>

Both.  The 2016 platform was never actually adopted or restated by the 2020 platform document.
As someone right leaning, I think theres an argument for good healthcare in the US as an investment in the economy.  
I also think there’s an argument that we need to rein in defense spending.  We’re approaching one trillion annually in defense spending with no ongoing significant combat operations.  Folks on the right don’t seem to appreciate that we can’t have a reduction in wasteful spending without addressing the $816 billion elephant in the room. >

As a progressive, I truly appreciate this take. Universal Healthcare would likely see an increase in healthy people returning to the job market. Healthy people are more inclined to actively pursue a better life. 
And the excessive spending on defense could see more money sent to places like mental health, poverty, education, welfare, etc. >

Why do you think the government doesn't show a greater interest in keeping people healthy from a lifestyle standpoint so that the demand for treatment-based healthcare decreases? Obesity-related complications are the biggest consumer of healthcare resources, but the government is all but silent in attempting to solve that problem at the source. >

Profits. The end. For-profit healthcare, prisons, rehab etc make it so no one ever actually gets better and will inevitably return. Capitalism is a blight on humanity, at least in its current form. Also, clearly, the American government is corrupt, so we're pretty well screwed. >


Capitalism is a blight on humanity,

Capitalism works great in certain sectors.   If you and I are selling widgets and you make a luxury widget but only ten of them and I make a cheaper widget but 1000 of them, capitalism works pretty good.  
But once it touches any fundamental way that human beings are allowed to survive and be content, it becomes sociopathic. >

I can definitely agree with the left on climate & environmental sustainability. We must take care of our earth. I truly don’t understand all the conservatives who are adamantly opposed to new sources of energy, transportation alternatives, & reducing our plastics consumption. >

Odd thing is, I do know a lot of Republicans that love solar. The idea of being self-sufficent, regardless of climate change, should be non-controversial.   
Having diverse sources for power is just a huge positive overall. It limits fluctuations in markets with limited resources (like petroleum). 
Multiple power sources and decentralized distribution of electricity is also great asset for our National Security. 
There is a big difference between conservatives and modern Republicans, so the OPs post to me is impossible to answer. >

Might help to market it as being self sufficient. Like you said.
Seems like the path with least resistance in getting more support for greener climate >

"Stop relying on Big Oil to live your best American life. Buy solar, and get tax credits for doing so."
Can see this appealing to that one odd yet significant crowd that wants society to collapse so they can thrive or whatever. >

The whole tax credit thing... years ago when my area was considering allowing wind farms (spoiler alert... we did), there was a massive push back from the Republicans saying "they're only doing it for the Obama dollars!". So, even then, they'll hear some Limbaugh wannabe tell them it's morally reprehensible for anyone to accept the tax break and they'll run to the mountaintops to let everyone else know. >

While accepting agricultural tax credits… odd. >

The whole "small government/ don't tread on me" thing, then going on to demand the government do something like ban abortion, is also odd. >

Are you under the impression that one cannot logically believe that one of the duties of said "small government" should be to protect the lives of its citizens? >

Gay rights. I don’t know why this is even brought up anymore. Their lifestyle is not affecting anyone else regardless of if you agree or disagree with it >

The issue with this question is at a high enough level, there’s a lot of “positions” that most people agree with. 
People generally agree on “restricting” congress trading, and “common sense” gun control. But once you get into actual proposed legislation - they don’t agree anymore. The devils in the details >

As a disclaimer, I'm independent, I agree with the Republicans on some things and agree with a Democrats on other things. But Democrats get more support and coverage on social media and news so I tend to hate on the Democrats more.
But I think everyone would agree that there are certain people who shouldn't own guns and we should do what we can within reason to keep criminals and certain people from owning guns. 
The Democrats lose me when they try an institute bans or otherwise institute laws that would punish law abiding citizens. 
But both parties have their hard line issue that I think turns away a lot of moderate voters. Democrats try and push way too hard in the way of gun control (more thorough background checks? Sure, banning certain firearms? No) and Republicans push way too hard in the way of abortion (regardless of your stance on the issue not allowing any exceptions at all is frankly ridiculous). >


But Democrats get more support and coverage on social media and news so I tend to hate on the Democrats more

This just sounds like knee jerk contrarianism. >

It's also statistically not true. >

As a conservative practically embarrassed to brand myself as a Republican now the way the party has gone, anything on climate and abortion I would agree with the dems on. >

It’s crazy how divided we are, especially with being practically forced into two parties, that labeling yourself a member of a party makes everyone think you believe a specific set of things.
Like no everyone’s different they are parties not ideologies. They have a similar baseline but grow from there. Judge each person individually. That’s why I, a more liberal person, tend to only label myself as moderate or independent to prevent being stereotyped with the worst/most extreme of the left >

I thibk it's fair to brand someone with the policies the party they vote for enacts.  Not so much to judge them for what other voters who voted simmilarly did or said.
For example, it's shitty to judge all GOP voters because of Qanon, but acceptable to think they are ok with burning the world and subjugating women if they continue to vote for the GOP. >

Based on voting habits you can judge someone more than just the label. If someone is labeled Republican they can still vote either way. If they end up voting right in a certain election, judge them for that >

Exactly. I personally know people too embarrassed to admit they’re Republican and claim to “see both sides” yet they’ve voted straight ticket for 50 years and watch Fox News daily and repeat Q talking points. 
Their actions tell me everything I need to know about how they really feel. >

I agree with the left on prison reform. Inmates shouldn’t be in privately owned prisons, in the horrendous conditions that they are, with no way of returning to society successfully on release. 
Prison should be about reforming citizens into productive contributors to society. >

To my knowledge Trump/the gop didn’t even publish a platform for 2020 so I’m not sure what they stand for to even begin >

They did.
It was one page long and defined being a Republican as being personally loyal to him.
There is literally nothing else to being a Republican right now, at least so far as the party platform is concerned. >

Sorry, I meant a platform with objectives, policies, etc >


Sorry, I meant a platform with objectives, policies, etc

Ah, you mean the thing that details their stances on guns, taxes, foreign relations, healthcare, and the like?  This is it.
I'm not kidding, that's all there is, still. >

Did you scroll down? It gives answers to all the questions you ask because they just reused the 2016 platform. >

I can't see whereas they expressly re-adopted the 2016 platform.  (Besides, the 2016 platform document derides "the President".) >

Yes and the fact that it derided the current President was a great mocking point of the GOP. They didn’t bother changing a thing to their platform between 2016 and 2020. Laziness or incompetence?