Exclusive: Dozens of former Bush officials leave Republican Party, calling it 'Trump cult'

[Steeleballz 7,550]

(Reuters) - Dozens of Republicans in former President George W. Bush’s administration are leaving the party, dismayed by a failure of many elected Republicans to disown Donald Trump after his false claims of election fraud sparked a deadly storming of the U.S. Capitol last month.

 

These officials, some who served in the highest echelons of the Bush administration, said they had hoped that a Trump defeat would lead party leaders to move on from the former president and denounce his baseless claims that the November presidential election was stolen.

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-republicans-exclusive/exclusive-dozens-of-former-bush-officials-leave-republican-party-calling-it-trump-cult-idUSKBN2A1275

[Dashinka 24,505]

They can all join the Lincoln Project, I heard they have a bit of a scandal among their top folks.

Edited February 1, 2021 by Dashinka

[nykolos 711]

D

2 hours ago, Steeleballz said:

(Reuters) - Dozens of DEMOCRATS in former President George W. Bush’s administration

Let's call them for who they really are.

 

 

[TBoneTX 45,303]

Some (most, all) shouldn't let the door hit them in the hindquarters on their way out.

[Cyberfx1024 7,980]

1 hour ago, nykolos said:

D

Let's call them for who they really are.

 

 

You mean NeoCons... I hear that MSNBC and CNN loves to hire NeoCons

[Steeleballz 7,550]

53 minutes ago, Cyberfx1024 said:

You mean NeoCons... I hear that MSNBC and CNN loves to hire NeoCons

 

  Looks like Reuters does too now.

[Steeleballz 7,550]

1 hour ago, TBoneTX said:

Some (most, all) shouldn't let the door hit them in the hindquarters on their way out.

 

  I'm not sure you want to be chasing voters away given what happened this election. I'm sure they'll all be back on red by 2024 though.

[laylalex 7,285]

45 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

 

  I'm not sure you want to be chasing voters away given what happened this election. I'm sure they'll all be back on red by 2024 though.

This is a very good point. The Democrats are, for better or worse, a big tent party which of course makes it difficult to manage. Sometimes the tent needs to stretch a little more to keep in a Joe Manchin or a Kristen Synema, but it expands outwards where needed. Dialogue about points of disagreement are good for a party, heterodoxy is good for a party. That's not to say it works all the time or even most of the time in the Democratic Party. But it seems odd to me too that a party that just lost an election by 7 million votes would want to expel people from their party instead of asking themselves: why did we lose where we lost? Not just the battleground states, but every state they lost in. Some are easy answers, some not so easy.

[Steeleballz 7,550]

16 minutes ago, laylalex said:

This is a very good point. The Democrats are, for better or worse, a big tent party which of course makes it difficult to manage. Sometimes the tent needs to stretch a little more to keep in a Joe Manchin or a Kristen Synema, but it expands outwards where needed. Dialogue about points of disagreement are good for a party, heterodoxy is good for a party. That's not to say it works all the time or even most of the time in the Democratic Party. But it seems odd to me too that a party that just lost an election by 7 million votes would want to expel people from their party instead of asking themselves: why did we lose where we lost? Not just the battleground states, but every state they lost in. Some are easy answers, some not so easy.

 

  Yeah, I thought so too. When the GOP just had the best turnout they have ever had and still lose by millions, and the base is significantly older than the other side and younger voters are significantly more likely to vote Dem, I would think they would be looking at attracting new voters, not repelling existing ones.

 

   It's not like they don't know all that either. Those were the talking points prior to 2016. I recall Lindsey Graham saying "were not generating enough angry white guys to stay in business in the long term". Seems like they decided to double down with Trump for the short term. I don't think that is sustainable.

[Cyberfx1024 7,980]

2 hours ago, Steeleballz said:

 

  I'm not sure you want to be chasing voters away given what happened this election. I'm sure they'll all be back on red by 2024 though.

I would bet you a $100 they probably didn't vote for Trump

[yuna628 9,676]

1 minute ago, Cyberfx1024 said:

I would bet you a $100 they probably didn't vote for Trump

Is it a requirement that they do? 

[laylalex 7,285]

1 minute ago, yuna628 said:

Is it a requirement that they do? 

The party seemed keen to attract Obama voters in 2016 so 🤷‍♀️

[Cyberfx1024 7,980]

3 minutes ago, yuna628 said:

Is it a requirement that they do? 

All if you want to claim that you are part of a party then you should vote for the front runner. If you didn't vote for the head of the party then don't claim you are part of the party. 

[yuna628 9,676]

5 minutes ago, Cyberfx1024 said:

All if you want to claim that you are part of a party then you should vote for the front runner. If you didn't vote for the head of the party then don't claim you are part of the party. 

Let's say your party's front runner eats babies for dinner. Now you really don't think it's cool to eat babies for dinner in fact you don't think they stand for anything your party that you love is about. Still gonna vote for them, huh? 

 

Guess we all gotta be sheep these days...

 

There was a reason why many Democrats voted for Reagan.

Edited February 2, 2021 by yuna628

[laylalex 7,285]

So Republicans who sat out 2008 because they didn't like McCain and then voted for Romney aren't Republican? Or did they get re-baptized in 2012? Or maybe in the 2010 midterms?