I think this analogy is getting weird haha. They are on the same team, in theory. I suppose in your Brazil scenario it's that you really hate the head coach and how he wasted the player's talent talent and you need to bite the bullet and see Brazil lose so that you get a new head coach.

Anyway, the point is that these guys are playing the long game and feel like it will be more beneficial if they just get their ass kicked in a single election cycle so that they can be a legitimate opposition party again. Failure to do so could result in Democratic dominance for decades. I don't mean to present a false dichotomy here, but which scenario would be better for center-right people?

It wouldn't be Roberts either. Gorsuch will look at the text and say that it's abundantly clear that you can't do that.



I'm not sure what you mean by this.

Why do you think the Lincoln Project cares what Democrats think? They want to take back control of the party that they once belonged to. These people ARE traditional conservatives...
The fact that you think that we care about Trump's "rudeness" means you're extremely out of touch. Chris Christie is "rude." IceMage and I would be very happy with a Christie presidency and so would members of the Lincoln Project.

Judges aren't supposed to be activists, sorry.



He wants to legitimize Trumpism as a form of conservatism. It is only so in a sense pejorative to conservatism.

Trump is a platform for very low insight racists.

I enjoyed the look of defeat in Christie's eyes when he was one of the first to be cucked by Trump.




You use the phrase soyboy faggot unironically, so you fit in with that bloc.

You are authoritarian, not conservative. Conservatives are for limited government. You stated in many times you want the government to legislate your discriminations. Conservatives are generally anti-fascist, not anti-faggot. You never talk about limited government or low taxes.

This post was edited by Skinned on Jul 21 2020 03:56pm

Nice pivot. I’m asking you specifically as a social conservative what choice do you have?

It’s an easy choice for some of us who have our conservative stances solidified.

I’d vote for trump 99/100 even if he behaves like a dumb fuck because the alternative is actually much more harmful to my core ideology and things that are important to me.

Agreed.



1. The Daily Show does a better job than most Democratic groups.
2. Why? Normal people don't go searching for the people behind attack ads... they simply absorb it, and it's either effective or not. Pro-Trump people attack the Lincoln Project because it produces effective content, and it's easier to attack the members, rather than defend Trump on the merits.
3. He explicitly relates the obstruction with recovery efforts. TLP can do what they want, and it's a legitimate worry that once Biden gets in, Republicans will no longer participate seriously in passing legislation that deals with these crises. Frankly, if Trump loses, I'm not sure TLP will be all that relevant anyway.
4. No, because my policy viewpoints don't align with the Democratic party sufficiently, I'm not a member of the party, and I don't identify as a Democrat. It's just the case that there's two relevant political parties in America, and only one has a level of seriousness that warrants my vote. There's rare exceptions where I might re-elect a Romney or something, but in general, I can't support any Republicans. The party and voters need to be punished.

This post was edited by IceMage on Jul 21 2020 04:03pm

Which scenario is better for center-right people? For Trump to lose by a mid-sized but comfortable margin (say 4-5% or so, Obama/Romney style) while the GOP narrowly holds the Senate. This way, Republicans keep a seat at the table in national politics, Biden cant push any far-left agenda through and he would presumably also have to compromise on the ideology of his supreme court nominations. You'd get Merrick Garland instead of the next RBG. The establishment wing of the Democratic party (Biden-Pelosi-Obama) being able to point at the Republican Senate would also strengthen their position in their intraparty fight with the Bernie-Warren-Squad wing.

If Biden wins in a landslide, the Dems expand their House majority and take back the Senate, you will not only get some fairly lefty policies enacted, but also go back to the situation of the judiciary that we had in 2016, with the federal courts soaked with very liberal, activist judges. Then, any GOP agenda would be stopped dead in its tracks once they are back in power in 4-10 years.

It would also mean that the GOP would lose the populist, predominantly white working-class voters that Trump won for the party. And they would then have to win back the suburbs and minorities that Trump alienated without bleeding support among non-college whites. Rebuilding the party after a cataclysmic loss in 2020 would be a lot harder than just "go back to the Paul Ryan agenda" or "go back to what GWB was doing".

I'm a social conservative, but there's a base level of character and competence that I require of people I vote for. I acknowledge that a vote for Biden is almost definitely going to result in worse outcomes for social conservatism, but those aren't the only issues on the table.

If you boil this down to strictly policy issues, you're just not understanding anti-Trump people like myself.

This post was edited by IceMage on Jul 21 2020 04:02pm

Kasich types were always in it for themselves.

It depends what you mean by social conservatism. Anti-abortion only? Anti-gay rights? Anti-trans? You need to be more specific because a lot of these ships have sailed. I'm very anti-abortion but I also know that things aren't going to change. It's been legal for 50 fucking years and the case law is solidified. It's a pipe dream that abortion will be illegal again. So for me, it doesn't matter because nothing will change.

Here is MY calculus: I really like judges approved by the Federalist Society which tend to be appointed by Republicans. My biggest concern is that the GOP keeps doubling down on a losing strategy which could put the presidency out of reach for decades. Given that we have a majority on SCOTUS for at least 10 more years, I'd rather rip the band-aid off now so that we can be competitive next election. Americans have a short memory and are quick to forgive.

To answer your question though, people who are strictly social conservatives and nothing else are fine IMO. They've been ideologically consistent and simply don't care about other policies. There are much worse enablers IMO.

Policy issues is what matter most or should matter most, at least imo. Most people are single issue voters, at most they maybe care about one or two more things strongly. Like I said I can overlook trump being a dumbfuck on Twitter, fumbling corona, not being ‘presidential’ etc because at the end of the day social conservativism is an overwhelmingly important issue to me. So is being anti war. Trump actually represents my politics better than the traditional neocon conservative that have been popular for awhile now. He’s no Pat Buchanan but he’ll do.