We Never Know
No Slack
I don't like either party.
Tell me why your party is the best.
Not a person, the party.
And go...
Tell me why your party is the best.
Not a person, the party.
And go...
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
democrat or republican
- Thread starter We Never Know
- Start date
I don't like either party, either.
InvestigateTruth
Well-Known Member
I don't like partition politics. They are always fighting and competing with each other.
They both suck.
But I’m not American and indeed I don’t like my political parties lol
Democratic party: basically decent and law abiding. Pro Democracy.
Republican party: Trump, restrict voting, restrict choice, authoritarianism growing, gaslighting
Neither is anywhere close to perfect but the Trump party (in the words of Eric Trump) would destroy the country given time.
Republican party: Trump, restrict voting, restrict choice, authoritarianism growing, gaslighting
Neither is anywhere close to perfect but the Trump party (in the words of Eric Trump) would destroy the country given time.
We Never Know
No Slack
I agree Trump is a **** stain on the republican party. But he has his devoted followers regardless.
Yeah both parties suck.
I say everyone should write in their own name
If by "destroying country" one means "destroying the elitist dictatorship that make Freemasons and Bankers exploit the populace", sure. I do agree. Trump's party can destroy the country.
Freemasons?
Gargovic Malkav
Well-Known Member
I'm not really a party animal.
Oh, you mean politics?
I'm not really a party animal.
I mean the high ranks.
Of freemasonry?
I always wonder: why do Freemasons never say they are Freemasons?
It seems a very shady and suspicious thing to me, honestly.
It reminds me of some secretive things ...plots...you know...
You beat me to it
I have know 2 Freemasons they both said they were Freemasons. I guess I might have known more and they didn't tell me.
I see.
Could it be that they don't say because of perceptions such as the "plots" you mention? Maybe they don't think it's safe to say.
I also have seen quite a few people who advertise that they are members. Such as license plate borders, bumper stickers, rings etc.
I think Freemasonry is the epitome of the Us vs Them mentality, meaning that they are better than ordinary people.
That's just my personal opinion.
Last edited:
I think Freemasonry is the epitome of the Us vs Them mentality, meaning that they are better than ordinary people.
That's just my personal opinion.
Sorry you feel that way.
I think Freemasonry is the epitome of the Us vs Them mentality, meaning that they are better than ordinary people.
That's just my personal opinion.
I understand that might be how you feel. But I'm not sure that that would pass factual muster.
I think it is a rare politician who doesn't lie, or who won't sell his/her soul if they feel it will do them some good. Rare, but the species isn't quite extinct. I also prefer a multi-party system -- and I'm aware of the argument "but you never get a true majority so you can get things done!" That's okay with me, minority governments, if they are going to survive at all, have to compromise far more often, meaning more viewpoints are brought into consideration, and there's a better chance of satisfying a broader constituency. When was the last time anybody saw the Republicans compromise -- especially in McConnell's Senate?
That said, I do honestly think that the Democrats have more concern for people, real human beings, than do the Republicans. The Republicans have their "ideals" that must be realized, even if it hurts some people. I sense, in fact, that the Republican notion of "liberty" includes allowing people to be at liberty to suffer and die for making "the wrong choice." C'est la vie, non?
So while I don't really care for either party, I will take the Democrats 99 times to just 1 for the Republicans. I can still never forget McConnell's new "rule" that prevented Merrick Garland even getting a hearing in his SCOTUS nomination, which "rule" magically didn't count when it was Amy Coney Barrett's turn. That was the most blatant hypocrisy I think anybody has ever seen -- except for Ted Cruz, Lindsay Graham and a whole bunch of others. Of Republicans, I'd keep Liz Cheney, Mitt Romney and Adam Kinzinger. The rest I'd toss out with the trash.
That said, I do honestly think that the Democrats have more concern for people, real human beings, than do the Republicans. The Republicans have their "ideals" that must be realized, even if it hurts some people. I sense, in fact, that the Republican notion of "liberty" includes allowing people to be at liberty to suffer and die for making "the wrong choice." C'est la vie, non?
So while I don't really care for either party, I will take the Democrats 99 times to just 1 for the Republicans. I can still never forget McConnell's new "rule" that prevented Merrick Garland even getting a hearing in his SCOTUS nomination, which "rule" magically didn't count when it was Amy Coney Barrett's turn. That was the most blatant hypocrisy I think anybody has ever seen -- except for Ted Cruz, Lindsay Graham and a whole bunch of others. Of Republicans, I'd keep Liz Cheney, Mitt Romney and Adam Kinzinger. The rest I'd toss out with the trash.