Progressives are just communists without the gunsCheck here and think about what that means for America and our Republic:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressivism
Good. Piglosi is unhappy since her party talks about nothing but impeachment.
They don’t really disagree but beating Trump over the head turns off swing voters.
The Democrat establishment would rather do it after they take over.
Progressive insurgents want to do it now.
Use the correct term: REGRESSIVES.
Every time you say this the next question will be what do you mean or why are you saying regressive. That’s the opening, run with it. Because they, democrat regressives wish to eliminate the first and second amendments, kill babies and kids in school, and return us to tyranny. You can go on and on.
If every single conservative commentator begin to exclusively use REGRESSIVE the debate would be over.
Question? Why are conservatives/republicans so damn stupid?
Look at all the names of the Ranking Democrat members who would be Chairmen
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seniority_in_the_United_States_House_of_Representatives
moderate primary opponents = non existent.
Progressives are just communists without the gunsProgressive = communist. Really it does.
“The Progressive Party of Henry Wallace was, and remains, controversial due to the issue of communist influence. The party served as a safe haven for communists, fellow travelers, and anti-war liberals during the Second Red Scare. Prominent Progressive Party supporters included U.S. Representative Vito Marcantonio and writer Norman Mailer.[2”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_Party_(United_States,_1948)
Voters need to become more aware of Progressives in our government and what their intentions are for our country.
Check here and think about what that means for America and our Republic:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressivism
__________________________
We need to call them what they are: Fascist Leftist.
Said often and loud.
The DLC “Moderates” went down for the count when Hildebeast was defeated.
It is Bernie’s party now. An Organize Wall Street camp with ballots. And the kids ain’t listening when the adults tell them what to do.
The Influence of Socialist Writers
How did politicians ever come to believe this weird idea that the law could be made to produce what it does not contain — the wealth, science, and religion that, in a positive sense, constitute prosperity? Is it due to the influence of our modern writers on public affairs?
Present-day writers — especially those of the socialist school of thought — base their various theories upon one common hypothesis: They divide mankind into two parts. People in general — with the exception of the writer himself — form the first group. The writer, all alone, forms the second and most important group. Surely this is the weirdest and most conceited notion that ever entered a human brain!
In fact, these writers on public affairs begin by supposing that people have within themselves no means of discernment; no motivation to action. The writers assume that people are inert matter, passive particles, motionless atoms, at best a kind of vegetation indifferent to its own manner of existence. They assume that people are susceptible to being shaped — by the will and hand of another person — into an infinite variety of forms, more or less symmetrical, artistic, and perfected. Moreover, not one of these writers on governmental affairs hesitates to imagine that he himself — under the title of organizer, discoverer, legislator, or founder — is this will and hand, this universal motivating force, this creative power whose sublime mission is to mold these scattered materials — persons — into a society.
These socialist writers look upon people in the same manner that the gardener views his trees. Just as the gardener capriciously shapes the trees into pyramids, parasols, cubes, vases, fans, and other forms, just so does the socialist writer whimsically shape human beings into groups, series, centers, sub-centers, honeycombs, labor-corps, and other variations. And just as the gardener needs axes, pruning hooks, saws, and shears to shape his trees, just so does the socialist writer need the force that he can find only in law to shape human beings.
“The Lsw” - Frederic Bastiat
“uncertainty remains around the Democratic Party’s ability to retake the House in November.”
“uncertainty” ?????????
There is just a little bit of doubt. We were certain, we should be certain.
We are mostly certain that we will retake the House, but some uncertainty remains.
The whole statement is based on the premise that the Dims WILL/ARE SUPPOSED TO, retake the House.
Utter BULLSHIRT!