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

[Two Thumbs]

He supports much of the status quo that cost the country a lot of money

Please elaborate

he supports forced use of ethanol even though it's been shown to be worse than just gas

He needs to know it does not work. Maybe he is just not informed on that fact yet.

it's hard to believe that his team wouldn't inform him

Spread a lie long enough and plant the shit over it deep enough sometimes it takes a little longer to get to the lie covered over.

 

[Freewill]

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.

Point of order: Trump is kicking ass.

Sure, but the GOP is arming up to stop him. They hate even the idea of him as the nominee. Why? Doesn't he echo the same things the right has been saying for years?

How do you know these things?

 

[bripat9643]

Please elaborate

he supports forced use of ethanol even though it's been shown to be worse than just gas

He needs to know it does not work. Maybe he is just not informed on that fact yet.

it's hard to believe that his team wouldn't inform him

Scott Adams thinks he's going to win in a huge landslide. He has some pretty interesting arguments.

Who?

And why should I care?

Scott Adams writes the Dilbert Cartoon.

Listen to him and then you decide:

 

[Freewill]

If Trump ends up with 1199 and we end up with an Establishment pick, that might very well be within the rules.

Don't expect much support from the base, and all those record breaking turnouts? YOu can forget that too.

The delegates might want to consider that.

I think it's possible that (and this is just what I'm inferring from some of what I'm hearing) the more moderate/establishment sector of the party would literally rather lose than win with Trump.

That's not for sure, obviously, but with each statement like Romney's it's going to get more and more difficult for many to back Trump.
.

And what does that say about THEM?

The policies that Trump is pushing, what is so radical or dangerous about them?

Answer: NOthing.

That they are having such a hissy fit because Trump is not one of them, speaks volumes about them more than it does about Trump or his supporters.

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?

Have you considered that Mrs Clinton would be as bad as Trump? Just in her own Tuluza way?

 

[RodISHI]

Please elaborate

he supports forced use of ethanol even though it's been shown to be worse than just gas

He needs to know it does not work. Maybe he is just not informed on that fact yet.

it's hard to believe that his team wouldn't inform him

Spread a lie long enough and plant the shit over it deep enough sometimes it takes a little longer to get to the lie covered over.

Interesting. I knew it had to be something for how he got so much support here. Congress sets the levels. I guess we'll see. I hate the shit. It first killed my van and then son helped get a later model used car and right away it died with it. It cost several hundred dollars to get the car running again.

 

[Desperado]

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.

 

[Two Thumbs]

he supports forced use of ethanol even though it's been shown to be worse than just gas

He needs to know it does not work. Maybe he is just not informed on that fact yet.

it's hard to believe that his team wouldn't inform him

Spread a lie long enough and plant the shit over it deep enough sometimes it takes a little longer to get to the lie covered over.

Interesting. I knew it had to be something for how he got so much support here. Congress sets the levels. I guess we'll see. I hate the shit. It first killed my van and then son helped get a later model used car and right away it died with it. It cost several hundred dollars to get the car running again.

the stuff is toxic
fuel for food caused meat prices to jump
as you know it damages engines, driving up demand for parts and thus cost
adding all other factors in, it creates a much larger carbon output, but that's a fact and leftist hate facts that go against things they supported blindly

 

[Two Thumbs]

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

 

[Cecilie1200]

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..

There would be a contested convention if no candidate wins 1237 votes on the first ballot. After that, the only thing that matters is that a candidate wins 1237 votes on subsequent ballots. If Trump - or any candidate - doesn't win 1237 votes, then they shouldn't be the candidate, full stop. And if Trump wins 1237 votes - like any other candidate - he should be the nominee.

What I'm curious about, though, is what the establishment does then. Back a moderate Republican third party candidate, back Gary Johnson, provide minimal support to Trump or fully back him to save the House and Senate.
.

The problem with backing him to save the House and Senate is that they're concerned - rightly, I think - that Trump could do more harm than good to other candidates.

However, it's just not reasonable OR feasible for the PARTY to leave the party. That's ridiculous on the face of it. All they really can do is deny Trump any real support and backing, and surreptitiously throw support to Johnson or someone else, by having establishment personalities - speaking strictly as private individuals, of course - endorse him.

No, I agree. I'd think they'd want to put some effort into saving the House & Senate down-ticket from Trump's presence.
.

Oh, I expect they will. It's one of the reasons they're going to have to be careful and surreptitious about sabotaging him: anything overt that they do is ALSO going to spill over to Congressional and gubernatorial races. And they're definitely in full-panic, save-what-you-can mode.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Whoever has the most delegates should get the nomination. Anything else is thwarting the will of the people. That 1237 shit needs to be done away with.

There are 2472 delegates at the convention. 1237 is the majority of the delegates needed to win the nomination.

If any candidate gets at least 1237 delegates, he should be the nominee, including Trump. But if no candidate gets the majority of the candidates, no candidate is owed anything by anyone. It will be up to the delegates to vote however they wish after the first ballot.

If Trump ends up with 1199 and we end up with an Establishment pick, that might very well be within the rules.

Don't expect much support from the base, and all those record breaking turnouts? YOu can forget that too.

The delegates might want to consider that.

I think it's possible that (and this is just what I'm inferring from some of what I'm hearing) the more moderate/establishment sector of the party would literally rather lose than win with Trump.

That's not for sure, obviously, but with each statement like Romney's it's going to get more and more difficult for many to back Trump.
.

You're correct, as far as it goes.

What a lot of people are having trouble understanding is that this is a three-sided fight. You have the GOPe and the party leadership on one side of the triangle, Trump and his fanboys on the second, and the conservative base on the third. Both the leadership and the conservatives would rather stick needles under their fingernails than have Trump as the candidate, but we also hate each other so virulently that we have a visceral reluctance to join forces.

Yes, there are three pieces now: The traditional moderates, the Christian conservatives and the Trump nationalist/populists. The latter two now are showing zero indication that they're willing to give in to anyone on anything.
.

Yes and no. The conservatives would be willing to - grudgingly - vote for pretty much any other Republican candidate, although a lot would sink back into apathy and just blow the election off. But Trump? No, Trump's out of the question.

 

[BULLDOG]

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.

He supports much of the status quo that cost the country a lot of money

Please elaborate

he supports forced use of ethanol even though it's been shown to be worse than just gas

OK. Is that the total difference?

If you want more information on how many of your policies trump supports, look it up yourself.

Not my policies. I'm well aware of where we differ or agree. I'm just wondering why the GOP is so hostile to him when he is only saying what they have advocated for a long time.

 

[S.J.]

He supports much of the status quo that cost the country a lot of money

Please elaborate

he supports forced use of ethanol even though it's been shown to be worse than just gas

OK. Is that the total difference?

If you want more information on how many of your policies trump supports, look it up yourself.

Not my policies. I'm well aware of where we differ or agree. I'm just wondering why the GOP is so hostile to him when he is only saying what they have advocated for a long time.

Are you having fun?

 

[BULLDOG]

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.

Point of order: Trump is kicking ass.

Sure, but the GOP is arming up to stop him. They hate even the idea of him as the nominee. Why? Doesn't he echo the same things the right has been saying for years?

How do you know these things?

You should pay more attention. Do you think romney came out against trump on his own? There has been a long line of GOP elites condemning trump and making plans for a contested convention, specifically to deny Trump the nomination.

 

[Toro]

Well, the thing about Trump and this election cycle is that he could actually win. As utterly ridiculous and cartoonish as Trump is, Hillary is pretty flawed herself.

That's the thing. Hillary is a weak candidate and can be beaten. But she almost certainly won't be if Trump is the candidate.

This whole thing is so bizarre that I'm not sure either way.

I'd say he has a better chance than Cruz, for sure, and there's always Hillary's baggage. I dunno.
.

Minorities have been coming out for huge for Hillary. If that continues, neither Trump nor Cruz will win enough of the white vote to beat her IMHO. That is, assuming, she doesn't get indicted. If she does, all bets are off.

I used to think that Trump would have a better chance of beating Hillary than Cruz, but I'm not so sure now. A recent WaPo poll had Trump with a staggering 80% negativity rating amongst Hispanics. Trump would eat away at her base in the Reagan Democrats while Cruz would not, but he would lose minorities much worse than Cruz and probably fair poorly amongst the educated in suburbs.

I'm now wondering if Cruz is surging enough to beat Trump. Trump appears less likely to win 1237 delegates, at least on the first ballot.

I joked months ago that Trump is running to make Cruz look good. Without any irony, that is what is happening.

 

[BULLDOG]

Please elaborate

he supports forced use of ethanol even though it's been shown to be worse than just gas

OK. Is that the total difference?

If you want more information on how many of your policies trump supports, look it up yourself.

Not my policies. I'm well aware of where we differ or agree. I'm just wondering why the GOP is so hostile to him when he is only saying what they have advocated for a long time.

Are you having fun?

Just seriously trying to figure out why the GOP is at war with it's self. I'll admit that it doesn't break my heart, but knowing the actual reasons for it would be helpful.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Well, the thing about Trump and this election cycle is that he could actually win. As utterly ridiculous and cartoonish as Trump is, Hillary is pretty flawed herself.

That's the thing. Hillary is a weak candidate and can be beaten. But she almost certainly won't be if Trump is the candidate.

This whole thing is so bizarre that I'm not sure either way.

I'd say he has a better chance than Cruz, for sure, and there's always Hillary's baggage. I dunno.
.

There's very little indication that Trump would do well in the general election, the rabidness of his fanboys notwithstanding.

 

[S.J.]

he supports forced use of ethanol even though it's been shown to be worse than just gas

OK. Is that the total difference?

If you want more information on how many of your policies trump supports, look it up yourself.

Not my policies. I'm well aware of where we differ or agree. I'm just wondering why the GOP is so hostile to him when he is only saying what they have advocated for a long time.

Are you having fun?

Just seriously trying to figure out why the GOP is at war with it's self. I'll admit that it doesn't break my heart, but knowing the actual reasons for it would be helpful.

I already explained it to you.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I don't remember the previous candidate of major party deploring people not to vote for the front-runner, or several national members of a party publicly distancing themselves from that same candidate.

Of course, I don't recall a major candidate talking about his dick during a debate before, either.
.

No, in my opinion what people who keep saying this crap want is for the RNC to torpedo Trump. I seriously do not see why anyone who thinks Mrs. Clinton is clearly the best give a crap about Trump or the RNC. What is unique is the attack. Trump is clearly the front runner and clearly an outsider and folks just are not used to both. So they must try and destroy Trump to maintain the same old same old.

i realize you think that the RNC should destroy Trump, but that is not going to happen.

As for the RNC, try reading what THEY have to say:

Republican leaders’ silence on Trump is inexcusable — and irrational

Resize Text
ON SUNDAY, ABC’s George Stephanopoulos asked Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus whether the party would back Donald Trump should he win the GOP nomination. “Yes, we will support the nominee,” the Republican chairman replied. “To me, it’s a no-brainer.” Mr. Stephanopoulos asked if a Trump nomination would split the party. “Winning is the antidote to a lot of things,” Mr. Priebus responded.

I really don't think it's his "outsider" status.

I think it's his behavior.
.

He is not real polished, or just speaks his mind, and what everyone is really thinking but are too PC to say so. Considering the majority of your posts have dealt with being PC one would think that someone so non-PC would inspire you. Or maybe that is the problem, you think he should be more PC and all your post bitchin' about being PC were BS.

Kinda funny, that something Rubio brought up about Trump and Rubio is forgotten.

"Not real polished"? He's white trash with money. And no, he's not "saying what everyone is really thinking". Maybe he's saying what YOU are thinking, but that's you. Don't project.

Really, he's saying what will get him headlines and free publicity.

Learn the difference between "politically incorrect" and "trailer park".

Me thinks you protest too much. It would be really convincing what you say if you did not engage in the same type of behavior.

And when I said polished i meant not PC.

You think I protest too much? Do you even know what that phrase means? I assure you, it's not "You're being too MEEEEAAANNN!"

Doesn't matter what you meant. He's not "unpolished" in the sense of being politically incorrect. He's unpolished in the sense of being a crass, boorish, no-class vulgarian. Polishing him would be like trying to polish chicken shit.

 

[Cecilie1200]

There are 2472 delegates at the convention. 1237 is the majority of the delegates needed to win the nomination.

If any candidate gets at least 1237 delegates, he should be the nominee, including Trump. But if no candidate gets the majority of the candidates, no candidate is owed anything by anyone. It will be up to the delegates to vote however they wish after the first ballot.

If Trump ends up with 1199 and we end up with an Establishment pick, that might very well be within the rules.

Don't expect much support from the base, and all those record breaking turnouts? YOu can forget that too.

The delegates might want to consider that.

I think it's possible that (and this is just what I'm inferring from some of what I'm hearing) the more moderate/establishment sector of the party would literally rather lose than win with Trump.

That's not for sure, obviously, but with each statement like Romney's it's going to get more and more difficult for many to back Trump.
.

You're correct, as far as it goes.

What a lot of people are having trouble understanding is that this is a three-sided fight. You have the GOPe and the party leadership on one side of the triangle, Trump and his fanboys on the second, and the conservative base on the third. Both the leadership and the conservatives would rather stick needles under their fingernails than have Trump as the candidate, but we also hate each other so virulently that we have a visceral reluctance to join forces.

Yes, there are three pieces now: The traditional moderates, the Christian conservatives and the Trump nationalist/populists. The latter two now are showing zero indication that they're willing to give in to anyone on anything.
.

Just two pieces: The Establishment, and Trump.

Yeah, you wish. Anything more complicated than "either-or" probably makes your head hurt and your eyes cross.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I think it's possible that (and this is just what I'm inferring from some of what I'm hearing) the more moderate/establishment sector of the party would literally rather lose than win with Trump.

That's not for sure, obviously, but with each statement like Romney's it's going to get more and more difficult for many to back Trump.
.

And what does that say about THEM?

The policies that Trump is pushing, what is so radical or dangerous about them?

Answer: NOthing.

That they are having such a hissy fit because Trump is not one of them, speaks volumes about them more than it does about Trump or his supporters.

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?

Have you considered that Mrs Clinton would be as bad as Trump? Just in her own Tuluza way?

Pretty sure I just said that I view them as being exactly as bad as each other.