Question for Trump supporters: Would this be okay with you?

[Correll]

If they did that wouldn't that be like saying there is no Republican party? and voters really do not count?

They're shitting bricks. It's beginning to look like they'd rather lose the general than back Trump. So outside of just bending over and taking it, this would be their only option.
.

I don't get it. Trump is saying exactly the same things that right wingers have been saying for years. I would think they should love having Trump for the nominee.

Trump is not a conservative.

True. He is a nationalist and a populist.

 

[Mac1958]

If they did that wouldn't that be like saying there is no Republican party? and voters really do not count?

They're shitting bricks. It's beginning to look like they'd rather lose the general than back Trump. So outside of just bending over and taking it, this would be their only option..

I don't get it. Trump is saying exactly the same things that right wingers have been saying for years. I would think they should love having Trump for the nominee.

Trump is not a conservative.

True. He is a nationalist and a populist.

Would you say that nationalist/populists have always existed within the GOP, and that his candidacy has brought them out?

Also, are the similarities between the nationalist/populists, the Christian conservatives and the moderate Republicans strong enough to hold the party together at the ballot box? It would seem to me that each of the groups are pretty committed to their segment.
.

 

[Correll]

If they did that wouldn't that be like saying there is no Republican party? and voters really do not count?

They're shitting bricks. It's beginning to look like they'd rather lose the general than back Trump. So outside of just bending over and taking it, this would be their only option..

I don't get it. Trump is saying exactly the same things that right wingers have been saying for years. I would think they should love having Trump for the nominee.

Trump is not a conservative.

True. He is a nationalist and a populist.

Would you say that nationalist/populists have always existed within the GOP, and that his candidacy has brought them out?

Also, are the similarities between the nationalist/populists, the Christian conservatives and the moderate Republicans strong enough to hold the party together at the ballot box? It would seem to me that each of the groups are pretty committed to their segment.
.

NATIONALISTS have certainly always been there.

Populism? Less so, but you can see the strains in the "anti-intellectualism" and anti-elitism shown by some in the past.

And sure, there is plenty to hold the groups together.

IF the moderates don't betray us.

I voted for McCain. He won the primary fair and square.

 

[Cecilie1200]

If the GOP Elites started a third party or commandeered an existing party then the GOP would cease to exist in many peoples minds. If the GOP elites do not care what the people think, then the people damn sure do not care what the GOP Elites think. They would be toast.

wont happen

a 3rd party means the dnc wins all the time every time and that would mean the end of all freedoms

for our own good, of course

I don't think we're looking at a third-party scenario, though. I think we're looking more at something like the original rise of the Republican Party when the old Whig Party died out.

The question is, would the new, emerging party be able to fill the power vacuum fast enough?

I doubt it.

cons and gop mods are miles apart, so I think any rise of a new party would be the rise of 2 separate parties.
1 clinging to power and the other trying to get rid of it.

oddly, the dnc died, openly died this cycle and no one cared. It's leaders can't tell you the difference between a socialist and a dem and not one liberal is running for Pres.

It died in all but name

I think it depends on what the new party arising was, what their focus was on.

 

[Cecilie1200]

As I have mentioned e several times, the establishment cannot allow Trump to win the presidency. The thought of him being privy to ALL of the shady underhanded deals with these countries that provide cheap labor along with ALL of the deals with every special interest terrifies all of them.

In fact it terrifies them so much that the "republicans" are more than willing to blow up a party that doesn't even exist anyway.

Don't believe it?

Could you imagine Trump having access to Obama's actual birth records? Could you imagine Trump directing the DOJ to truly investigate Billarys emails? You think they may find out that she revealed the mission that SEAL TEAM VI was going on when they shot out of the sky only a few weeks after they killed bin laden? We still have no answers regarding that disaster.

You get the point. Trump cannot be president. They will take him out one way or another. Trust that.

1) What makes you think the President has any more legal access to people's birth records than anyone else does?

2) No, I can't imagine Donald Trump directing anyone to do anything against his best buds, the Clintons. As if. I can, however, imagine Donny calling up the Clintons to consult with them, or even inviting them for a White House visit.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I don't listen to right wing radio, I only know Trump doesn't always agree and support the direction republicans have made in the past, such as Iraq. Trump is not afraid to say where the republicans went wrong. Because he is so vocal about that in being his own voice, politicians from among the establishment are saying he is not a worthy candidate to represent the party.

"Establishment" Republican politicians say he's not a worthy politician because he calls POWs losers, mocks a handicapped reporters, says a woman can't be elected because she's ugly, ruminates that he'd like to punch someone in the face, calls Mexicans rapists and drug mules, says a woman isn't doing her job because she's menstruating, states that he wants to ban an entire religion from entering the country including Americans of that religion, traffics in bizarre conspiracy theories, brings up Hillary's bathroom habits, threaten people who criticize him, threaten the Speaker of the House if he doesn't co-operate with you, call critics "losers," take several days before condemning the KKK, pretend you don't know David Duke, tells companies to go **** themselves, talk about his manhood on stage, and so on.

He was in an heated exchange with John McCain that McCain started and he insulted McCain BACK.

Can I just take a moment to admire the deep maturity of your "He started it!" reasoning?

Sure.

And then consider that firing back in the heat of the moment is better than being a doormat.

Like normal for Republicans.

No, actually, I don't consider either to be particularly useful.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I see a difference between PC's attempt to strangle open conversation and forgiving a major presidential candidate for acting like he's 15. "Hey, cool, he's talking about his dick in a major, nationally-televised debate, I love the way he's not PC". Holy crap. He's certainly welcome to behave that way, and I certainly wouldn't try to silence him.

What is on his mind appears to be polls, insulting people, his hurt feelings, rambling stream of consciousness, manic hyperbole and playing to the crowd. All I'm saying is I don't get the attraction, and I can understand why more moderate Republicans don't either.
.

I don't even know what he supposedly said about his dick but what I heard it was in response to what Rubio had said. That's what is so great about the situation, Trump says crap like that, you folks get your shorts in a knot and he just wins bigger. I really don't think you are getting what the Trump phenomena is all about.

But, why don't you write him a letter and tell him you think he should be more PC.

Agreed, I definitely don't get it.

And you don't get my point on PC.
.

I think your missing the point about PC.

Trump is the anti-PC. That's why the reaction AGAINST him by so many, so strongly.

He is violating all the Taboos.

And considering the insults flowing AT Trump and his supporters, insulting back as aggressively as possible seems to be the best answer to PC yet.

Lord knows your attempts at reasoning with liberals on the issue of Political Correctness have been completely failures.

No, honey. This is all the same sort of rationalized bunker-think one finds in cults, right before they start forting up with their arsenals and sacrificing their testicles to comets and shit. "They hate us because we're speaking the truth! Look at how they're attacking us! We're so persecuted!" Chop chop, slice slice, plop go the danglies into the jar.

If you ever pulled your head out of Donny's sphincter for two seconds and applied his behavior to anyone else on the planet that you're not currently worshiping, you'd have a much clearer picture of why the reaction against him is so strong. In this, I am generously crediting you with the benefit of the doubt that you are otherwise a decent, rational, civilized adult, so take the compliment, sparse as it is. He's not "anti-PC"; he's odious and repulsive.

OF COURSE you and he are being insulted. Every other word out of the man's mouth is a grade school-quality insult, and his followers literally act like mind-numbed, brainwashed zombies. It is ******* frightening to think that so many of my neighbors and fellow voters are this close to nutbar lunacy at any given moment.

NOt every word.

He has advanced a platform of policies that I have been waiting for some Republican to push.

And is it a problem for you that he keeps flip-flopping on that platform?

Oh, and I didn't say "every word". I said "every other word".

 

[Correll]

I don't listen to right wing radio, I only know Trump doesn't always agree and support the direction republicans have made in the past, such as Iraq. Trump is not afraid to say where the republicans went wrong. Because he is so vocal about that in being his own voice, politicians from among the establishment are saying he is not a worthy candidate to represent the party.

"Establishment" Republican politicians say he's not a worthy politician because he calls POWs losers, mocks a handicapped reporters, says a woman can't be elected because she's ugly, ruminates that he'd like to punch someone in the face, calls Mexicans rapists and drug mules, says a woman isn't doing her job because she's menstruating, states that he wants to ban an entire religion from entering the country including Americans of that religion, traffics in bizarre conspiracy theories, brings up Hillary's bathroom habits, threaten people who criticize him, threaten the Speaker of the House if he doesn't co-operate with you, call critics "losers," take several days before condemning the KKK, pretend you don't know David Duke, tells companies to go **** themselves, talk about his manhood on stage, and so on.

He was in an heated exchange with John McCain that McCain started and he insulted McCain BACK.

Can I just take a moment to admire the deep maturity of your "He started it!" reasoning?

Sure.

And then consider that firing back in the heat of the moment is better than being a doormat.

Like normal for Republicans.

No, actually, I don't consider either to be particularly useful.

Well, we Republicans have tried being doormats and that has not worked.

I'm up for trying the other thing, you know, fighting back.

 

[Correll]

I don't even know what he supposedly said about his dick but what I heard it was in response to what Rubio had said. That's what is so great about the situation, Trump says crap like that, you folks get your shorts in a knot and he just wins bigger. I really don't think you are getting what the Trump phenomena is all about.

But, why don't you write him a letter and tell him you think he should be more PC.

Agreed, I definitely don't get it.

And you don't get my point on PC.
.

I think your missing the point about PC.

Trump is the anti-PC. That's why the reaction AGAINST him by so many, so strongly.

He is violating all the Taboos.

And considering the insults flowing AT Trump and his supporters, insulting back as aggressively as possible seems to be the best answer to PC yet.

Lord knows your attempts at reasoning with liberals on the issue of Political Correctness have been completely failures.

No, honey. This is all the same sort of rationalized bunker-think one finds in cults, right before they start forting up with their arsenals and sacrificing their testicles to comets and shit. "They hate us because we're speaking the truth! Look at how they're attacking us! We're so persecuted!" Chop chop, slice slice, plop go the danglies into the jar.

If you ever pulled your head out of Donny's sphincter for two seconds and applied his behavior to anyone else on the planet that you're not currently worshiping, you'd have a much clearer picture of why the reaction against him is so strong. In this, I am generously crediting you with the benefit of the doubt that you are otherwise a decent, rational, civilized adult, so take the compliment, sparse as it is. He's not "anti-PC"; he's odious and repulsive.

OF COURSE you and he are being insulted. Every other word out of the man's mouth is a grade school-quality insult, and his followers literally act like mind-numbed, brainwashed zombies. It is ******* frightening to think that so many of my neighbors and fellow voters are this close to nutbar lunacy at any given moment.

NOt every word.

He has advanced a platform of policies that I have been waiting for some Republican to push.

And is it a problem for you that he keeps flip-flopping on that platform?

Very much so.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I see a difference between PC's attempt to strangle open conversation and forgiving a major presidential candidate for acting like he's 15. "Hey, cool, he's talking about his dick in a major, nationally-televised debate, I love the way he's not PC". Holy crap. He's certainly welcome to behave that way, and I certainly wouldn't try to silence him.

What is on his mind appears to be polls, insulting people, his hurt feelings, rambling stream of consciousness, manic hyperbole and playing to the crowd. All I'm saying is I don't get the attraction, and I can understand why more moderate Republicans don't either.
.

I don't even know what he supposedly said about his dick but what I heard it was in response to what Rubio had said. That's what is so great about the situation, Trump says crap like that, you folks get your shorts in a knot and he just wins bigger. I really don't think you are getting what the Trump phenomena is all about.

But, why don't you write him a letter and tell him you think he should be more PC.

Why should the Republicans run more moderate candidates? McCain might as well be a democrat and Romney is not far behind.

Oh, we "get" the Trump "phenomena". Why do you think we have so little respect for it?

The fact that you people can't tell the difference between "politically incorrect" and "repulsively offensive and trashy" is just the tip of the iceberg, Captain Titanic.

That you don't get that Politically Correct is the problem and Trump is the solution is the whole of the Arctic ice pack.

Right, sweetie. Because I'm such a model of politically correct newspeak and so terribly afraid of ever saying anything that might offend someone. I'm practically teaching a Gender Studies class at Berkeley, over here.

The only thing Trump is a "solution" to is civilized, mature intelligence, but you'll excuse me if I didn't consider that a problem.

Maybe you aren't.

Our leadership is.

And all the real solutions, that this nation needs, like Deporting the Illegals, have been made Taboo, and are NOT going to get done by any of the rest of the pack.

None of them.

Who's "our"? I don't claim the freaking GOP leadership, and haven't for a long time.

Be that as it may, the antidote to political correctness is NOT to spout off like a drunk with Tourette's Syndrome.

I have serious doubts about Trump "deporting" much of anyone. His personal practice on the subject doesn't lend itself to confidence in his rhetoric. Cruz, on the other hand, advocates extensions on the same sort of plan which Arizona has implemented to good effect, doing the things that a state can't do by itself.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Could be, but it's a pertinent question. I'm just trying to figure out exactly why the GOP hates Trump so much.

Not all of the GOP, mostly it's the establishment.

For instance Limbaugh and O'Reilly are friends with Trump. On the other hand, Michael Medved and Beck hate Trump and don't hide it. Trump is dividing the party even more so and the establishment is upset by this. They were hoping the TP would just fade away and now Trump is reigniting it.

In one regard, though, Trump is a uniter. Disgust and loathing for him are damned near the only thing that conservatives, independents, AND liberals have been able to agree on for as long as I can remember.

And yet the polls show him in striking distance of HIllary.

Almost as though there is a huge portion of the nation that you don't know and have never heard from nor even considered....

Which polls would that be? Rasmussen, which has Hillary over Trump, 41 to 36? Fox, which has 47 to 42 in favor of Hillary? Quinnipiac, which shows Trump as the only GOP candidate who doesn't beat Hillary head-to-head? Vegas bookmakers, who show the betting odds on Hillary are 64%?

Oh, wait, I'm sorry. We automatically discount any polling system that doesn't give the right answer as "biased" and "tools of the establishment". So the only polls that are valid are the ones that give Trump what he wants to hear . . . whoever those polls are.

Yes. That sounds like striking distance to me.

And imo, his message is the one most likely to appeal to people on the other side of the party line.

I seem to remember another candidate who thought he could flip the bird to the conservative base and build a winning campaign on Democrats abandoning their own candidate to support him. Let me think, who was that? Oh, yeah. John McCain.

Good luck with that.

 

[Correll]

I don't even know what he supposedly said about his dick but what I heard it was in response to what Rubio had said. That's what is so great about the situation, Trump says crap like that, you folks get your shorts in a knot and he just wins bigger. I really don't think you are getting what the Trump phenomena is all about.

But, why don't you write him a letter and tell him you think he should be more PC.

Why should the Republicans run more moderate candidates? McCain might as well be a democrat and Romney is not far behind.

Oh, we "get" the Trump "phenomena". Why do you think we have so little respect for it?

The fact that you people can't tell the difference between "politically incorrect" and "repulsively offensive and trashy" is just the tip of the iceberg, Captain Titanic.

That you don't get that Politically Correct is the problem and Trump is the solution is the whole of the Arctic ice pack.

Right, sweetie. Because I'm such a model of politically correct newspeak and so terribly afraid of ever saying anything that might offend someone. I'm practically teaching a Gender Studies class at Berkeley, over here.

The only thing Trump is a "solution" to is civilized, mature intelligence, but you'll excuse me if I didn't consider that a problem.

Maybe you aren't.

Our leadership is.

And all the real solutions, that this nation needs, like Deporting the Illegals, have been made Taboo, and are NOT going to get done by any of the rest of the pack.

None of them.

Who's "our"? I don't claim the freaking GOP leadership, and haven't for a long time.

Be that as it may, the antidote to political correctness is NOT to spout off like a drunk with Tourette's Syndrome.

I have serious doubts about Trump "deporting" much of anyone. His personal practice on the subject doesn't lend itself to confidence in his rhetoric. Cruz, on the other hand, advocates extensions on the same sort of plan which Arizona has implemented to good effect, doing the things that a state can't do by itself.

Anything from Ted on reducing LEGAL immigration? Because that is just as much of the problem as illegal, if not more so.

And whether you "claim" them or not, they are in charge of the Party Machine whether we like it or not.

 

[Correll]

Not all of the GOP, mostly it's the establishment.

For instance Limbaugh and O'Reilly are friends with Trump. On the other hand, Michael Medved and Beck hate Trump and don't hide it. Trump is dividing the party even more so and the establishment is upset by this. They were hoping the TP would just fade away and now Trump is reigniting it.

In one regard, though, Trump is a uniter. Disgust and loathing for him are damned near the only thing that conservatives, independents, AND liberals have been able to agree on for as long as I can remember.

And yet the polls show him in striking distance of HIllary.

Almost as though there is a huge portion of the nation that you don't know and have never heard from nor even considered....

Which polls would that be? Rasmussen, which has Hillary over Trump, 41 to 36? Fox, which has 47 to 42 in favor of Hillary? Quinnipiac, which shows Trump as the only GOP candidate who doesn't beat Hillary head-to-head? Vegas bookmakers, who show the betting odds on Hillary are 64%?

Oh, wait, I'm sorry. We automatically discount any polling system that doesn't give the right answer as "biased" and "tools of the establishment". So the only polls that are valid are the ones that give Trump what he wants to hear . . . whoever those polls are.

Yes. That sounds like striking distance to me.

And imo, his message is the one most likely to appeal to people on the other side of the party line.

I seem to remember another candidate who thought he could flip the bird to the conservative base and build a winning campaign on Democrats abandoning their own candidate to support him. Let me think, who was that? Oh, yeah. John McCain.

Good luck with that.

Unlike McCain Trump has both a serious plan to attract benefit the interests of those voters and no hesitation to play rough and dirty.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Well, maybe they're factoring his behavior into this.
.

So he's uncouth and that's reason to throw the election?

LIke I said, you are asking the wrong question.

This is not about what is wrong with Trump, this is about what is wrong with the GOP Establishment.

Do they think that having HIllary define the Court for the next generation is a good thing?

If they don't have a problem with a Democrat President, then why the hell have they taken on the job of supposedly fighting against that?

IT IS THEIR JOB TO WIN ELECTIONS.

Have you considered that they think Trump would be just as bad as Hillary, just in his own Trump-y ways?

It is obvious from their actions, they consider Trump to be WORSE than HIllary.

Which raises all kinds of questions about why they are in their positions, if that is the case.

For example, Trump as President cannot appoint someone worse than Hillary to the COurt.

For Hillary will nominate a Leftist who will flip the court to the Left with all that implies.

Trump CANNOT do any worse than that. He cannot take the Court in a whole NEW direction that is worse than Left.

He won't be adding his appointments to an existing large minority on the COurt.

I have trouble seeing any validity to their POV.

Well, that's certainly an interesting tautology and set of Miss Cleo predictions. You've set up a nice little echo chamber for yourself there.

Tell me again how you feel the disrespect directed at you is unjustified.

Err, do you doubt that Hillary or Sanders would nominate liberals to the Court?

What, in this specific example could Trump do that would be worse than what they would do, from a pov of the GOP establishment?

When and why did I become answerable for the GOPe?

From MY point of view, on the other hand, what he could do that would be worse is to govern exactly like Hillary, and be an embarrassing sideshow freak on top of it.

Really, though, the problem here isn't so much that he's "worse", as it is that he's not any better.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I don't listen to right wing radio, I only know Trump doesn't always agree and support the direction republicans have made in the past, such as Iraq. Trump is not afraid to say where the republicans went wrong. Because he is so vocal about that in being his own voice, politicians from among the establishment are saying he is not a worthy candidate to represent the party.

"Establishment" Republican politicians say he's not a worthy politician because he calls POWs losers, mocks a handicapped reporters, says a woman can't be elected because she's ugly, ruminates that he'd like to punch someone in the face, calls Mexicans rapists and drug mules, says a woman isn't doing her job because she's menstruating, states that he wants to ban an entire religion from entering the country including Americans of that religion, traffics in bizarre conspiracy theories, brings up Hillary's bathroom habits, threaten people who criticize him, threaten the Speaker of the House if he doesn't co-operate with you, call critics "losers," take several days before condemning the KKK, pretend you don't know David Duke, tells companies to go **** themselves, talk about his manhood on stage, and so on.

He was in an heated exchange with John McCain that McCain started and he insulted McCain BACK.

You don't understand the rules, Correll. They can attack Trump but Trump is NOT allowed to attack them back.

So this is the new meme: Trump was just standing there, mute, like an innocent little lamb, when the big bad mean people came along and attacked him and he had no choice but to respond.

John McCain was quite rude to him, as far as I know, completely without personal provocation.

You are the one out of touch with reality.

John McCain criticized a person running for the nomination from McCain's party. His words were intemperate - his words often are - but they were more insulting to the Trumpettes than they were to Trump himself.

Furthermore, some specific points that should be addressed about that.

1) It's hypocritical for any supporter of Trump to be incensed by someone else being "rude".

2) If Donald Trump is going to get his panties in a ruffle about people criticizing him, then running for President is not the best place for him, let alone actually BEING President.

3) There is no "personal provocation" needed for someone to criticize a Presidential candidate, or anyone in politics. And McCain's remark wasn't personal to Trump at all; Trump made it personal, and well beyond simply "rude", when he felt the proper response was to mock McCain's war record. No one in the state of Arizona holds a candle to me on hating McCain politically, and finding him distasteful personally, but there's simply no excusing or justifying denigration of a POW.

 

[Cecilie1200]

"Establishment" Republican politicians say he's not a worthy politician because he calls POWs losers, mocks a handicapped reporters, says a woman can't be elected because she's ugly, ruminates that he'd like to punch someone in the face, calls Mexicans rapists and drug mules, says a woman isn't doing her job because she's menstruating, states that he wants to ban an entire religion from entering the country including Americans of that religion, traffics in bizarre conspiracy theories, brings up Hillary's bathroom habits, threaten people who criticize him, threaten the Speaker of the House if he doesn't co-operate with you, call critics "losers," take several days before condemning the KKK, pretend you don't know David Duke, tells companies to go **** themselves, talk about his manhood on stage, and so on.

He was in an heated exchange with John McCain that McCain started and he insulted McCain BACK.

Can I just take a moment to admire the deep maturity of your "He started it!" reasoning?

Sure.

And then consider that firing back in the heat of the moment is better than being a doormat.

Like normal for Republicans.

No, actually, I don't consider either to be particularly useful.

Well, we Republicans have tried being doormats and that has not worked.

I'm up for trying the other thing, you know, fighting back.

And there's no middle ground between doormat and white trash? The only way to "fight back" and to bluster and bully like an episode of "Jerry Springer"?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Agreed, I definitely don't get it.

And you don't get my point on PC.
.

I think your missing the point about PC.

Trump is the anti-PC. That's why the reaction AGAINST him by so many, so strongly.

He is violating all the Taboos.

And considering the insults flowing AT Trump and his supporters, insulting back as aggressively as possible seems to be the best answer to PC yet.

Lord knows your attempts at reasoning with liberals on the issue of Political Correctness have been completely failures.

No, honey. This is all the same sort of rationalized bunker-think one finds in cults, right before they start forting up with their arsenals and sacrificing their testicles to comets and shit. "They hate us because we're speaking the truth! Look at how they're attacking us! We're so persecuted!" Chop chop, slice slice, plop go the danglies into the jar.

If you ever pulled your head out of Donny's sphincter for two seconds and applied his behavior to anyone else on the planet that you're not currently worshiping, you'd have a much clearer picture of why the reaction against him is so strong. In this, I am generously crediting you with the benefit of the doubt that you are otherwise a decent, rational, civilized adult, so take the compliment, sparse as it is. He's not "anti-PC"; he's odious and repulsive.

OF COURSE you and he are being insulted. Every other word out of the man's mouth is a grade school-quality insult, and his followers literally act like mind-numbed, brainwashed zombies. It is ******* frightening to think that so many of my neighbors and fellow voters are this close to nutbar lunacy at any given moment.

NOt every word.

He has advanced a platform of policies that I have been waiting for some Republican to push.

And is it a problem for you that he keeps flip-flopping on that platform?

Very much so.

Well, I'm at least glad to hear that much.

 

[Correll]

"Establishment" Republican politicians say he's not a worthy politician because he calls POWs losers, mocks a handicapped reporters, says a woman can't be elected because she's ugly, ruminates that he'd like to punch someone in the face, calls Mexicans rapists and drug mules, says a woman isn't doing her job because she's menstruating, states that he wants to ban an entire religion from entering the country including Americans of that religion, traffics in bizarre conspiracy theories, brings up Hillary's bathroom habits, threaten people who criticize him, threaten the Speaker of the House if he doesn't co-operate with you, call critics "losers," take several days before condemning the KKK, pretend you don't know David Duke, tells companies to go **** themselves, talk about his manhood on stage, and so on.

He was in an heated exchange with John McCain that McCain started and he insulted McCain BACK.

You don't understand the rules, Correll. They can attack Trump but Trump is NOT allowed to attack them back.

So this is the new meme: Trump was just standing there, mute, like an innocent little lamb, when the big bad mean people came along and attacked him and he had no choice but to respond.

John McCain was quite rude to him, as far as I know, completely without personal provocation.

You are the one out of touch with reality.

John McCain criticized a person running for the nomination from McCain's party. His words were intemperate - his words often are - but they were more insulting to the Trumpettes than they were to Trump himself.

Furthermore, some specific points that should be addressed about that.

1) It's hypocritical for any supporter of Trump to be incensed by someone else being "rude".

2) If Donald Trump is going to get his panties in a ruffle about people criticizing him, then running for President is not the best place for him, let alone actually BEING President.

3) There is no "personal provocation" needed for someone to criticize a Presidential candidate, or anyone in politics. And McCain's remark wasn't personal to Trump at all; Trump made it personal, and well beyond simply "rude", when he felt the proper response was to mock McCain's war record. No one in the state of Arizona holds a candle to me on hating McCain politically, and finding him distasteful personally, but there's simply no excusing or justifying denigration of a POW.

1. I regret that Public Discourse has reached the point where the only thing that is working to punch though the Wall of Lies of the PC Media, is the aggressive tactics of Trump. But it has.

2. I disagree. We are in a world were politeness is often mistaken as weakness, and civility and respect is rarely if ever returned. It may very well be better to teach people that slights will be answered.

3. As McCain was not making a valid "criticism" but simply insulting Trump's supporters, I, as one of those supporters. am glad that he insulted McCain back.

 

[Correll]

He was in an heated exchange with John McCain that McCain started and he insulted McCain BACK.

Can I just take a moment to admire the deep maturity of your "He started it!" reasoning?

Sure.

And then consider that firing back in the heat of the moment is better than being a doormat.

Like normal for Republicans.

No, actually, I don't consider either to be particularly useful.

Well, we Republicans have tried being doormats and that has not worked.

I'm up for trying the other thing, you know, fighting back.

And there's no middle ground between doormat and white trash? The only way to "fight back" and to bluster and bully like an episode of "Jerry Springer"?

You show me someone who are taken that "middle" route and had it work, I will consider it.

Until then, welcome to the Future.

 

[Fang]

From what I'm hearing, the GOP establishment is trying to downplay the possibility of a brokered convention. Surely they know it would cause a huge revolt within their own party. And regardless, there's nothing they can do if he gets the required votes.

Also, Trump's supporters have made it pretty clear that they've had it with the GOP and really don't care what it thinks about Trump. Okay.

So here's my question: Would you mind if the "establishment" ran and backed a more moderate Republican, like a Romney or a Ryan or a Rubio, and ran them third party?
.

The question is pointless. If the GOP does this Hillary wins easily.