1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

'Rationals' vs. 'radicals': Anti-Trump Republicans threaten third party

Discussion in 'News & Current Events' started by Baptist Believer, May 11, 2021.

  1. Baptist Believer

    Baptist Believer Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    9,856
    Likes Received:
    686
    Faith:
    Baptist
    WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Over 100 former Republican officials will sign a letter on Thursday declaring that if the Republican Party does not break with former President Donald Trump and change course, they will back the creation of a third party.

    The letter, headlined: “A Call For American Renewal,” is an exploratory move toward forming a breakaway party, two of its organizers said. The group is dismayed by what it says is a modern Republican Party driven by its allegiance to Trump, who continues to falsely claim the 2020 election was stolen from him.

    “The Republican Party is broken. It’s time for a resistance of the ‘rationals’ against the ‘radicals,’” said Miles Taylor, one of the organizers. Taylor, while serving in the Trump White House, wrote an anonymous opinion piece in the New York Times in 2018 headlined: “I Am Part of the Resistance Inside the Trump Administration.”

    more here
     
  2. Conan

    Conan Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2019
    Messages:
    469
    Likes Received:
    103
    Faith:
    Baptist
    It is not a false claim.
     
  3. Alcott

    Alcott Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2002
    Messages:
    9,195
    Likes Received:
    328
    Faith:
    Baptist
    The Cow Moose Party, or what will they call it?
     
  4. Reynolds

    Reynolds Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2014
    Messages:
    10,013
    Likes Received:
    1,768
    Faith:
    Baptist
    The RINO party.
     
    • Winner Winner x 3
  5. Paul from Antioch

    Paul from Antioch Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2021
    Messages:
    479
    Likes Received:
    41
    Faith:
    Baptist
    It is called The Constitution Party.. www.constitutionparty.org This party was formed after the demise of the Taxpayer's Party. To its distracters it seems to be siphoning what normally would be conservative Republican Party support and/or voters. Some have claimed that its participation in the 2020 general election in which the CP ran its own candidates for both the US President's race as well as in several state and/or local races handed the White House over to Biden. From what little I've been able to gather about the CP, it doesn't seem IMHO at this time to be much of a serious threat to GOP conservatives (except for example the GOP's running Mitt Romney for President on 2012). The CP's success on the state or local levels seems to vary from location to location. Whether the CP will ever amount to a really serious factor in national political election victories remains to be seen. With a few exceptions (the 1968 race for example) these third parties, sincere as they may claim to be, tend to be more of a spoiler than a really viable alternative to our two major parties. OTOH, one ought to consider the 1856 presidential race as an example. In that race the relatively newly-formed GOP lost in its bid for the US President. Four years later, GOP President Abraham Lincoln won. In that particular election year there was at least one, possibly two, third parties. In 1860 there was a Constitutional Union party that was somewhat of a factor in our border states. Its candidate was named Bell (as far as I know, he was not a direct relative of Alexander Graham Bell, inventor of the telephone). Candidate Bell campaigned and merely claimed to be for, "Both the Constitution AND the Union." Of the border states wherein he was somewhat successful, his drawing power appeared viable to those voters who probably would have voted for the GOP candidate Lincoln. It seemed that at first, Lincoln's attitude towards the slavery issue was more of a tacid agreement to retain this institution as it was at that time in our history, i.e., slavery appeared to be a necessary evil in the Deep South where it'd been somewhat widely accepted as a "fact of life" for the powerful cotton plantation owners. However, Lincoln WAS opposed to slavery being expanded into regions whose climate and/or geography were simply not conducive to developing large plantations such as was a fact in our Deep South. It's really a misnomer to apply the "Great Emancipator' title to Lincoln. In his 1863 Emancipation Proclamation, it did NOT free any slaves in the North. All it really did was to liberate such slaves that were in areas already (or soon to be) under the Union Army's control/occupation. IOW, the saying that the EP was more of a lofty goal rather than an obvious desire at the time it first was "proclaimed." IOW, it was truthfully said that Lincoln's EP "freed no slaves where he could, but it only freed what slaves it couldn't" is actually TRUE. Granted, Lincoln seemed to want to be more lenient to the seceding Southern states once they were occupied by the US Army than that of the so-called "Radical" Republicans who pretty much controlled the US Congress in the 1860s & during the Reconstruction Period. To the Radicals, the breakaway southern states forfeited their role once they broke away from the "ONE nation, indivisible" former UNITED states & hence paid the price politically for at least a generation or two in the aftermath of "The War of Northern Aggression" as it was called by many southerners back then. The forming of the KKK & implementation of Jim Crow laws in the South was another reaction to the rather harsh conditions in the already battle-torn areas of our "un-united' states. But back to the CP. Given today's philosophical impasse of the GOP and the national Democratic Party, all it seems to me is that the CP at present is more like the Progressive "Bull Moose" party of 1912. TR didn't think Taft was "Progressive" enough, but in reality all the TR factor seemed to be successful was to divide the GOP's "party loyalists" into two warring camps. This division only proved to hand Democrat Woodrow Wilson the White House. The same could also be said in 1968 were Wallace's run only hurt the still largely Democratic voters in the South to vote for the American Independent Party & thus the GOP won & we then got Nixon, who. of course, PROVED that "I'm NOT a Crook."
     
  6. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    49,748
    Likes Received:
    3,134
    Faith:
    Baptist
    They think it’s an allegiance to Trump. They don’t get it which is why they have lost so much support from real republicans.
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. just-want-peace

    just-want-peace Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2002
    Messages:
    7,182
    Likes Received:
    691
    Faith:
    Baptist
    A great big triple AMEN TO THIS!!!:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

    Either the Rs get it together 'fore '22 or this party is toast, and this ole geezer is one who will quickly become an "I" rather than an "R". 'Course right now the only reason I am an R is the ability to vote in primaries. When the Rs become D lite, then that one reason is gone!!!
    MARANATHA!!!!!!!!!!!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Baptist Believer

    Baptist Believer Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    9,856
    Likes Received:
    686
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I doubt they would join an existing party. Moreover, the Constitution Party platform (at least as it was a few years ago when I looked into it) would not be a good fit for many former Republicans.

    A nit pick:
    Actually, it did NOT liberate slaves in areas currently under Union control. For instance, New Orleans and surrounding areas were specifically excluded from the order. Lincoln only "freed" slaves not currently under his control. Some speculate he was trying to incite a slave uprising or cause other disruption in the Confederacy. But from that point onward, slaves were generally freed at the discretion of the Union commanders.

    Yes, exactly right.
     
  9. Paul from Antioch

    Paul from Antioch Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2021
    Messages:
    479
    Likes Received:
    41
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Right on my Brother......And Lincoln was a Republican....Of course he lived in IL.....Maybe he got the idea from those CROOK County Chicago "ADvisors"???:D:D:D:D:Frown:Frown:Frown:Tongue:Tongue:Tongue
     
  10. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    50,806
    Likes Received:
    2,625
    Faith:
    Baptist
    He would had been then their Judas, and the republican party must understand that they move forward by being Conservative, and not by becoming Rinos!
     
  11. RighteousnessTemperance&

    RighteousnessTemperance& Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2017
    Messages:
    5,594
    Likes Received:
    1,080
    Faith:
    Baptist
    These RINOs made a cardinal mistake in not backing Trump’s pro-America policies when they had the majority. They helped create Trump by running Romney and McCain instead of someone sensible. Their rationale has always been irrational.

    They cannot now look pro-America while bashing Trump. They simply aren’t credible. They might be able to ruin the party, but they’ve already helped the Dems ruin the country, eight years under Obama and now another four years under Biden-Harris. They are RINOs.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Winner Winner x 2
  12. Baptist Believer

    Baptist Believer Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    9,856
    Likes Received:
    686
    Faith:
    Baptist
    If it is not about allegiance to Trump, what is it?

    Whatever you do, don't claim she is a RINO (like a number of others here), since she has voted with Trump well over 90% of the time -- a much higher percentage than the woman who will probably take her place. It is certainly not an issue with supporting the Republican agenda, unless the Republican agenda is to claim that Trump won the last election and that he should not face any consequences for his words and actions.

    So what is the real issue?
     
  13. canadyjd

    canadyjd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2005
    Messages:
    7,396
    Likes Received:
    696
    And they will get about 1% support because that is what they represent.

    peace to you
     
  14. thomas15

    thomas15 Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    1,576
    Likes Received:
    17
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Just an fyi

    In the Presidential election of 1864, Abraham Lincoln (R) was running against George McClellan (D). McClellan was actually a General in the Federal Army. President Lincoln had made him Commanding General of the U.S. Army in 1861, right after the Battle of First Bull Run. He was demoted after the 7 Days Battles but was given command of the Army of the Potomac after the Battle of Second Bull Run (August 29-30 1862). General McClellan was the Union Commander at the Battle of Antietam MD (Sept 17, 1862), a tactical Union victory. This victory gave Lincoln the opportunity to issue the Emancipation Proclamation, which he did five days later on Sept 22, 1862.

    General McClellan was both vocally critical of Lincoln and slow to move his army after Antietam. Lincoln relieved him of command in November 1862.

    As mentioned, Democrat McClellan ran against Lincoln in 1864. His position on the American Civil War was that he would have made peace with the southern states then in rebellion thus ending the war. The implication being that the institution of slavery would have been left to the discretion of the individual states.

    It is also generally understood that the Emancipation Proclamation slowed down the impending recognition of France and England of the Confederacy. The Union victory at Gettysburg PA (July 1-3, 1863) and the fall of Vicksburg, MS the next day (July 4, 1863), closed the door for that recognition and marked the beginning of the end of the Confederacy.
     
    • Informative Informative x 3
    • Agree Agree x 2
  15. Paul from Antioch

    Paul from Antioch Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2021
    Messages:
    479
    Likes Received:
    41
    Faith:
    Baptist
     
  16. Paul from Antioch

    Paul from Antioch Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2021
    Messages:
    479
    Likes Received:
    41
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I do recall one of stand-up comedian, turned TV star Bob Newhart's routine "Abe Lincoln vs Madison Avenue." It's hilaroius!! Especially at the end where Abe's inviting his ad man to a bridge party at the White House: "A bridge party at the White House? Sorry Abe, Old boy...I'll be booked up solid out in LA for some new ad campaign for some up-and-coming Congress people!! Tell you what though.....Why don't you and Mary go to that Ford's Theater and take in a play?? From what I heard of its new script, you''ll just die laughing!!:eek::eek::eek::eek::Rolleyes:Rolleyes:Rolleyes:Rolleyes:Tongue:Tongue:Tongue:Tongue:Sleep:Sleep:Sleep:Sleep:Sleep:Sleep
     
  17. thomas15

    thomas15 Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    1,576
    Likes Received:
    17
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Sounds like a real laugh riot.

    Abraham Lincoln's predecessor, the 15th US President was James Buchanan (D). Buchanan's Vice President was John C. Breckenridge who was the Democratic nominee running against Lincoln in 1860. Breckenridge then served as US Senator for KY. When he received a commission as Brigadier General in the Confederate Army he was kicked out of the Senate and left DC.

    As General, Breckenridge moved up the ranks and was the commander of the southern force during the Battle of New Market VA (May 15, 1864). While his troops won the battle, the notable thing about the affair was the decision to place 261 cadets from VMI into the line of battle. These were of course kids in uniform. Breckenridge was a division commander at the battle of Cold Harbor VA (May 31-June 12 1864) and a few others of note then sent out west where he did well for the confederate cause.

    On January 19, 1865, Confederate President Jefferson Davis appointed him to the post of Secretary of War, a post he held until his country surrendered. He then fled to Cuba, then to England, to Canada then France. He toured Europe with his family and met the pope before returning to Canada. In 1869 he returned to KY where he spent the rest of his life.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    50,806
    Likes Received:
    2,625
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Real issue is that the Dem party has ran fast in to the lane of secularism and denouncing the Lord jesus, and exalting the darkness!
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  19. Paul from Antioch

    Paul from Antioch Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2021
    Messages:
    479
    Likes Received:
    41
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Oddly enough, Guess who was POTUS Franklin Pierce's (A Northerner) Secretary of War? If you guessed Jefferson Davis....you're right!! :D:D:D:eek::eek::eek::Laugh:Laugh:Laugh:Whistling:Whistling:Whistling
     
  20. Paul from Antioch

    Paul from Antioch Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2021
    Messages:
    479
    Likes Received:
    41
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Moreover, Davis proposed that the US "Harbor Ports" be manned by each respective state's Milita (That era's designation for our modern-day Army National Guard.) For some reason(s) neither Congress nor the Executive Branches acted on Davis's proposal. Hence, in 1861 SC's Fort Sumpter was bombarded by the SC Militia & this required our new C-in-C to send reinforcements to protect what remained of Ft. Sumpter!! In the 1860s, Congress was controlled by the so-called "Radical" Republicans, headed by Steward (Who later "purchased" (With the US citizens' tax money!!) the Alaskan territory from Czarist Russia ("Steward's Folly"). Also, his demands that Congress pass a "Tenure of Office" Act (Which it did.) was what led to the impeachment of Andrew Johnson. Johnson survived his impeachment by a landslide vote of one US Senator. Thus he stayed in the remainder of what should have been Lincoln's 2d Term. (& BTW, in 1864 Lincoln did NOT run as a Republican. He ran on what was called "The Union Ticket" with A J as his running mate.) Johnson quietly served out the remainder of the Union Party's 4-year term, and after April 1869 he went back to his humble abode in E TN. Subsequently the SCOUS rulled the Tenure of Office Act (Which stipulated that any presidential appointee that required the US Senate's approval would also require the Senate's approval to remove said appointee from that office.) was UNCONSTITUTIONAL. In true poetic justice, Andrew Johnson's last federal position was that of a US Senator from TN. :Laugh:Laugh:Laugh:p:p:p:Whistling:Whistling:Whistling
     
Loading...