them.

I wonder how history might have worked out then? A better world, you think?

Whether you are aware of it or not, we are fighting a war, a very real one. It's against ourselves. And it has practical consequences involved with death and suffering, not all that different than a shooting war.

My own biggest concern at the end of my life is actually climate change. It will fuck up the world far more than Hitler and Stalin might have done combined as allies.

I have no use whatsoever for impractical holiness. None. I live in the real world.

[TheNewNumberTwo]

34. #DumptheTurdNov3

I'm not sure that FDR knew the extent of Stalin's purges when JS switched sides to ally with us against Hitler (when Hitler violated their alliance and attacked him). Remember that the two of them were poised to divvy up Europe before Hitler couldn't help himself and got greedy, despite Stalin ending up 'winning' the war against his own people in the end.

Nor do I think we could have taken on BOTH of them at the time, *and* kept on fighting the Japanese too - remember them? at the time, we were busy trying to rebuild the pacific fleet after Pearl Harbor, which thankfully spared the aircraft carriers (which weren't there to be attacked, luckily for us). the alliance with Stalin was certainly one of Hitler and Hirohito being the 'bigger enemy' at that moment in time, to be sure.

I have no disagreement that we are at 'war' with ourselves in terms of American society and it's still an open question as to who will win - cynicism, dark money and rich Whitey, or an open society that values each other as human beings, our contributions, unique perspectives and backgrounds which all build on that.

and completely agree with you on climate change, of which we are all guilty of causing. part of the reason I am a 'tree zealot' and run outside of my home office to **yell** at the McMansioneers every time I hear what I think may be a chainsaw. And serve on a local group to protect urban trees and give to every green group related to that and similar I know. I absolutely agree with you.

the 'real world' can't be the world as it is - if we were able to create climate change, nazi's and Dump - we can begin to mitigate and reverse them, too. Idealism? Sure. But the world is what we make it, and if we don't make the effort, we get the world we deserve, no?

[NNadir]

35. Roosevelt was no dummy; neither was Churchill.

If you open a good biography of Churchill - I've just read Andrew Roberts wildly acclaimed, but occasionally morally over generous biography of him - he had no illusions about who and what Stalin was.

As I remarked in another thread in which there was also whining about the fact that the Lincoln Project is run by (gasp) Republicans, Churchill famously said after the commencement of Barbarossa, “If Hitler invaded hell I would make at least a favorable reference to the devil in the House of Commons.”

You seem to disagree with that practical attitude, and want to whine about the Lincoln Project at this time, when they are working to the same goal as all of us here are working, getting rid of that awful beast tearing the White House to pieces.

I have no use for your position.

I must say too, that I am a member of the Democratic Party - and have been my whole adult life - because of its approach to human decency, education, fighting against racism, and (albeit less important than when I was young) concern for the poor, preservation of wilderness etc.

That does not mean that I endorse every rote party position. For example I have spent thirty years in intense study of the primary scientific literature concerning energy and the environment - posts about that work dominate my journal here - and I would say that the overwhelming policy of the majority of the members of my party - that we're going to save the world, along with our bourgeois lifestyle - with so called "renewable energy" is absurd and is actually making things worse, not better. I believe for example, that Ed Markey is a dangerous fool when it comes to Energy and the Environment, but would probably vote for him if his opponent was a person so morally bankrupt as to declare himself or herself as a member of the Trump dominated Republican Party of the 21st century. (I once considered voting for a Republican in the 20th century - Jacob Javits - but didn't do so because of Nixon.)

So I'm certainly no ideologue.

It is not the case that we benefit by eliminating opposition; on the contrary any political party benefits by having a sane opposition. That is what is generally lacking in our country; our current opposition is insane, corrupt, reactionary and ignorant. That said, the remnants of a sane honorable opposition exist, and they are well represented by the Lincoln Project.

In sane times, I would oppose them on particular issues for sure. But these are not sane times; and I welcome their marvelous participation in this overwhelmingly important goal of removing this horrible excuse for a human being from our national life. Their ads are excellent, and I believe effective, and that's all that matters to me right now.

I regard quibbling with them in times like these as foolish and destructive.

I don't think that either Roosevelt or Churchill were naive as to what and who Stalin was. Harry Truman certainly wasn't. However the world was better with Stalin without Hitler, than it would have been with both Stalin and Hitler.

One needs to be realistic about what is achievable, and by doing so, both Churchill and Roosevelt, for all their disagreements with Stalin and with each other, achieved the best that could be achieved in the early 1940's. This is why they are both considered to be great men, flawed great men, but great men all the same.

[TheNewNumberTwo]

36. #f**theGOPs

Last edited Sat Jun 13, 2020, 08:56 PM - Edit history (1)

If you read what I actually wrote, I'm not whining about The Lincoln Project - who better to take on dishonest R's than those who know them best? I mostly whine about DINOs who sell out their principles to the highest bidder while paying lip service to actual D values (exemplified by FDR, certainly Truman, likely my fave president and many others).

I don't have any illusions about what the Lincoln Project represent, however and if their work of getting rid of Dump is successful, they will then of course turn to Dump-lite immediately after, represented by the likes of Rom-Nuts or similar. Ideally Moscow Mitch will be thrown in the gator pond with Dump along the way, however as besides being evil, MM actually knows how to play the game to not spite his own face, unlike "The Dealmaker" (who only knows how to successfully bankrupt casinos).

I would argue that TLP aren't 'sane' by my definition, but to your point, we all own a slightly different internal dictionary on that point. And I don't live in a fantasyland where there are no opposing viewpoints to my opinions and positions - some of those actually live in my same house

Again, not quibbling with TLP running even better attack ads against Dump than Biden or others may/will - the more the merrier. I just don't have any illusions why they are doing it vs. why i'd want them to be doing it - as you note, it's a question of motivation. If they want to spend money on it - by all means.

i also don't recall attacking Churchill or FDR in previous points either, i'll let the Irish take the former, they can do that far better than I, were I even motivated to do it. As to FDR, like his cousin a couple decades earlier - having been brought up with a silver spoon, he saw it for what it was and chose a different course to rectify the situation, he more directly than TR in many ways.

But again, no matter how far these may be allowed to go/get enacted in practice, the right motivation and principle has to actually *exist* in the first place to guide the course of action - otherwise you are just a politician in it for yourself, or worse, you are Dump and *all* you care about is yourself, to the exclusion of even your family, friends and employees, traits he's displayed ever more prominently the past 3+ years.

[flotsam]

10. I'm good with that because

A. This one is a must win.

B. I truly believe our platform and people are the future.

c. Even if they "save" their party they will be a weakened threat for the foreseeable future and perhaps someday even an honorable opposition. I want my party to always win but never be unopposed since that breeds complacency.

[evilhime]

11. Yes and no . . .

Nicole Wallace I believe had left the party before and has been very vocal about her opinion of the party's misogyny in social as well as business areas, among other complaints. The Lincoln Project is giving us a free master class on how to combat them in the future. Their tactics that are helping us now will go back to the other side and we need to learn from them now for the future.

[bucolic_frolic]

12. Totally agree, if you listen closely they are posturing between the lines already

[zipplewrath]

13. I want them to take back the GOP

It's long past time for the GOP to get back to being a rational party like it was at the time of Ike. I yearn for the time we could have rational debates among people that valued facts and the truth. We need the rational people to take back control of the GOP.

[Beartracks]

14. They all still think conservatism can work. However, the main problem preventing it...

... isn't that liberalism gets in the way; rather, conservatism's failures can almost all be chalked up to: conservatives. So even if never-Trumpers wrest control from Trump and his ilk and take back their party, the conservative movement will still be the same festering morass that gave rise to Trumpism in the first place.

Unless American conservatism can divorce itself from Confederate heritage, religion, and always valuing the individual over group, and thereby perhaps just stick to fiscal conservatism, then conservatives will slide down the same rabbit hole in which they find themselves now.

(Let's not even get started on dark money and gun ownership -- and by that I mean the NRA's ownership of Congressional Republicans!)

==============

[mnmoderatedem]

15. add to the list

David Jolly, Rick Wilson, Stephen Schmidt.

Unlikely allies.

But I do believe all of them truly mean well.

[Iggo]

17. They're hitting him from the other side. That's all I care about.

But when it's done, they'll still be on the other side.

[live love laugh]

18. Absolutely true. I very much remember lots of Republican naysayers before Trump was selected.

So, even as allies, I suggest a double grain of salt. Like you say, they only want to get the rest of their cesspool elected and leave the impression things have been fixed with their party because Trump is gone.

[seta1950]

19. Great point

[GulfCoast66]

21. The enemy of my enemy is a friend. For now.

I want the Republican Party to be a loyal party that supports the constitution but believes in limited government. But if they run against us just on those beliefs they will lose every time.

Racism and hate is what gives them a chance. It bought them the south which used to be filled with pro big government racists. Once the Democratic Party started trying to move away from racism white southerners chose racism over good governance. I saw this as white southerner who lived it.

[octoberlib]

25. Purity is a wonderful thing but

unfortunately it has nothing to do with reality. There will always be an opposition party in this country and if The Lincoln Project conservatives can remake their party into something better , I’m all for it. They’re mostly moderate Republicans who hated the Tea Party and the culture wars bullshit. I welcome their help right now because Trump has got to go.

The Trump experience might change them permanently. I hope so but no way I’m going to state right now that “after the election Imma gonna hate Nichole Wallace and Rick Wilson.” That’s just as fucking stupid and intolerant as Trumpism.

[smirkymonkey]

26. +1000

[Cosmocat]

27. I dont care

ill deal with that when it gets to that point.

Two days ago the Lincoln Project released a video absolutely blistering the Republican party's confederate flag fetish. Ds/liberals/progressives should have done this decades ago.

You are seeing some progressive groups following suit, like MeidasTouch but these people are going after Rs bare knuckles in ways our side is too gentile to do, and what is absolutely maddening is WE HAVE THE ACTUAL HIGH GROUND!

[kentuck]

28. Adversaries but not enemies?

We can deal with adversaries. It's the enemies of the people that are difficult to deal with.

[dalton99a]

32. I welcome all ammunition against the criminal regime.

[Tom Rinaldo]

33. I have come to believe that we need responsible adversaries

I don't disagree with what you wrote although I'm not totally sure about Nicole Wallace. I would not be shocked if she is evolving into becoming a true Democrat.

Why do we need responsible adversaries? Because virtually nowhere has human nature every coalesced around one set of universal values and priorities, beyond near full agreement of some basics such as; "Murder is wrong." Some people tend to view change as offering opportunities, others see it as presenting threats. Some people stress the role of the individual foremost, others the role of the community. Some think peace is best secured through strength, others through love etc. These differences in orientation exist independent of partisan politics.

In an open pluralistic society we must coexist, within reason, with our differences. And that is where the need for responsible adversaries comes in. We need adversaries like John McCain who will step up and correct the crazies when they attack someone like Barack Obama and say "No M'am, he's a good man, we just disagree on policies" rather than screaming "Lock her up!" to a rabid mob.