She's right. In fact, this is WHY the Republicans are the minority party. Their opposition to the social safety net means that they are willing to let a hundred million Americans go homeless and starve rather than have a system to provide for them.

That entire hundred million votes is permanently written off. There is no OTHER electorate that the Republicans can look to to replace the bottom half of the America.

Trump is the only Republican who gets this...which is why so many Republican leaders hate him.

In fact, this is WHY the Republicans are the minority party. Their opposition to the social safety net means that they are willing to let a hundred million Americans go homeless and starve rather than have a system to provide for them.

Nah. Conservatives would rather give them jobs than make them an eternal dependent underclass on the government tit. Dems just lie, mislead or distort in public and tell the truth in private. It's called having a private and a public position.

Under President Obama, the economy has experienced a record 70 straight months of private-sector job growth. Over 14 million jobs!

— Donna Brazile (@donnabrazile) January 13, 2016

Nah. Conservatives would rather give them jobs than make them an eternal dependent underclass on the government tit. Dems just lie, mislead or distort in public and tell the truth in private. It's called having a private and a public position.

No, Republicans would rather that they HAD jobs, but Republicans don't want to lift a finger to make that happen. The jobs are supposed to just exist, because the market is supposed to be efficient. It's not, and they don't, but Republicans have never been willing to think through that part. Democrats have, and people on the margins see the difference and vote for them on account of it. Republicans are really stubborn about it too, which does not bode well for their long term survival.

Republicans don't want to lift a finger to make that happen.

[...]

Democrats have, and people on the margins see the difference and vote for them on account of it.

Democrats have created an underclass in the inner city ghetto projects who are dependent, like addicts, on government handouts. The government education they are provided is a disgrace.

Socialism is the answer only where living on the dole is an accepted way of life.

Democrats have created an underclass in the inner city ghetto projects who are dependent, like addicts, on government handouts. The government education they are provided is a disgrace.

Socialism is the answer only where living on the dole is an accepted way of life.

Go back before welfare, including Social Security and Medicare. What was that like? It was the Great Depression. There was starvation. That's the problem with refusing - and Republicans absolutely refuse - to accept the need for a systematic approach to poverty. In good times, poverty can perhaps be handled through private charity, but in bad times, poverty expands exponentially, the wolf is at everybody's door, and the rich, by themselves, neither have the resources nor the interest in keeping everybody alive, fed and sheltered. It's not their job.

The Left and the Center have turned to government to fill this gap, and government HAS filled the gap. There's nothing else to do it. Republicans have systematically refused, since the 1930s, to admit that on a philosophical level. They refuse to admit it. They refuse to ADDRESS it.

Consider the health insurance issue, that led to Obamacare. Obamacare sucks, but what did the Republicans offer to address the problem? NOTHING. They offered nothing. And in the face of a crying need, something, anything, is better than nothing - at least you're trying. Republicans have refused to try. They have set their faces against ANY sort of rational social welfare, and view it punitively. That is why they are the minority party, and always will be.

The difference in THIS election, which makes it unlike any other, is that THIS time the control of the Supreme Court will pass to the Democrats for the first time in 50 years - if Hillary wins. Truth is, it has been the conservatism of the Supreme Court that has held back the Democrats from charging ahead into all sorts of protected areas of the Right.

With 5 liberal Dems on the Supreme Court, things will change across the board faster than at any time since the "Switch in Time that Saved Nine" allowed FDR to implement the New Deal.

Republicans have not reconciled themselves even to the New Deal. They hold to a "Flat Earth" view of social welfare that will never win the day again (and that failed in the first place because it did not work in the crisis of the Depression).

Trump's appeal relies, in part, on the fact that he isn't a traditional Republican at all. His energized voter base is not the traditional GOP base.

Anyway, all of the Republicans had better hope Trump wins, because he is what is standing between them and political oblivion. They don't realize how dramatic and swift the changes will be when the Supreme Court works for Hillary Clinton.

Go back before welfare, including Social Security and Medicare. What was that like? It was the Great Depression. There was starvation.

I heard about it endlessly from my parents. Please document the starvation where the dead were being put in the street and picked up in the mornings.

From the crash of 1929 to the 21st Amendment in 1933, the people still seemed able to support the speakeasys.

Let's not get carried away. It was tough times but the people were not starving to death. That would be Leningrad in WW2.

That's the problem with refusing - and Republicans absolutely refuse - to accept the need for a systematic approach to poverty. That's the problem with refusing - and Republicans absolutely refuse - to accept the need for a systematic approach to poverty.

Whereas, the liberals/socialists have a very systematic approach to poverty. Keep the impoverished where they are, keep them dependent of government handouts, and keep them like pets.

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/1637

The main reason behind successful immigration should be painfully obvious to even the most dimwitted of observers: Some groups of people are almost always highly successful given only half a chance (Jews*, Hindus/Sikhs and Chinese people, for example), while others (Muslims, blacks** and Roma***, for instance) fare badly almost irrespective of circumstances. The biggest group of humanity can be found somewhere between those two extremes – the perennial overachievers and the professional never-do-wells.

So, they consider Blacks to be "professional never-do-wells" and treat them as such, giving them poor education, a ghetto, drugs, food stamps, EBT cards, and promises. The actual, real world result of this crap is that 73% of black children are born to unmarried mothers, and 67% grow up in single-parent households.

This is what liberalism has wrought. It has systematically destroyed black families.

CNN's Don Lemon says more than 72 percent of African-American births are out of wedlock

By Louis Jacobson on Monday, July 29th, 2013 at 6:48 p.m.

[...]

Our ruling

Lemon said that "more than 72 percent of children in the African-American community are born out of wedlock." Federal data confirms that 73 percent of African-American births in 2010 were out of wedlock. Estimates for the percentage of African-American children growing up in single-parent households are slightly lower, at 67 percent. Finally, black children counted in these statistics may have contact outside the household with their biological father. But Lemon's statistic was accurate, and we rate his statement True.

Consider the health insurance issue, that led to Obamacare. Obamacare sucks, but what did the Republicans offer to address the problem? NOTHING. They offered nothing.

NOTHING would be better then Obamacare, and all before Obamacare was better than Obamacare. What the heck does a poor person do with a high-deductable policy? They help the government statistical claim of having more people insured. But what good is insurance they cannot use before they shell out $6,000 out of pocket? The whole thing is a great big boondoggle.

The difference in THIS election, which makes it unlike any other, is that THIS time the control of the Supreme Court will pass to the Democrats for the first time in 50 years - if Hillary wins. Truth is, it has been the conservatism of the Supreme Court that has held back the Democrats from charging ahead into all sorts of protected areas of the Right.

Let me fix that for you.

Truth is, it has been the conservatism of the Supreme Court that has held back the Democrats from charging ahead into all sorts of protected areas of the Right. for which the people, by the Constitution, did not delegate authority to the Federal government.

There, that's better. They are areas that the people protected. They said to the Federal government, not yours. The word for the liberal systematic assault on constitutional rights is usurpation.

Republicans have not reconciled themselves even to the New Deal. They hold to a "Flat Earth" view of social welfare that will never win the day again (and that failed in the first place because it did not work in the crisis of the Depression).

Actually, it will likely win the day again, but not until the liberal fiscal nonsense bankrupts the country which has now amassed $20T in Federal debt.

Nothing compares to the myth of the Social Security trust fund. It consists of nothing more than the full faith and credit of the U.S. Government. The money taken in goes to the general fund and gets spent. Monthly deposits from the general fund are made to the Social Security Administration to cover current expenses. It operates month-to-month to the general fund. If the general fund runs dry, SSA has zilch.

Trump's appeal relies, in part, on the fact that he isn't a traditional Republican at all. His energized voter base is not the traditional GOP base.

Much of Trump's appeal relies on his not being a Neo-Conservative, which is a liberal rebranded to obtain influence within the GOP party organization. It is a liberal cancer in the Republican party.

Trump's base is the traditional paleo-conservative GOP base.

Anyway, all of the Republicans had better hope Trump wins, because he is what is standing between them and political oblivion. They don't realize how dramatic and swift the changes will be when the Supreme Court works for Hillary Clinton.

The politically minded are aware. Societies, over centuries, tend to place more and more power in the central government until they foment a revolution and reset the cycle.

We doubled the debt under Neo-con G.W. Bush. We doubled that debt under Obama. If we double it under a Hillary Clinton administration, we would have $40T in debt. That cannot go on forever.

Well there you have it.

If Trump loses this election, the Republican Party is finished for good.

If Trump loses this election, the Republican Party is finished for good.

The Republican Party was destroyed before Trump. GWBush killed the GODDAMNED POLITICAL PARTY called: Republicans.

Well there you have it.

If Trump loses this election, the Republican Party is finished for good.

Yeah, just like the Whigs. It won't get to one party because the PTB need the façade of two.

It won't get to one party because the PTB need the façade of two.

It won't visibly be one party - in China there are six - but one party will have all of the power.