Why do people hate republicans?

[Kiribati-Tarawa]

So is this not "All the X are Y" trolling, then? Just checking.

No it isnt, because I am speaking of a perceived view of a political party, not the members of this forum.

I was actually asking the forum moderator, but thanks anyways.

[The Black Forrest]

I'm not a Democract, but I'll answer, anyways.

I hate Republicans because they are often socially regressive and economically heartless. When it comes to equality of race, sex, orientation, or gender, their position is "nope." They support policies to eliminate anything and everything that could possibly support minorities or the underprivileged. They continuously try to cut down the social safety nets to protect the poor, such as minimum wage and healthcare. In short, they're old, rich, white men trying to keep everyone else down.

Oh, please. Those programs are unsustainable and you know it, they are bankrupting our country. Something has to be done with them. Cutting it is one thing that could be done. (Before you go berzerk, I also support some cuts to the military, but this will not be near enough to solve any spending problem)

Old, white men? Just stop, seriously. You KNOW this isn't true.

Thats true, they did have that one black guy in charge for a little bit.

Seriously, if they weren't then why all the failed outreach efforts to blacks, Asians, Hispanics and women?

The programs are fine when they are funded. Problem is the Repubs like to throw that money at the 1 percent club. Got to keep the myth of trickle down going of course.

[Scyobayrynn]

Okay but you do understand that if you asked the Heads of these Parties, if you asked even the most radical members none of them would say they agree with every single view of the party as whole right?

I mean you understand that the official position of both the Democrat and Republican Parties is to be as inclusive as possible-- that is to say we all dont agree with each other entirely, we just agree with the other guys even less.

And by your generalization you are in fact far more radical in your view of the opposition than say The Islamic State Group.

Yes, I know the Democratic and Republican Parties want to be inclusive. That is a bad thing. It prevents the formation of multiple ideologies and forces American politics into a deadlock between two factions nobody actually likes or supports. It also allows for radical groups like the Tea Party to highjack a major political party, rather than getting stuck as a weak minor party like the UKIP or BNP.

Also, unless I have been beheading Republicans in my sleep, I do not think I am comparable to ISIS.

Comparable in the narrow range of your view point.
You literally dismiss the views of others because they themselves have been given a limited set of labels. In that same moment act as if this point of view is some how not even more radical in obstinate refusal to engage the opposition reasonably.

Honestly, you should reconsider your position. On how parties work. The two party system is awful but not nearly as awful as you would make it out to be.

[Jordsindia]

Oh, please. Those programs are unsustainable and you know it, they are bankrupting our country. Something has to be done with them. Cutting it is one thing that could be done. (Before you go berzerk, I also support some cuts to the military, but this will not be near enough to solve any spending problem)

Old, white men? Just stop, seriously. You KNOW this isn't true.

It really is true.

and its Rich Old White men, they dont care for working class Whites either I mean beyond using fear mongering and pandering to the lowest common denominator to get the votes then they have no use for the working poor, and absolutely no intention of doing anything to help them be anything but poor.

If this is the case, I guess Democrats are also the party of old, white men. Ever heard of Mia Love, Tim Scott, Allen West, Marco Rubio? I could go all day.

Fear-mongering? Pandering? This is hardly a one-party thing.

Lowest common denominator? Quit watching Family Guy, kid.

That last common is complete shit. How do Republicans hate the poor? Because they don't hand people free money? I'm sorry, but this is the real world, not fairy land. You can't just do that. Also, Republicans support lower taxes, less regulation on businesses, and projects which would increase employment opportunities. Some Democrats like to keep the poor poor and dependent on the Democrats for all their needs. Makes great voters. Republicans believe that all minorities and poor should have the opportunity to be successful, and believe they can achieve it.

Again, these programs are bankrupting our country, it can't keep going like this. That is why these programs have to be downsized.

[Scyobayrynn]

Okay but you do understand that if you asked the Heads of these Parties, if you asked even the most radical members none of them would say they agree with every single view of the party as whole right?

I mean you understand that the official position of both the Democrat and Republican Parties is to be as inclusive as possible-- that is to say we all dont agree with each other entirely, we just agree with the other guys even less.

And by your generalization you are in fact far more radical in your view of the opposition than say The Islamic State Group.

Yes, I know the Democratic and Republican Parties want to be inclusive. That is a bad thing. It prevents the formation of multiple ideologies and forces American politics into a deadlock between two factions nobody actually likes or supports. It also allows for radical groups like the Tea Party to highjack a major political party, rather than getting stuck as a weak minor party like the UKIP or BNP.

Also, unless I have been beheading Republicans in my sleep, I do not think I am comparable to ISIS.

Comparable in the narrow range of your view point.
You literally dismiss the views of others because they themselves have been given a limited set of labels. In that same moment act as if this point of view is some how not even more radical in obstinate refusal to engage the opposition reasonably.

Honestly, you should reconsider your position. On how parties work. The two party system is awful but not nearly as awful as you would make it out to be.

[Coreyea]

Most don't, but if they do, they're probably Libtards.

[The Black Forrest]

Texas isn't the worst, but it is still at times over necessarily onerous. Student IDs and the like don't work (fine, I understand that) but out of state IDs are also no go. Legal Texas residents who met the criteria to vote during the last election cycle were turned away because their DL were not issued by Texas. A number of other ones are also not allowable either. You need to have one of a small number of allowable IDs. That is unnecessary and burdensome. The only reason to be so restrictive on what IDs are usable is voter suppression.

And that is the only part you have to rebut?

If we didn't have voters ID. Then people would vote multiple times at multiple places.

Yes because that happens all the time in large numbers to turn elections.

If effects the lower classes and that's what the Repubs want.

[Olthar]

I'm not a Democract, but I'll answer, anyways.

I hate Republicans because they are often socially regressive and economically heartless. When it comes to equality of race, sex, orientation, or gender, their position is "nope." They support policies to eliminate anything and everything that could possibly support minorities or the underprivileged. They continuously try to cut down the social safety nets to protect the poor, such as minimum wage and healthcare. In short, they're old, rich, white men trying to keep everyone else down.

Oh, please. Those programs are unsustainable and you know it, they are bankrupting our country. Something has to be done with them. Cutting it is one thing that could be done. (Before you go berzerk, I also support some cuts to the military, but this will not be near enough to solve any spending problem)

Old, white men? Just stop, seriously. You KNOW this isn't true.

How about, instead of cutting programs for the poor, we raise taxes on the rich? Or, hell, we don't even need to do that. Just crack down on offshore tax havens that keep trillions out of the hands of the government.

Alright. Name every Republican leader who isn't an old, rich, white man, and lets see how many there are.

[Kiribati-Tarawa]

It really is true.

and its Rich Old White men, they dont care for working class Whites either I mean beyond using fear mongering and pandering to the lowest common denominator to get the votes then they have no use for the working poor, and absolutely no intention of doing anything to help them be anything but poor.

If this is the case, I guess Democrats are also the party of old, white men. Ever heard of Mia Love, Tim Scott, Allen West, Marco Rubio? I could go all day.

Fear-mongering? Pandering? This is hardly a one-party thing.

Lowest common denominator? Quit watching Family Guy, kid.

That last common is complete shit. How do Republicans hate the poor? Because they don't hand people free money? I'm sorry, but this is the real world, not fairy land. You can't just do that. Also, Republicans support lower taxes, less regulation on businesses, and projects which would increase employment opportunities. Some Democrats like to keep the poor poor and dependent on the Democrats for all their needs. Makes great voters. Republicans believe that all minorities and poor should have the opportunity to be successful, and believe they can achieve it.

Again, these programs are bankrupting our country, it can't keep going like this. That is why these programs have to be downsized.

Amen to that.

[Timsvill]

If we didn't have voters ID. Then people would vote multiple times at multiple places. They would do this too help the person he or she voted for win. We have voters ID to help prevent that. All you have too do is show some sort of ID to vote! You do that at other places!

Do you have any evidence this happens? There are no voter ID requirements in California. There is no noticeable amounts of voter fraud in the state. Does it happen? Maybe, but the number of times it does is so minuscule as to be meaningless. Voter fraud is not actually a problem. So why create solutions for problems that don't exist?

http://ivn.us/2014/01/16/hard-evidence- ... r-id-laws/
There's you're evidence! Or a way too back up my claim

[Avenio]

This is the polarization I speak of-- see its general and worded to include all republicans. It presumes a homogenuous state of mind among republicans. Yet he likely believes his own side of the political coin hold great diversity of thought.

Its not a slight against you Tyrandel, its thought process that is a bill of goods youve been sold.

Being able to nitpick and quibble about ideology is the luxury of someone who is not slated for dehumanization by a party's politics. Anyone who identifies as a Republican and votes for people that hold the mainstream Republican view implicitly supports the Republican policies that target people like me (and presumably Tyrandel, but they weren't entirely specific).

[Kiribati-Tarawa]

Oh, please. Those programs are unsustainable and you know it, they are bankrupting our country. Something has to be done with them. Cutting it is one thing that could be done. (Before you go berzerk, I also support some cuts to the military, but this will not be near enough to solve any spending problem)

Old, white men? Just stop, seriously. You KNOW this isn't true.

How about, instead of cutting programs for the poor, we raise taxes on the rich? Or, hell, we don't even need to do that. Just crack down on offshore tax havens that keep trillions out of the hands of the government.

Alright. Name every Republican leader who isn't an old, rich, white man, and lets see how many there are.

I don't subscribe to the idea that one's socioeconomic background makes them a good or bad leader or political ideologist. Just because you are one thing doesn't mean you can't understand something that isn't you. Just because one is rich and white doesn't mean that they don't want the best for the poor. It's no better than saying someone is unqualified to lead because they are poor.

[Text People]

Because to them it represents the America that was, old or 'old' America. They hate all traditional values across the board.

[The Black Forrest]

It really is true.

and its Rich Old White men, they dont care for working class Whites either I mean beyond using fear mongering and pandering to the lowest common denominator to get the votes then they have no use for the working poor, and absolutely no intention of doing anything to help them be anything but poor.

If this is the case, I guess Democrats are also the party of old, white men. Ever heard of Mia Love, Tim Scott, Allen West, Marco Rubio? I could go all day.

Actually, no you cant.

Fear-mongering? Pandering? This is hardly a one-party thing.

Is it now? Examples?

Lowest common denominator? Quit watching Family Guy, kid.

That last common is complete shit. How do Republicans hate the poor? Because they don't hand people free money? I'm sorry, but this is the real world, not fairy land. You can't just do that.

Tossing out trite phrases like entrepreneurial and pulling yourself up by your boot straps is not love.

Also, Republicans support lower taxes,

For the upper classes mainly.

less regulation on businesses,

Will not create jobs.

and projects which would increase employment opportunities.

Are we talking about the 33 permanant jobs of the pipeline?

Some Democrats like to keep the poor poor and dependent on the Democrats for all their needs.

Source.

Makes great voters. Republicans believe that all minorities and poor should have the opportunity to be successful, and believe they can achieve it.

No it doesn't and no they don't.

Again, these programs are bankrupting our country, it can't keep going like this. That is why these programs have to be downsized.

Of course it is. But again the Repubs fought like hell to prevent job exportation right?

[Olthar]

How about, instead of cutting programs for the poor, we raise taxes on the rich? Or, hell, we don't even need to do that. Just crack down on offshore tax havens that keep trillions out of the hands of the government.

Alright. Name every Republican leader who isn't an old, rich, white man, and lets see how many there are.

I don't subscribe to the idea that one's socioeconomic background makes them a good or bad leader or political ideologist. Just because you are one thing doesn't mean you can't understand something that isn't you. Just because one is rich and white doesn't mean that they don't want the best for the poor. It's no better than saying someone is unqualified to lead because they are poor.

This is true. Unfortunately, it does not seem to apply to the Republican party.

[The Black Forrest]

Do you have any evidence this happens? There are no voter ID requirements in California. There is no noticeable amounts of voter fraud in the state. Does it happen? Maybe, but the number of times it does is so minuscule as to be meaningless. Voter fraud is not actually a problem. So why create solutions for problems that don't exist?

http://ivn.us/2014/01/16/hard-evidence- ... r-id-laws/
There's you're evidence! Or a way too back up my claim

A republican saying voter id laws are a good thing? I am shocked.

[Jordsindia]

Oh, please. Those programs are unsustainable and you know it, they are bankrupting our country. Something has to be done with them. Cutting it is one thing that could be done. (Before you go berzerk, I also support some cuts to the military, but this will not be near enough to solve any spending problem)

Old, white men? Just stop, seriously. You KNOW this isn't true.

How about, instead of cutting programs for the poor, we raise taxes on the rich? Or, hell, we don't even need to do that. Just crack down on offshore tax havens that keep trillions out of the hands of the government.

Alright. Name every Republican leader who isn't an old, rich, white man, and lets see how many there are.

This is why.
And this.

Black Republicans
and
some Republican women of Congress.

[Scyobayrynn]

It really is true.

and its Rich Old White men, they dont care for working class Whites either I mean beyond using fear mongering and pandering to the lowest common denominator to get the votes then they have no use for the working poor, and absolutely no intention of doing anything to help them be anything but poor.

If this is the case, I guess Democrats are also the party of old, white men. Ever heard of Mia Love, Tim Scott, Allen West, Marco Rubio? I could go all day.

Fear-mongering? Pandering? This is hardly a one-party thing.

Lowest common denominator? Quit watching Family Guy, kid.

That last common is complete shit. How do Republicans hate the poor? Because they don't hand people free money? I'm sorry, but this is the real world, not fairy land. You can't just do that. Also, Republicans support lower taxes, less regulation on businesses, and projects which would increase employment opportunities. Some Democrats like to keep the poor poor and dependent on the Democrats for all their needs. Makes great voters. Republicans believe that all minorities and poor should have the opportunity to be successful, and believe they can achieve it.

Again, these programs are bankrupting our country, it can't keep going like this. That is why these programs have to be downsized.

Marco_Rubio < Republican, Anti-Labor anti-workng class
Mia Love < Republican who consistently does not tow the Republican party line, and defies the most radical of the Party. Centrist, and exception to the common Republican Politician.
Tim Scott < Just wow. Here is a Tea Party poor hating radical. You think a black face makes him less Anti-Poverty, and by Anti-Poverty I mean Poor-Hating.

Allen West-- Lets Dance!
" Progressives are “communists”: At a town hall meeting in April, West said that 80 House Democrats were “members of the Communist Party.” He later clarified that the 80 Democrats he was speaking about were those in the Progressive Caucus."

Opposed early voting as an “entitlement”: In an interview with ThinkProgress, West objected to early voting in Florida because “people see it as an entitlement.” He ultimately lost his seat, in part, because of high Democratic early voting turnout.

Said Obama’s campaign slogan had a “Marxist-Socialist” meaning: West found hidden meaning in Obama’s “Forward” slogan. “They want to bring out an old Soviet Union, Marxist-Socialist theme for their campaign called “Forward”.”

Food stamps “enslave the American people”: West lamented the rise in available food stamps for Americans. “That’s not how you empower the American people,” West said. “That’s how you enslave the American people.”

Social Security enslaves the American people: Appearing on Fox News, West criticized Social Security disability benefits. “Once again we are creating the sense of economic dependence, which to me is a form of modern, 21st century slavery.”

Obama wants to enslave people: West argued at a campaign event that Obama “does not want you to have the self-esteem of getting up and earning and having that title of American. He’d rather you be his slave.”

Said Barney Frank should be in a “pink jumpsuit”: West criticized openly gay Rep. Barney Frank’s (D-MA) congressional tenure earlier this year. “[He's] a guy who for all practical purposes should be in a pink jumpsuit for what he did.”

Told congresswoman, “You are not a lady”: West blasted nearby congresswoman Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) after a dispute, scolding her in a letter, “You have proven repeatedly that you are not a Lady, therefore, shall not be afforded due respect from me!”

Called for censoring news outlets: After Wikileaks released thousands of pages of documents, West argued that “we also should be censoring American news agencies” who reported on the cables.

Obama supporters are a “threat to the gene pool: West wrote on a conservative website, “I must confess, when I see anyone with an Obama 2012 bumper sticker, I recognize them as a threat to the gene pool.”

Religious coexistence “would give away our country”: West blasted “Coexist” bumper stickers at a March 2011 town hall, saying people who have them represent “something that would give away our country, would give away who we are.”

Said Nazi leader would be “very proud” of Democrats: In December 2011, West told reporters that “If Joseph Goebbels was around, he’d be very proud of the Democrat party, because they have an incredible propaganda machine.”

Criticized rise of feminism: West told a conservative conference that liberal women “have been neutering American men and bringing us to the point of this incredible weakness — to let them know that we are not going to have our men become subservient.”

Told liberals to “get the hell out of the United States”: At a Republican dinner, West had harsh words for his Democratic counterparts. “Take your message of equality of achievement. … You can take it to Europe, you can take it to the bottom of the sea, you can take it to the North Pole, but get the hell out of the United States of America.”


Those are your shining examples of the Republican Party.

And yes, I do not count the Democratic Party as being one bit better.

[Kiribati-Tarawa]

I don't subscribe to the idea that one's socioeconomic background makes them a good or bad leader or political ideologist. Just because you are one thing doesn't mean you can't understand something that isn't you. Just because one is rich and white doesn't mean that they don't want the best for the poor. It's no better than saying someone is unqualified to lead because they are poor.

This is true. Unfortunately, it does not seem to apply to the Republican party.

Being a Republican myself (though I would probably be towards the left of the party, given my liberal views on social policy), I do not believe that it is the duty of the government to provide welfare for the poor, nor do they have the prerogative to redistribute wealth. The poor, for the most part, are, sadly, poor by their own doing. Statistics support the idea that staying out of poverty in this country, which is a very well-off country by any standard, is a matter of self-control.

Former Clinton advisor William Galston sums up the matter this way: you need only do three things in this country to avoid poverty—finish high school, marry before having a child, and marry after the age of 20. Only 8 percent of the families who do this are poor; 79 percent of those who fail to do this are poor.

From this article

These statistics hold up, even among people who are born into poverty. The United States still is, in many ways, the land of opportunity. Avoiding poverty in this very prosperous country is not difficult. As such, it is my belief that people must learn to live with the consequences of their actions. Does this mean we should let people die on the street and leave them to rot? No, but this does not mean that we should punish the rich for being rich so that we can redistribute wealth and take from people who produce things and earn money and give it to those who do not. Does this make me an evil person for thinking so? No.

[Scyobayrynn]

This is the polarization I speak of-- see its general and worded to include all republicans. It presumes a homogenuous state of mind among republicans. Yet he likely believes his own side of the political coin hold great diversity of thought.

Its not a slight against you Tyrandel, its thought process that is a bill of goods youve been sold.

Being able to nitpick and quibble about ideology is the luxury of someone who is not slated for dehumanization by a party's politics. Anyone who identifies as a Republican and votes for people that hold the mainstream Republican view implicitly supports the Republican policies that target people like me (and presumably Tyrandel, but they weren't entirely specific).

You make assumptions about me because I do not participate in generalizing millions of people.

Then please also assume I am not an intolerant politicized ass, who uses weak excuses to justify my own brand of intolerance against those I disagree with.

[Heraklea-]

http://ivn.us/2014/01/16/hard-evidence-supports-need-voter-id-laws/
There's you're evidence! Or a way too back up my claim

Your source is a known partisan shill whose sole evidence of the occurrence of voter fraud is James O'Keefe, a disgraced "documentarist" who is known for taking video footage and selectively editing it to misleadingly support his cause of the week. Remember that whole issue I had with Repubs lying through their teeth all the time? These are guy that are part of that problem.

[Kiribati-Tarawa]

Being able to nitpick and quibble about ideology is the luxury of someone who is not slated for dehumanization by a party's politics. Anyone who identifies as a Republican and votes for people that hold the mainstream Republican view implicitly supports the Republican policies that target people like me (and presumably Tyrandel, but they weren't entirely specific).

You make assumptions about me because I do not participate in generalizing millions of people.

Then please also assume I am not an intolerant politicized ass, who uses weak excuses to justify my own brand of intolerance against those I disagree with.

Oh, please. Those programs are unsustainable and you know it, they are bankrupting our country. Something has to be done with them. Cutting it is one thing that could be done. (Before you go berzerk, I also support some cuts to the military, but this will not be near enough to solve any spending problem)

Old, white men? Just stop, seriously. You KNOW this isn't true.

It really is true.

and its Rich Old White men, they dont care for working class Whites either I mean beyond using fear mongering and pandering to the lowest common denominator to get the votes then they have no use for the working poor, and absolutely no intention of doing anything to help them be anything but poor.

Sorry, what was that about not generalising millions of people?

[The Black Forrest]

How about, instead of cutting programs for the poor, we raise taxes on the rich? Or, hell, we don't even need to do that. Just crack down on offshore tax havens that keep trillions out of the hands of the government.

Alright. Name every Republican leader who isn't an old, rich, white man, and lets see how many there are.

This is why.

Did you read the comment section?

And this.

Was that a "real" evaluation?

Black Republicans

Ok. You found 76. How many support the democrats and liberal ideas?

Even with your list; how many support the bible thumping aspects of the repubs?

some Republican women of Congress.

How many of those women hold positions of power? Head committees......

[The Flood]

Because they fuck over the poor to line the wallets of the rich, and a lot of the party's officials are remarkably unintelligent for people who are supposed to govern us.

[Insaeldor]

I don't hate Republicans and I'm fairly content with the centrist establishment Republicans. Men like Brian Sandavol and Colin Powell come to mind as Republicans i typiclly like. There are however some republicans I don't like, the Tea Party Republicans come to mind as I can't say I've ever found a liking to Republicans that call themselves "Tea Partiers" those Include Allen West, Ted Cruz, and Michele Bachmann generally put me off to the Republican Party and that the party itself is giving into its vocal minority.