Liz Cheney D- Wyoming

[825VOL]

Her electoral history shows 3 comfortable primary victories, and it would have likely stayed that way had she not been principled and opposed the abuse of power from Donald Trump.

You do not know if she miscalculated, unless you are another one of VolNation's resident mind-readers. Her calculation, for all we know, could very well have been that her career in Congress was worth sacrificing, in effort to stand up to the reckless tyranny of Donald Trump. You are choosing to view her with cynicism... when she has gained NOTHING from opposing her party's leadership during this tribal political age.

Stop using the phrase “tyranny of Donald Trump”. You obviously have no idea what tyranny is. Mean tweets and and loud combative personality- yes. Tyranny- no.

 

[BowlBrother85]

Stop using the phrase “tyranny of Donald Trump”. You obviously have no idea what tyranny is. Mean tweets and and loud combative personality- yes. Tyranny- no.

Trump's treatment of his fellow Republicans who would not break with protocol (or the Constitution and the law) and assist him in his efforts to overturn the outcome of his own election, such as Mike Pence, William Barr, Jeffrey Rosen, Brad Raffensperger, Brian Kemp and Doug Ducey, was the work of a tyrant, who was drunk with power and willing to use whatever means necessary to hold onto it.

I don't give a damn about tweets. Trump's conduct in between election day and January 6th posed a legitimate threat to the democratic system of elections in the United States.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

I don't give a damn about tweets. Trump's conduct in between election day and January 6th posed a legitimate threat to the democratic system of elections in the United States.

So you had no issues with him before November 2020? Only his last 90 days in office got you riled up?

 

[BowlBrother85]

So you had no issues with him before November 2020? Only his last 90 days in office got you riled up?

I didn't say that. I only said that I didn't care about tweets.

 

[NCFisher]

Her electoral history shows 3 comfortable primary victories, and it would have likely stayed that way had she not been principled and opposed the abuse of power from Donald Trump.

You do not know if she miscalculated, unless you are another one of VolNation's resident mind-readers. Her calculation, for all we know, could very well have been that her career in Congress was worth sacrificing, in effort to stand up to the reckless tyranny of Donald Trump. You are choosing to view her with cynicism... when she has gained NOTHING from opposing her party's leadership during this tribal political age.

Her electoral history means squat; again, three polls since the election show her under 25% in WY. That's fact, no mind-reading necessary.

Why is that? After four+ years of Russia collusion, fabricated from whole cloth and executed with Stasi-like determination by FBI/DOJ/Intel and media, Cheney stupidly runs with the left pack and peddles the Russia bounty hoax, Cheney Was A Main Culprit Of Spreading Fake News On Russian Bounties and THEN sides with the most radical congress in history to impeach on yet another lawless charge. Being critical of Trump's insistence that he could only lose if they cheated is one thing; taking "peacefully and patriotically make your voice heard" as a call to violence is indistinguishable from leftist propaganda. Continuing to refer to the capitol riot as "insurrection" indicates she has clearly lost the critical thought handle when it comes to Trump and doesn't understand the party.

Cheney then got into her head that establishment Repubs like herself are necessary to exorcise the Trump effect from the party and 'save it', when Repubs like her represent the decline of the party and rise of that radical left. She gained nothing because she didn't understand the base doesn't long for her daddy's GOP. They'd like someone who communicates much better, doesn't turn every slight into a public battle, and is more tempered. But if the choice is more establishment 2-party - or radical Marxists veiled as progressives - vision for the country, or Trump? Pretty ***** easy choice for R voters.

The left's allegations of "abuse of power" are overwhelmingly a sorry mess of ignorance of presidential plenary power or selective aversion to it, allusion, and Russiaaaaah! propaganda. None more spectacular than 'The Report Bearing Mueller's Name' second volume when, in fact, Mueller should have never been commissioned at all.

 

[norrislakevol]

Her electoral history means squat; again, three polls since the election show her under 25% in WY. That's fact, no mind-reading necessary.

Why is that? After four+ years of Russia collusion, fabricated from whole cloth and executed with Stasi-like determination by FBI/DOJ/Intel and media, Cheney stupidly runs with the left pack and peddles the Russia bounty hoax, Cheney Was A Main Culprit Of Spreading Fake News On Russian Bounties and THEN sides with the most radical congress in history to impeach on yet another lawless charge. Being critical of Trump's insistence that he could only lose if they cheated is one thing; taking "peacefully and patriotically make your voice heard" as a call to violence is indistinguishable from leftist propaganda. Continuing to refer to the capitol riot as "insurrection" indicates she has clearly lost the critical thought handle when it comes to Trump and doesn't understand the party.

Cheney then got into her head that establishment Repubs like herself are necessary to exorcise the Trump effect from the party and 'save it', when Repubs like her represent the decline of the party and rise of that radical left. She gained nothing because she didn't understand the base doesn't long for her daddy's GOP. They'd like someone who communicates much better, doesn't turn every slight into a public battle, and is more tempered. But if the choice is more establishment 2-party - or radical Marxists veiled as progressives - vision for the country, or Trump? Pretty ***** easy choice for R voters.

The left's allegations of "abuse of power" are overwhelmingly a sorry mess of ignorance of presidential plenary power or selective aversion to it, allusion, and Russiaaaaah! propaganda. None more spectacular than 'The Report Bearing Mueller's Name' second volume when, in fact, Mueller should have never been commissioned at all.

Cheney is a RINO if there ever was a RINO.

I've been thinking a lot about people like her (and people on here) who bought into/peddled the fake Russian collusion story. You can divide them into two: Group 1) Has zero common sense, are incapable of critical thought, and are extremely gullible. Group 2) Probably knew it was fake, but didn't care either way, using it for smear purposes only.

 

[hog88]

Cheney is a RINO if there ever was a RINO.

I've been thinking a lot about people like her (and people on here) who bought into/peddled the fake Russian collusion story. You can divide them into two: Group 1) Has zero common sense, are incapable of critical thought, and are extremely gullible. Group 2) Probably knew it was fake, but didn't care either way, using it for smear purposes only.

All of them are RINOs

 

[hog88]

Cheney voted to censure Gosar and strip him of his committee assignments.

 

[NCFisher]

Cheney is a RINO if there ever was a RINO.

I've been thinking a lot about people like her (and people on here) who bought into/peddled the fake Russian collusion story. You can divide them into two: Group 1) Has zero common sense, are incapable of critical thought, and are extremely gullible. Group 2) Probably knew it was fake, but didn't care either way, using it for smear purposes only.

Her voting record is standard issue GOP, but she lost her marbles thinking a fistful of Romney-types are going to move the party from the most substantial transformation in decades. By magnifying valid criticism of Trump into impeachment and becoming a Russia-narrative mouthpiece, no less.

 

[BowlBrother85]

Cheney is a RINO if there ever was a RINO.

This is ignorant. As I have said, and repeated, and posted a link for .... she votes straight down the Republican Party line. Facts mean nothing to you, if you believe that Liz Cheney is a Republican in name only. When it comes to how she votes on policy, instead of behavior, she is a Republican.

 

[BowlBrother85]

Her electoral history means squat; again, three polls since the election show her under 25% in WY. That's fact, no mind-reading necessary.

Why is that? After four+ years of Russia collusion, fabricated from whole cloth and executed with Stasi-like determination by FBI/DOJ/Intel and media, Cheney stupidly runs with the left pack and peddles the Russia bounty hoax, Cheney Was A Main Culprit Of Spreading Fake News On Russian Bounties and THEN sides with the most radical congress in history to impeach on yet another lawless charge. Being critical of Trump's insistence that he could only lose if they cheated is one thing; taking "peacefully and patriotically make your voice heard" as a call to violence is indistinguishable from leftist propaganda. Continuing to refer to the capitol riot as "insurrection" indicates she has clearly lost the critical thought handle when it comes to Trump and doesn't understand the party.

Cheney then got into her head that establishment Repubs like herself are necessary to exorcise the Trump effect from the party and 'save it', when Repubs like her represent the decline of the party and rise of that radical left. She gained nothing because she didn't understand the base doesn't long for her daddy's GOP. They'd like someone who communicates much better, doesn't turn every slight into a public battle, and is more tempered. But if the choice is more establishment 2-party - or radical Marxists veiled as progressives - vision for the country, or Trump? Pretty ***** easy choice for R voters.

The left's allegations of "abuse of power" are overwhelmingly a sorry mess of ignorance of presidential plenary power or selective aversion to it, allusion, and Russiaaaaah! propaganda. None more spectacular than 'The Report Bearing Mueller's Name' second volume when, in fact, Mueller should have never been commissioned at all.

Her electoral history demonstrates that she was popular among her constituents before she opposed Trump. She has fallen out favor, not over matters concerning policy, but because the Republican Party has morphed into a cult, where subservience and fealty to one person is the only criteria for membership.

 

[BowlBrother85]

Her voting record is standard issue GOP, but she lost her marbles thinking a fistful of Romney-types are going to move the party from the most substantial transformation in decades. By magnifying valid criticism of Trump into impeachment and becoming a Russia-narrative mouthpiece, no less.

She was wrong to think any other Republicans would ever show some semblance of a spine, and stand up to the abuses of power, of Donald Trump. He went too far in his attempts to retain the presidency in January. No other Republican seems to care.

 

[norrislakevol]

All of them are RINOs

Yeah, I would say that the vast majority are. I liked Trump's policies, but I always wanted him to be more fiscally conservative because Republicans are supposed to be fiscal hawks. Money wise he was like most of the other Republicans. They really changed during Bush's last term.

 

[norrislakevol]

This is ignorant. As I have said, and repeated, and posted a link for .... she votes straight down the Republican Party line. Facts mean nothing to you, if you believe that Liz Cheney is a Republican in name only. When it comes to how she votes on policy, instead of behavior, she is a Republican.

Many Republicans are RINO's, she is just a glaring example. Unfortunately, Republicans are definitely the lesser of two evils right now.

 

[newokie03]

Yeah, I would say that the vast majority are. I liked Trump's policies, but I always wanted him to be more fiscally conservative because Republicans are supposed to be fiscal hawks. Money wise he was like most of the other Republicans. They really changed during Bush's last term.

There hasn't been a fiscally conservative President in my lifetime and I was born when Nixon was President.

 

[AshG]

Republicanism isn't fiscally conservative at its core. Root Republicanism is simply the belief in the primacy of rei publicae - rule of law.

It is possible (and has been so in the past, before party shifts) that both primary parties had fiscally liberal and fiscally conservative branches. It's only really been a historically recent idea that Republicanism is tied to conservative financial policy.

 

[BowlBrother85]

Many Republicans are RINO's, she is just a glaring example. Unfortunately, Republicans are definitely the lesser of two evils right now.

The facts do not support your assertion.

Rep. Liz Cheney is neither an inconspicuous example, or a glaring example of a "Republican in name only". On anything having to do with policy, Rep. Liz Cheney has consistently cast her vote in favor of the preferred position of the Republican Party's leadership. In this thread, I have twice posted a link to her voting record during Trump's 4 years as President. Her votes were in line with President Trump's publicly stated position 92.9% of the time. It is only on matters concerning unprofessional conduct, where she has broken with her Republican Party colleagues.

Unless the Republican Party truly has become the Cult of Trump, a voting record should matter. Facts should matter. You are wrong to call her a RINO. It is a ridiculous thing to say.

 

[norrislakevol]

The facts do not support your assertion.

Rep. Liz Cheney is neither an inconspicuous example, or a glaring example of a "Republican in name only". On anything having to do with policy, Rep. Liz Cheney has consistently cast her vote in favor of the preferred position of the Republican Party's leadership. In this thread, I have twice posted a link to her voting record during Trump's 4 years as President. Her votes were in line with President Trump's publicly stated position 92.9% of the time. It is only on matters concerning unprofessional conduct, where she has broken with her Republican Party colleagues.

Unless the Republican Party truly has become the Cult of Trump, a voting record should matter. Facts should matter. You are wrong to call her a RINO. It is a ridiculous thing to say.

No, I'm not wrong. The majority of Republicans are RINO's, she just votes along with them. You just don't see it that way.

 

[BowlBrother85]

No, I'm not wrong. The majority of Republicans are RINO's, she just votes along with them. You just don't see it that way.

That doesn't make any sense. Whatever purpose, ideology or agenda comprises a majority of Republicans ... is what a Republican is.

 

[BowlBrother85]

Republicanism isn't fiscally conservative at its core. Root Republicanism is simply the belief in the primacy of rei publicae - rule of law.

It is possible (and has been so in the past, before party shifts) that both primary parties had fiscally liberal and fiscally conservative branches. It's only really been a historically recent idea that Republicanism is tied to conservative financial policy.

William F. Buckley and Rush Limbaugh both touted the importance of fiscal responsibility, but it was often hollow rhetoric. Their favorite President was clearly Reagan, who was definitely not a fiscal conservative.

 

[norrislakevol]

That doesn't make any sense. Whatever purpose, ideology or agenda comprises a majority of Republicans ... is what a Republican is.

Disagree. The majority of Democrats are going woke/socialist. That's not what they are supposed to be. Hell, even Obama believed in borders.

 

[BowlBrother85]

Disagree. The majority of Democrats are going woke/socialist. That's not what they are supposed to be. Hell, even Obama believed in borders.

Who gets to define what a "true" Republican or Democrat is then? You? If not, then who?

... and while we're at it, what is your definition of a Republican? What policies do they espouse? What are their objectives?

I would be willing to bet, that like most people, you would define a Republican by their adherence to these 8 core values :

1) Pro Life ... with no exceptions.

2) Pro 2nd Amendment. Strictly opposed to all forms of anti-gun legislation.

3) Pro de-regulation. Fewer government agencies, with as limited intrusion as possible.

4) Pro tax cuts, especially for the rich, and small business owners. Pro Arthur Laffer's supply side economics.

5) In favor of entitlement reform. Government should not provide a mechanism for social engineering, or income / wealth re-distribution.

6) Pro military. Strong on defense.

7) Not necessarily fiscally conservative in practice, but raise hell at the irresponsible federal spending of Democrats.

8) The belief in having as close to a free market economy as the country can sustain.

I would point out, that Rep. Liz Cheney has been a strong advocate and supporter of every single one of these values. Her voting record demonstrates that. You are dead wrong to call her a "RINO".

 

[volfanhill]

Who gets to define what a "true" Republican or Democrat is then? You? If not, then who?

... and while we're at it, what is your definition of a Republican? What policies do they espouse? What are their objectives?

I would be willing to bet, that like most people, you would define a Republican by their adherence to these 8 core values :

1) Pro Life ... with no exceptions.

2) Pro 2nd Amendment. Strictly opposed to all forms of anti-gun legislation.

3) Pro de-regulation. Fewer government agencies, with as limited intrusion as possible.

4) Pro tax cuts, especially for the rich, and small business owners. Pro Arthur Laffer's supply side economics.

5) In favor of entitlement reform. Government should not provide a mechanism for social engineering, or income / wealth re-distribution.

6) Pro military. Strong on defense.

7) Not necessarily fiscally conservative in practice, but raise hell at the irresponsible federal spending of Democrats.

8) The belief in having as close to a free market economy as the country can sustain.

I would point out, that Rep. Liz Cheney has been a strong advocate and supporter of every single one of these values. Her voting record demonstrates that. You are dead wrong to call her a "RINO".

Lol at number 4. You have fallen for Dem attack adds. And yes Republicans want less taxes. Graduated income tax system is a thing.

 

[BowlBrother85]

Lol at number 4. You have fallen for Dem attack adds. And yes Republicans want less taxes. Graduated income tax system is a thing.

Arthur Laffer and his supply side economics are a thing as well... and he has served as an advisor to every Republican President since Reagan. You can "LOL" all you want to. #4 is spot on. Laffer's influence has been profound in the Republican Party.

 

[volfanhill]

Arthur Laffer and his supply side economics are a thing as well... and he has served as an advisor to every Republican President since Reagan. You can "LOL" all you want to. #4 is spot on. Laffer's influence has been profound in the Republican Party.

That wasn't what I was laughing at. Try again.