The newest political party on the ballot in three states has Democrats terrified

He would have beaten Hillary by a substantially larger margin than Trump did.

 

A former governor of the blue-ist state in the Union. Mitten's is the very definition of a RINO.

 

Biden defines divisive. His State of the Union theatrics didn't offer much hope just hate and divisiveness.

 

LOL. You don't apparently know, the meaning of the words you use. Based on the common understanding of the term, however, "liberals" and "progressives" are essentially thought of as the same thing, that is, the words are used interchangeably. I am guessing that, by "liberals," you actually mean Libertarians? Not the same thing. Besides, your original quote was:

flyboy56 said: ↑
Joe Biden’s progressive positions will not attract RINOs who are more like moderate Democrats.

In that, you were describing neither Libertarians, not Liberals, but moderate Republicans, with a distaste for dictatorship, who put democracy ahead of Party. It makes it nearly impossible to have any meaningful conversation, BTW, if you make up your own meanings for words; or if you continually change the values you are using, in your arguments. Your "simple common sense," should make that obvious to you.

 

If you are a Democrat it really is sad you don't know much about the party and how it is divided into two factions; liberals and progressives. AOC considers herself a progressive, a far leftist who has done more harm to the party. Sanders is a progressive. Wokeism is a progressive creation.

https://www.psypost.org/2022/08/new...s-and-progressives-in-the-united-states-63768

Is a progressive in the United States just a more extreme version of a liberal? New research suggests that is not the case. Self-described progressives and self-described liberals have significantly different views on a number of issues related to free speech, equality, diversity, and identity, according to a series of studies published in the Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin.

First, progressives supported imposing immediate changes to increase diversity, such as maintaining diversity quotas. Second, progressives were opposed to cultural appropriation. Liberals, in contrast, were more likely to agree with statements such as “People should be permitted to adopt whatever cultural characteristics that appeal to them [music, fashion], regardless of status inequalities.”


Thirdly, progressives supported publicly censuring those perceived to hold discriminatory views. In other words, progressives tended to agree with statements such as “Those who express bigoted views should be exposed and deserve the backlash that follows.” Finally, progressives were less likely than liberals to express a desire to incrementally promote equality for the long-term and tended to disagree with statements such as “Most progress has been made by ignoring social identity and appealing to our shared experiences.”

 

OK.

 

First, those words are used arbitrarily by most people-- on both sides of the political spectrum.

Second, even if there are actual differences, between these two categories, for those few who know & use the technical definitions, they are still both on the same side of the Democratic Party, or the Liberals may be in the middle, but that is not another name for the group which is on the Right side of the Dem Party, who instead are the Moderate, Centrist, some even say Conservative, "Blue Dog," Democrats.

Thirdly, and most relevant to our conversation: YOU HAD NOT been talking about Democrats, at all!

flyboy56 said: ↑
Joe Biden’s progressive positions will not attract RINOs who are more like moderate Democrats.


There have not been many posts, since you had offered this appraisal, & I even reminded you about your focus, being supposedly on Republican RINOS, in my last post. So the fact that you are calling "RINOS" Liberals, is all that needs to be said, to demonstrate what gobbledy-gook, you are writing (and is sad for you, as a Republican, to think that this is what RINOS are).

 

"RINO" is a term without meaning. Romney would have been an excellent President, IMHO.

 

Exactly true
After Bush. Clinton 2x. Bush 2x.
I said never ever again.
No Bush. No Clinton.
Hilary is the only reason trump won.
I didn't make the Same mistake again.

 

Didn't answer my question.

 

I believe I did, but just for you the simple answer is "yes."

 

So, it's more important to protect the borders of Ukraine than the southern borders of the US?

 

We can easily do both. Our problem on the southern border is not financial.

 

Wow!!!!!!!!!!!!

Although the situation here in Canada is very different in so many ways than it is in the USA......

..... this has me wondering immediately if this could perhaps hold the key...... .and be the best way to defeat Prime Minister Justin Trudeau????????????????



Could all of this fit with what I already had in mind???????


http://www.politicalforum.com/index...people-on-earth.608615/page-2#post-1074100884