Question For Conservatives.Hillary's Small Rally Crowds.How Come We Never See Them?

[kaz]

False. We could have offered better. Much, much better. But there's no accounting for stupid.

I know. The republicans went for the stupidest candidate possible. It's what they wanted. I guess they wanted someone just as stupid and hateful as them.

Trump is the "stupidest candidate possible?" You're the stupidest voter possible. One thing the guy clearly is not is "stupid." You kool-aid swillers are real pieces of work

Which republican could be a worse choice for the RNC presidential candidate?

Jeb Bush. The election would be over now. Trump is a wild card.

And not being the sharpest spoon in the shed, you moved the goal posts. I said Trump is clearly not stupid. Whether he's a bad candidate or not, he's clearly not stupid

Jeb couldn't even get his own party. His name is toxic. What on earth make you think he wouldn't be a major fail in the general? Lol

Trump is ignorant and insane? Stupid? He's arrogant. That makes him stupid.

A Hillarette calling Trump "arrogant" is comical. Damn, all those concussions from your head hitting the headboard earning a living really took it's toll, didn't it?

Apparently it also damaged your brain as the question I answered was who would be a WORSE candidate than Trump, and I answered Jeb Bush

 

[BIG YANK BAL 1976]

Especially in her last boring speech about how to fix the economy that her President screwed up. And who are these people cheering her on, even after she lies to them? Has anyone ever actually seen these crowds? Yes, maybe the paid actors and baffoons that stand behind her and told not to pick their noses while Hillary is speaking.
Something just isn't right. When Hillary speaks before her crowds of 200, she sounds like a robot that works for Burger King, and at the same time, just makes up stuff about Donald Trump. Just like with Polls. No one can possibly believe that about 55/56% of all potential voters have the same IQ as a Titmouse.

Bernie Sanders regularly drew 10 thousand folks to his crowds, and lost the Democratic Primary by almost 4 MILLION VOTES..

Large crowds don't translate to votes

Most of Clinton's voters work, don't exactly have a lot of time to go to pep rallies, but they make time to go vote is what counts..

Let me know when they start electing candidates by crowd size

 

[jillian]

What? Are you trying to say it's democrats fault that you stupid republicans chose an idiot? Here's a hint. Republicans chose Trump. Democrats have their own nominating process, and don't effect yours.

I said it was foolish to allow large blue states to have so much influence. No need to put words into my mouth.

I guess you lost me. How did whether a state is blue, or red, or bright orange like your nominee have anything to do with your primaries? They were REPUBLICAN primaries voted in by REPUBLICANS.

Trump did the best in States with open primaries. Grasp the obvious ...

Yes. Deny reality.

 

[kaz]

The party didn't pick him, stop and think, period. The doom and gloom is funny on both sides. The economy will likely be the deciding factor for many and he is leading in that area. Most people don't believe more of the same shit will yield different results. And he's only down 5 or 6 points AND Hillary has had little to no bad advertising yet while Trump has had the kitchen sink thrown at him.

Are you trying to say all those people who voted for him aren't republicans? More republicans voted for him than any of the others, because they wanted crazy. That's how it works.

Crazy is believing an establishment DC insider owned by Wall Street is going to reform our financial system ...

Trying to change the subject? We were talking about the stupid republicans wanting a stupid candidate. He got the most votes. He is what most Republicans wanted.

And crazy is what most Democrats wanted. You don't see how that pertains to the discussion? Of course you don't ...

Dems are happy to have your crazy candidate. But you idiots voted for him. He's your problem now.

I did? When was that?

 

[candycorn]

What? Are you trying to say it's democrats fault that you stupid republicans chose an idiot? Here's a hint. Republicans chose Trump. Democrats have their own nominating process, and don't effect yours.

I said it was foolish to allow large blue states to have so much influence. No need to put words into my mouth.

I guess you lost me. How did whether a state is blue, or red, or bright orange like your nominee have anything to do with your primaries? They were REPUBLICAN primaries voted in by REPUBLICANS.

Trump did the best in States with open primaries. Grasp the obvious ...

Gotta prop up your messiah at every turn…

How is saying Democrats voted for Trump propping him up? Wouldn't I want to claim Republicans wanted him to do that? Didn't think that one through, did you, dearest?

“Trump did his best…”

spoken like a true worshiper.

 

[kaz]

I said it was foolish to allow large blue states to have so much influence. No need to put words into my mouth.

I guess you lost me. How did whether a state is blue, or red, or bright orange like your nominee have anything to do with your primaries? They were REPUBLICAN primaries voted in by REPUBLICANS.

Trump did the best in States with open primaries. Grasp the obvious ...

Gotta prop up your messiah at every turn…

How is saying Democrats voted for Trump propping him up? Wouldn't I want to claim Republicans wanted him to do that? Didn't think that one through, did you, dearest?

“Trump did his best…”

spoken like a true worshiper.

That quote doesn't appear anywhere in the quote box and I don't believe I ever said that.

Spoken like a true Democrat

 

[candycorn]

What? Are you trying to say it's democrats fault that you stupid republicans chose an idiot? Here's a hint. Republicans chose Trump. Democrats have their own nominating process, and don't effect yours.

I said it was foolish to allow large blue states to have so much influence. No need to put words into my mouth.

I guess you lost me. How did whether a state is blue, or red, or bright orange like your nominee have anything to do with your primaries? They were REPUBLICAN primaries voted in by REPUBLICANS.

Trump did the best in States with open primaries. Grasp the obvious ...

Spoken like a true trump-is-the-messiah worshiper that you are.

 

[Ame®icano]

The race hasn't started, neither candidate has been nominated by their party. But quibble over that or not, clearly your view they are in the last lap is ridiculous. And again you ignore that the candidate with the "tight, disciplined campaign" has a deeply entrenched 55% negative rating while Trump clearly has the opportunity to change his rating significantly. Most fall voters are only going so far by the media reporting of Trump.

I do find the tight, disciplined campaign to be comical, you really think Fido has done that? What a partisan Democrat hack ...

Disciplined campaign...

 

[SwimExpert]

I guess you lost me. How did whether a state is blue, or red, or bright orange like your nominee have anything to do with your primaries? They were REPUBLICAN primaries voted in by REPUBLICANS.

Take California, Texas, and New York as an example. California has 4.5 million Republicans, while Texas has 4.6 million. Yet California accounted for 170+ delegates, while Texas only 155. Meanwhile, New York has about 2.5 million Republicans and was allocated 95 delegates. That is to say, they have only 54% of the number of Republicans as Texas, but 61% of the delegates.

The delegate allocation system the RNC adopted four years ago was intended to align the delegate power of states with their influence in the electoral college. The idea was that this would yield primary results that were electoral college centric, yielding candidates who had a better chance to succeed from an electoral college point of view. However, the opposite has happened. States like California and New York are of zero importance to Republicans in the electoral college, but their influence in the primary is inflated. Liberalized states are choosing the Republican nominee, and in this case they've chosen a liberal Democrat, recently registered as a Republican, and a life long Clinton donor.

 

[kaz]

What? Are you trying to say it's democrats fault that you stupid republicans chose an idiot? Here's a hint. Republicans chose Trump. Democrats have their own nominating process, and don't effect yours.

I said it was foolish to allow large blue states to have so much influence. No need to put words into my mouth.

I guess you lost me. How did whether a state is blue, or red, or bright orange like your nominee have anything to do with your primaries? They were REPUBLICAN primaries voted in by REPUBLICANS.

Trump did the best in States with open primaries. Grasp the obvious ...

Spoken like a true trump-is-the-messiah worshiper that you are.

Back to the playground. Your natural domain. All you're doing is repeating the same air headed line, can't you work it into a discussion or something?

 

[SwimExpert]

Large blue states have more people

What is foolish is allowing small red states to have so much power

Having more Democrats should not be a consideration for the GOP nomination process.

 

[BULLDOG]

I guess you lost me. How did whether a state is blue, or red, or bright orange like your nominee have anything to do with your primaries? They were REPUBLICAN primaries voted in by REPUBLICANS.

Take California, Texas, and New York as an example. California has 4.5 million Republicans, while Texas has 4.6 million. Yet California accounted for 170+ delegates, while Texas only 155. Meanwhile, New York has about 2.5 million Republicans and was allocated 95 delegates. That is to say, they have only 54% of the number of Republicans as Texas, but 61% of the delegates.

The delegate allocation system the RNC adopted four years ago was intended to align the delegate power of states with their influence in the electoral college. The idea was that this would yield primary results that were electoral college centric, yielding candidates who had a better chance to succeed from an electoral college point of view. However, the opposite has happened. States like California and New York are of zero importance to Republicans in the electoral college, but their influence in the primary is inflated. Liberalized states are choosing the Republican nominee, and in this case they've chosen a liberal Democrat, recently registered as a Republican, and a life long Clinton donor.

So your stupid party isn't allotting delegates the way you think they should. Whose fault is that? It's your party.

 

[candycorn]

What? Are you trying to say it's democrats fault that you stupid republicans chose an idiot? Here's a hint. Republicans chose Trump. Democrats have their own nominating process, and don't effect yours.

I said it was foolish to allow large blue states to have so much influence. No need to put words into my mouth.

I guess you lost me. How did whether a state is blue, or red, or bright orange like your nominee have anything to do with your primaries? They were REPUBLICAN primaries voted in by REPUBLICANS.

Trump did the best in States with open primaries. Grasp the obvious ...

Spoken like a true trump-is-the-messiah worshiper that you are.

Back to the playground. Your natural domain. All you're doing is repeating the same air headed line, can't you work it into a discussion or something?

You said you didn’t say it. I just showed you as worshiper.

 

[SwimExpert]

He got the most votes. He is what most Republicans wanted.

"Most" would mean a majority. Trump received a plurality. A significant number of them due to the fact that people simply assumed that he would win, so they figured they may as well just vote for him (or inversely, those supporting others thought it was hopeless so they stayed home).

 

[kaz]

I said it was foolish to allow large blue states to have so much influence. No need to put words into my mouth.

I guess you lost me. How did whether a state is blue, or red, or bright orange like your nominee have anything to do with your primaries? They were REPUBLICAN primaries voted in by REPUBLICANS.

Trump did the best in States with open primaries. Grasp the obvious ...

Spoken like a true trump-is-the-messiah worshiper that you are.

Back to the playground. Your natural domain. All you're doing is repeating the same air headed line, can't you work it into a discussion or something?

You said you didn’t say it. I just showed you as worshiper.

Are you quoting the right post? I said you made up the quote in the other post, you did. This isn't that post. This is where I pointed out the Democrats who voted for Trump in open primary States. I never said I didn't say that, I did

 

[BULLDOG]

He got the most votes. He is what most Republicans wanted.

"Most" would mean a majority. Trump received a plurality. A significant number of them due to the fact that people simply assumed that he would win, so they figured they may as well just vote for him (or inversely, those supporting others thought it was hopeless so they stayed home).

So republican voters made a dumb decisions. Got it.

 

[SwimExpert]

So your stupid party isn't allotting delegates the way you think they should. Whose fault is that? It's your party.

You must be trying to pick a fight. That's the only explanation for your blatant stupidity and disregard for what has been said in favor of alternative insinuations. I'm pretty sure that I was quite clear whose "fault" it is. The RNC adopted a delegate allocation plan. The plan is flawed. The results of a flawed plan are poor results.

 

[jillian]

The race hasn't started, neither candidate has been nominated by their party. But quibble over that or not, clearly your view they are in the last lap is ridiculous. And again you ignore that the candidate with the "tight, disciplined campaign" has a deeply entrenched 55% negative rating while Trump clearly has the opportunity to change his rating significantly. Most fall voters are only going so far by the media reporting of Trump.

I do find the tight, disciplined campaign to be comical, you really think Fido has done that? What a partisan Democrat hack ...

Disciplined campaign...

Poor delusional hack.

 

[BULLDOG]

So your stupid party isn't allotting delegates the way you think they should. Whose fault is that? It's your party.

You must be trying to pick a fight. That's the only explanation for your blatant stupidity and disregard for what has been said in favor of alternative insinuations. I'm pretty sure that I was quite clear whose "fault" it is. The RNC adopted a delegate allocation plan. The plan is flawed. The results of a flawed plan are poor results.

I'm not trying to pick a fight. The GOP picked a stupid candidate because that's what they want. If you want to blame that on stupid RNC rules, I don't care. It's still right wing stupidity.

 

[SwimExpert]

So your stupid party isn't allotting delegates the way you think they should. Whose fault is that? It's your party.

You must be trying to pick a fight. That's the only explanation for your blatant stupidity and disregard for what has been said in favor of alternative insinuations. I'm pretty sure that I was quite clear whose "fault" it is. The RNC adopted a delegate allocation plan. The plan is flawed. The results of a flawed plan are poor results.

I'm not trying to pick a fight. The GOP picked a stupid candidate because that's what they want. If you want to blame that on stupid RNC rules, I don't care. It's still right wing stupidity.

You keep trying to insist that the GOP as a whole "wants" Trump as the nominee. But the truth is that the majority of us do not.