Republicans Need To Decide If Protecting Trump Is Worth The Price Of Destroying Their Party

[Doc1]

In the next two election cycles, the Senate map will flip from favorable to Republicans to strongly unfavorable, and with Democrats sweeping to victories at the state level, they soon won't have gerrymandering to protect them in the House that they just lost despite it. And as investigations that they can't stop further expose the depth and breadth of the corruption that is the defining feature of the Trump era, Republicans will have choices to make. Do they really want to continue to protect Trump? Is it worth it? They can't be expected to do the right thing for the right reasons, but political self-preservation does tend to motivate them. Will it, or do they want their political careers and their political party to go down in metaphorical flames that they themselves lit? We'll soon find out.


Republicans need to decide if protecting Trump is worth the price of destroying their party

Was Obambi worth protecting at expense of your Party boi?

 

[my2¢]

Read only the first paragraph. I doubt the author of that hit piece has any interest at all in the preservation of the Republican Party and so didn't proceed.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Protecting Trump from what?
There is nothing there that they need to protect.

From this:

“This election was a referendum on Trump, and Trump failed. And in failing, Trump failed his Republican Party. And the Republican Party that has been Trump's protector, enabler, and lapdog failed at the polls because of its failure to stand up for democratic principles and basic human decency. And soon to be subject to legitimate congressional oversight, Trump is in deep trouble, and his next-level meltdown since the election suggests that he knows it. Even the supposed Republican consolation prize of having netted one or two Senate seats is much less than it seems, and is, in fact, yet another warning, particularly to those senators who will be up for re-election in two and four years.” ibid

And every American should look forward to January 2021, when we are finally rid of Trump.

He lost far less seats than obie did. Even gained a few. I think you're projecting a bit too far out.

 

[Thinker101]

Protecting Trump from what?
There is nothing there that they need to protect.

From this:

“This election was a referendum on Trump, and Trump failed. And in failing, Trump failed his Republican Party. And the Republican Party that has been Trump's protector, enabler, and lapdog failed at the polls because of its failure to stand up for democratic principles and basic human decency. And soon to be subject to legitimate congressional oversight, Trump is in deep trouble, and his next-level meltdown since the election suggests that he knows it. Even the supposed Republican consolation prize of having netted one or two Senate seats is much less than it seems, and is, in fact, yet another warning, particularly to those senators who will be up for re-election in two and four years.” ibid

And every American should look forward to January 2021, when we are finally rid of Trump.

And your candidate is whom? Hillary, Biden, Warren....?

 

[edward37]

In the next two election cycles, the Senate map will flip from favorable to Republicans to strongly unfavorable, and with Democrats sweeping to victories at the state level, they soon won't have gerrymandering to protect them in the House that they just lost despite it. And as investigations that they can't stop further expose the depth and breadth of the corruption that is the defining feature of the Trump era, Republicans will have choices to make. Do they really want to continue to protect Trump? Is it worth it? They can't be expected to do the right thing for the right reasons, but political self-preservation does tend to motivate them. Will it, or do they want their political careers and their political party to go down in metaphorical flames that they themselves lit? We'll soon find out.


Republicans need to decide if protecting Trump is worth the price of destroying their party

Throw the pos to the dogs

 

[edward37]

Protecting Trump from what?
There is nothing there that they need to protect.

From this:

“This election was a referendum on Trump, and Trump failed. And in failing, Trump failed his Republican Party. And the Republican Party that has been Trump's protector, enabler, and lapdog failed at the polls because of its failure to stand up for democratic principles and basic human decency. And soon to be subject to legitimate congressional oversight, Trump is in deep trouble, and his next-level meltdown since the election suggests that he knows it. Even the supposed Republican consolation prize of having netted one or two Senate seats is much less than it seems, and is, in fact, yet another warning, particularly to those senators who will be up for re-election in two and four years.” ibid

And every American should look forward to January 2021, when we are finally rid of Trump.

And your candidate is whom? Hillary, Biden, Warren....?

BROWN from Ohio

 

[edward37]

Here we go again the left telling us we need to act like more like liberals. Instead we'll just let Trump continue kicking the crap out of you and your liberal media fake news pals.

LOL everything is fake except the lying pos you put in our WH

 

[Thinker101]

Protecting Trump from what?
There is nothing there that they need to protect.

From this:

“This election was a referendum on Trump, and Trump failed. And in failing, Trump failed his Republican Party. And the Republican Party that has been Trump's protector, enabler, and lapdog failed at the polls because of its failure to stand up for democratic principles and basic human decency. And soon to be subject to legitimate congressional oversight, Trump is in deep trouble, and his next-level meltdown since the election suggests that he knows it. Even the supposed Republican consolation prize of having netted one or two Senate seats is much less than it seems, and is, in fact, yet another warning, particularly to those senators who will be up for re-election in two and four years.” ibid

And every American should look forward to January 2021, when we are finally rid of Trump.

And your candidate is whom? Hillary, Biden, Warren....?

BROWN from Ohio

For the most part Brown is not even on the radar. Other than that, he's got a few skeletons that may suggest he doesn't really support some of the Democrat agendas.

 

[edward37]

Protecting Trump from what?
There is nothing there that they need to protect.

From this:

“This election was a referendum on Trump, and Trump failed. And in failing, Trump failed his Republican Party. And the Republican Party that has been Trump's protector, enabler, and lapdog failed at the polls because of its failure to stand up for democratic principles and basic human decency. And soon to be subject to legitimate congressional oversight, Trump is in deep trouble, and his next-level meltdown since the election suggests that he knows it. Even the supposed Republican consolation prize of having netted one or two Senate seats is much less than it seems, and is, in fact, yet another warning, particularly to those senators who will be up for re-election in two and four years.” ibid

And every American should look forward to January 2021, when we are finally rid of Trump.

And your candidate is whom? Hillary, Biden, Warren....?

BROWN from Ohio

For the most part Brown is not even on the radar. Other than that, he's got a few skeletons that may suggest he doesn't really support some of the Democrat agendas.

He won in Ohio Dems need Ohio They all have a skeleton or 2 if you look hard enough

 

[DustyInfinity]

Clueless old white people think they're saving their party.

lol

You do know that conservatism has nothing to do with age or skin color? You need to quit watching CNN, because you are applying ethnicity to political ideas.

 

[DustyInfinity]

Let us look at the wingers. On the left, you have people who physically assault their opposition, and ban 'unacceptable speech' or ideas. If you go to the right, you just lose people like Flake and McCain. It seems moving right would benefit everyone. The further right on the scale, the more personal freedom we have. You guys sure are gung ho about giving away all your freedom.

 

[cutter]

Clueless old white people think they're saving their party.

lol

Alot of brown and black people sure want to sneak into this country that was created by those clueless old white people. Those old white guys did a fantastic job. Show me another country, that was created by someone not white that can compare to this country.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

`
There is also the evangelical cult problem which the republicans have and that is firmly embedded.

LefTard Logic:
“Evangelicals are BAD for this country but tens of millions of low iQ, thirdworld wetbacks are GOOD.”

It's the evangelicals who are low IQ or at least low Emotional Intelligence...just like YOU

Haha...there you go following LefTard protocol perfectly.

“Evangelicals are bad because they won’t champion ass pounders and trannies. Wetbacks are great.”

Evangelicals are bad because they won’t respect the Constitution and secular authority . You think a lot about anal sex, don't you?

 

[BrokeLoser]

`
There is also the evangelical cult problem which the republicans have and that is firmly embedded.

LefTard Logic:
“Evangelicals are BAD for this country but tens of millions of low iQ, thirdworld wetbacks are GOOD.”

It's the evangelicals who are low IQ or at least low Emotional Intelligence...just like YOU

Haha...there you go following LefTard protocol perfectly.

“Evangelicals are bad because they won’t champion ass pounders and trannies. Wetbacks are great.”

Evangelicals are bad because they won’t respect the Constitution and secular authority . You think a lot about anal sex, don't you?

We totally get it bud...
Overly moral folks with boundaries = BAD
Immoral wackos with no boundaries such as men in a dresses and fudge packers = GOOD

Actually, I highly recommend anal sex between men and women. It’s good shit.

 

[peach174]

Protecting Trump from what?
There is nothing there that they need to protect.

From this:

“This election was a referendum on Trump, and Trump failed. And in failing, Trump failed his Republican Party. And the Republican Party that has been Trump's protector, enabler, and lapdog failed at the polls because of its failure to stand up for democratic principles and basic human decency. And soon to be subject to legitimate congressional oversight, Trump is in deep trouble, and his next-level meltdown since the election suggests that he knows it. Even the supposed Republican consolation prize of having netted one or two Senate seats is much less than it seems, and is, in fact, yet another warning, particularly to those senators who will be up for re-election in two and four years.” ibid

And every American should look forward to January 2021, when we are finally rid of Trump.

Protecting Trump from what?
There is nothing there that they need to protect.

From this:

“This election was a referendum on Trump, and Trump failed. And in failing, Trump failed his Republican Party. And the Republican Party that has been Trump's protector, enabler, and lapdog failed at the polls because of its failure to stand up for democratic principles and basic human decency. And soon to be subject to legitimate congressional oversight, Trump is in deep trouble, and his next-level meltdown since the election suggests that he knows it. Even the supposed Republican consolation prize of having netted one or two Senate seats is much less than it seems, and is, in fact, yet another warning, particularly to those senators who will be up for re-election in two and four years.” ibid

And every American should look forward to January 2021, when we are finally rid of Trump.

The Republican party failed Trump.

 

[Claudette]

In the next two election cycles, the Senate map will flip from favorable to Republicans to strongly unfavorable, and with Democrats sweeping to victories at the state level, they soon won't have gerrymandering to protect them in the House that they just lost despite it. And as investigations that they can't stop further expose the depth and breadth of the corruption that is the defining feature of the Trump era, Republicans will have choices to make. Do they really want to continue to protect Trump? Is it worth it? They can't be expected to do the right thing for the right reasons, but political self-preservation does tend to motivate them. Will it, or do they want their political careers and their political party to go down in metaphorical flames that they themselves lit? We'll soon find out.


Republicans need to decide if protecting Trump is worth the price of destroying their party

Nope. Once Pelosi tries to raise taxes, as she has already said is her goal and the House wastes their two years with investigations that are already done or being done I think voters will kick the Dems to the curb in 2020.

They will prove to one and all how ineffective and ridiculous they are.

Oh and Trump doesn't need anyone to protect him. He does a damned good job of protecting himself.

Sucks to be you.

 

[bendog]

In the next two election cycles, the Senate map will flip from favorable to Republicans to strongly unfavorable, and with Democrats sweeping to victories at the state level, they soon won't have gerrymandering to protect them in the House that they just lost despite it. And as investigations that they can't stop further expose the depth and breadth of the corruption that is the defining feature of the Trump era, Republicans will have choices to make. Do they really want to continue to protect Trump? Is it worth it? They can't be expected to do the right thing for the right reasons, but political self-preservation does tend to motivate them. Will it, or do they want their political careers and their political party to go down in metaphorical flames that they themselves lit? We'll soon find out.


Republicans need to decide if protecting Trump is worth the price of destroying their party

I was thinking along similar lines, but disagree with your OP/link somewhat. Going all in with Trump, and ceding the burbs and even college educated white men by double digits may well doom the gop to near certain loss of the House in the foreseeable future, and it was very difficult for them to win a presidency unless the dems were running for a third term or ran a horrible candidate .... and perhaps it takes BOTH.

But because of how senate seats are allocated, I think the RURAL/White party is pretty much even money to control the senate in the future. Population means nothing. My count:

Dems 21: Or, WA, CA, NM, Maine, NH, Ver, NY, Mass, RI, CT, NJ, DE, MD, IL, VA, PA, Mich, Wis, NM and HI

GOP 21 Mont (tester) ID, UT, Wyo, ND, SD, Neb, KA, OK, Missouri, ARK, LA, Ind, Kentucky, Tenn, Miss, Ala, SC, WV (Manchin), Iowa and AK

True swings: AZ, Tex (maybe a dem stretch), GA(maybe a dem stetch), VA(maybe a gop stretch), FL, NC, NV, CO

 

[bendog]

Protecting Trump from what?
There is nothing there that they need to protect.

From this:

“This election was a referendum on Trump, and Trump failed. And in failing, Trump failed his Republican Party. And the Republican Party that has been Trump's protector, enabler, and lapdog failed at the polls because of its failure to stand up for democratic principles and basic human decency. And soon to be subject to legitimate congressional oversight, Trump is in deep trouble, and his next-level meltdown since the election suggests that he knows it. Even the supposed Republican consolation prize of having netted one or two Senate seats is much less than it seems, and is, in fact, yet another warning, particularly to those senators who will be up for re-election in two and four years.” ibid

And every American should look forward to January 2021, when we are finally rid of Trump.

Protecting Trump from what?
There is nothing there that they need to protect.

From this:

“This election was a referendum on Trump, and Trump failed. And in failing, Trump failed his Republican Party. And the Republican Party that has been Trump's protector, enabler, and lapdog failed at the polls because of its failure to stand up for democratic principles and basic human decency. And soon to be subject to legitimate congressional oversight, Trump is in deep trouble, and his next-level meltdown since the election suggests that he knows it. Even the supposed Republican consolation prize of having netted one or two Senate seats is much less than it seems, and is, in fact, yet another warning, particularly to those senators who will be up for re-election in two and four years.” ibid

And every American should look forward to January 2021, when we are finally rid of Trump.

The Republican party failed Trump.

What is this republican party of which you speak?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

`
There is also the evangelical cult problem which the republicans have and that is firmly embedded.

LefTard Logic:
“Evangelicals are BAD for this country but tens of millions of low iQ, thirdworld wetbacks are GOOD.”

It's the evangelicals who are low IQ or at least low Emotional Intelligence...just like YOU

Haha...there you go following LefTard protocol perfectly.

“Evangelicals are bad because they won’t champion ass pounders and trannies. Wetbacks are great.”

Evangelicals are bad because they won’t respect the Constitution and secular authority . You think a lot about anal sex, don't you?

We totally get it bud...
Overly moral folks with boundaries = BAD
Immoral wackos with no boundaries such as men in a dresses and fudge packers = GOOD

Actually, I highly recommend anal sex between men and women. It’s good shit.

Boundaries?? Like the boundaries that T-Rump so rigidly adheres to?

 

[BrokeLoser]

LefTard Logic:
“Evangelicals are BAD for this country but tens of millions of low iQ, thirdworld wetbacks are GOOD.”

It's the evangelicals who are low IQ or at least low Emotional Intelligence...just like YOU

Haha...there you go following LefTard protocol perfectly.

“Evangelicals are bad because they won’t champion ass pounders and trannies. Wetbacks are great.”

Evangelicals are bad because they won’t respect the Constitution and secular authority . You think a lot about anal sex, don't you?

We totally get it bud...
Overly moral folks with boundaries = BAD
Immoral wackos with no boundaries such as men in a dresses and fudge packers = GOOD

Actually, I highly recommend anal sex between men and women. It’s good shit.

Boundaries?? Like the boundaries that T-Rump so rigidly adheres to?

Damn...Trump owns you.
WTF does our President have to do with this?