You Guys Really Going to Nominate Donald Trump?

[Slyhunter]

YOu wouldn't vote against Hillary?

Kasich has had his moments, but recently he's been getting soft on Immigration, and we can't afford that.

I will vote as I have always done. I will consider the value of the Republican candidate. If I find him fatally lacking, I will vote for the best person out there. I vote in favor of candidates. I'm not so stupid as to reduce myself to merely voting against someone.

If you're so obsessed with voting against Clinton, then you should do your damnedest to make sure Trump never gets nominated.

Republican vs Democrat, they both suck.
Libertarians want to open the border to anyone who wants to work here while getting rid of all government handouts meaning my family will starve when we lose our jobs to the immigrants. So no way in hell I'm voting for them. Cruz would outlaw porn if elected. Cruz would try to turn this country into a theocracy if elected. I like him, but hell no!

Trump is the only one who speaks for me.

 

[Correll]

Yes, it is interesting the way that America bought the line the media sold them.

The media didn't have to sell anything. Fact is, half of marriages have someone who commits adultery in them. Most of us don't think people deserve to have their careers ruined because their marriage hits a rough spot.

And, yes, when your Party of "Family Values" is filled with guys who get divorces, cheat on their spouses, break up marriages, and hire prostitutes, it's kind of hard to take you all seriously.

And women are generally not very forgiving of men who cheat, nor men who cheat with much, much younger women.

And yet in this case, the vast majority just accepted it...very odd.

But yes, I agree it should not be a reason to have your career ruined.

Now the sexual harassment of Paul Jones? That's another story.

 

[Correll]

My complaint is that if we give the illegals citizenship, it will be like giving the Libs a Texas, and will usher in a long period of ONe Party Rule as I said.

I don't see how you consider that a "personal problem" instead of a real problem for the nation,

though I note that your naked bigotry against Southern Whites takes off the table any pretense of moral superiority from you, so don't bother with any answer like that.

Frankly, I'm all for a period of one-party rule. The GOP just ***** things up when they get ahold of them, anyway.

And just because the South is full of dumb-ass crackers who are soooooo ******* stupid they vote against their own economic interest, I don't really mind taking texas away from them.

Thank you for not denying that One Party Rules is what you want or what you expect, with a Path to Citizenship.

Want to take a swing at explaining how this will be better for the US, when Dems have everything their way?

 

[Slyhunter]

Trump's style is not presidential, I grant you that it is a minus.

But, on the issues, he is what America needs, if there is any chance of things improving any time soon.

Trump is not anything on any issues. He's hidden that in a veil of virtual hand jobs.

ok so I am going to have to repost the links on this thread because apparently you don't know SHIT!!!!!!!

First off he wrote a book on where he stands on issues; Crippled America: How to Make America Great Again: Donald J. Trump: 9781501137969: Amazon.com: Books

Second off someone went through the trouble to post all of his positions in one web page easy to read format; Donald Trump on the Issues

Now then do I need to google search the details for how the Blacks and the Hispanics are more for Trump then they ever have been for any other Republican Candidate, EVER!

I get tired of looking this shit up for you ignoramuses.

 

[candycorn]

Trump would need a significant number of independents plus all of the GOP base which would rather vomit than vote for him in some cases. The hard right isn't going to show up for him. Christians are not going to show up for him. And it's entirely likely that the establishment Republicans are going to sit this one out.

Advantage Hillary.

It depends.

Conservatives said that conservatives would stay home if they nominated Romney, and more conservatives voted for Romney than any other Presidential candidate in history. So I'm not sure if conservatives would stay home for Trump. In fact, given the passion conservatives here show for him, they may be more likely to go to the polls with Trump on the ballot.

As you said, it depends. I'm not sure more conservatives showed up for Romney. More people did.

According to Wiki, BHO got 3 million fewer votes in 12 than he got in 08. Undoubtedly some of those went to Gov. Romney.

As for Trump, what I was speaking of was the fiscal conservatives--the true TEA partiers--not the GOP's Monster Truck Rally constituency.

The biggest threat Trump poses to Clinton is him peeling off blue collar Democrats, who - along with minorities - are Clinton's base. He may also bring out new voters, voters who generally don't vote. The other group to watch are young people. Young people would probably still vote for the Democrats, but Clinton doesn't seem to inspire young people in the way Obama did. Clinton isn't cool. Trump is "cooler" than Hillary. Clinton probably doesn't pull the same amount of minorities as Obama did. Clinton also has to be wary of the Left pulling her to far away from the center. The Democrat Party is shifting left, which threatens their viability. The final thing that could benefit Trump would be if terrorist activity increases.

Some of that is spot on. I think something you're overlooking is that "coolness" isn't what it once was. When I was a kid about 300 years ago, the whole "If your neighbor is coming into your yard, you build a fence" notion was not just good sense, it was done regularly. Today's youth are more sophisticated than this. They want to know how you'll pay for it, why the wall is only on one border, and if the spotted scarecrow will be effected.

You're right about the Dems....they may need Bill to explain to them once more that the Pelosi liberalism is not what the country likes (or needs frankly). Just wait until Bill gets out there though.

OTOH, moderates decide elections. What appeals to the Republican base probably turns moderates off. Trump does relatively poorly amongst educated, higher-income Republicans, let alone moderates of the same demographics. Trump needs to win A LOT of white votes. Assuming minorities vote the same as they have the past few elections, Trump would have to win the same percentage of whites as Reagan did in 1984, which seems unlikely. Also unlikely is that he would do appreciably better with minorities than either McCain or Romney. The Democrats were also way, way ahead of Republicans in terms of technology in 2012. Have the Republicans closed that gap? Would it under Trump, a 69 year-old man whose primary advantage is amongst older, rural and less-educated voters? Another question is funding. Trump isn't spending any of his own money. Where will it come from? He probably would do better amongst small donors, but my guess is that big donors will sit this out. Of course, Trump doesn't come across as Presidential, and that matters also.

Spot on.

Don't discount Rubio. I think he will be the nominee, and I think Hillary would beat him, but I think it would be a lot closer than many Democrats think. People have dismissed him throughout his career, and all he has done is win. He's a better campaigner than Clinton, he'll do well amongst Hispanics, he appeals to moderates, he's young and attractive, and Americans look forward, not back. Clinton represents the past, Rubio the future.

I keep waiting for Rubio to announce he's running for President. Has he done so?
Seriously...can he not connect the dots for GOP voters that Trump's ideas are not only illogical, impractical, and illegal (all of which is theoretically debatable even with the most ardent Trump supporter) but that they will cost a shit load of MONEY that we do not have???? One would think that if there is anything GOP voters would understand is the economics of the zany ideas.

He's polling on a par with Ted Cruz who is probably the most unelectable person running outside of Rand Paul. As for being a better campaigner than Clinton...remains to be seen. Clinton is running a masterful campaign this time around but there hasn't been much put in her way by her opponents. Again, he is polling with unelectable Teddy.

His record is zero.

His immigration standing has made him persona-nongrata with a lot of the hard right. Young and attractive is correct. However, in each time where he was in the public limelight, he seems to do something bizarre. The water incident...weird. The filibuster where he quoted Jay-Z....weird. His debate performances have been so-so where he at times sounds like the floor manager telling the staff that there is no overtime and to get busy (basically a prick we all remember from our first jobs). He has likable qualities and a good story.

 

[Toro]

You see, this is where you got it wrong. Moderates don't decide elections.

Actually, they do.

Republicans win elections when they are within 10% of Democrats amongst moderates. They lose when they aren't.

The Conservative Presidential Vote | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

This has been the case in the nine past elections.

 

[candycorn]

Well, you better get used to it. Because if Trump gets the nomination, the White House is going to stay Democrat for another four years.

YOu know, I like Trump on the issues,

BUT, it will be a nice bonus to know that if he wins, that it will kill you guys.

What are you talking about? Oh I see, you're one of those fake conservative types who think that being conservative is about being an ignorant, low class slob. Get out and go sign on with the Democrats. That's where you belong. You fifth column types are the reason the fine tradition of the GOP has been shredded to tatters.

The only tradition of the GOP I care about is protecting and advancing the interests of American citizens.

The Grand Old Party leadership has been dropping the ball on that with regard to Trade and Immigration Policy for far too long.

It comes as no surprise that for the most part GOP leadership excludes the interests of African-Americans, gay Americans, Hispanic Americans, and Muslim Americans as being entitled to protection.

And how well has your dem concern for the interests of Blacks worked out for them? Are the democratic controlled cities filled with harmony and light where the black population strolls about stately gardens while enjoying the sound of classic music in the air and discussing art and literature?

Do they do that in GOP controlled cities? Examples please....

 

[JoeB131]

And women are generally not very forgiving of men who cheat, nor men who cheat with much, much younger women.

And yet in this case, the vast majority just accepted it...very odd.

But yes, I agree it should not be a reason to have your career ruined.

Now the sexual harassment of Paul Jones? That's another story.

Except Paula Jones' case was dismissed as being "without merit" by Judge Susan Weber Wright. Also, most of the country didn't think that was a big deal, anyway. So she saw his dick. She has two kids, she knows what a dick looks like.

Pictured: A Dick

 

[JoeB131]

Actually, they do.

Republicans win elections when they are within 10% of Democrats amongst moderates. They lose when they aren't.

This has been the case in the nine past elections.

A lot of cherry picking. You sound like the scientist who chops all the legs off a frog, yells jump and concludes legless frogs are deaf.

Also, no real evidence that "moderates" won't go for Trump over Hillary, who just plain old isn't likable.

 

[candycorn]

I will admit that I certainly thought The Donald would have been gone by now but there seems to be zero inclination on the part of GOP challengers to The Donald to take him on. It's allowed him to basically bully the field into silence.

The lack of courage on the part of Rubio, Christie, Bush, and Kasich is all at once bewildering and saddening. Much more for Rubio than anyone else. He's set up his "white house or bust" scenario by saying he is resigning from the Senate. Christie and Kasich have day jobs to go back to. Bush is the most bewildering of all in how little he seems to really want the job which was the one question mark besides his bid to start with.

Rubio's cache on the lecture circuit is far from established as a fairly incompetent Senator, a pretty lousy Republican, and someone who has been exposed as being as petulant as his age would indicate. Someone in the Rubio camp, one would think, would mention to the Senator that this is the final sets of his professional life and it's time to start spiking the ball when he can.

Trump is basically lying his way through the campaign season and nobody is checking him or calling him out. Democrats will not be as accomdating. The GOP is setting itself up for a shameful defeat and it's candidates seem content to let it happen.

Let me get this straight? The Democratic Party complains that taxes are to high on the middle class but will vote enthusiastically against a canidate that will zero out the income tax for anyone making below 50000. When did you guys stop supporting the middle class?

Well, I'm not a democrat so I'm not sure about the complaints.

As for Trump's pledge to where you pay nothing while enjoying all of the goods and services...

 

[Correll]

YOu know, I like Trump on the issues,

BUT, it will be a nice bonus to know that if he wins, that it will kill you guys.

What are you talking about? Oh I see, you're one of those fake conservative types who think that being conservative is about being an ignorant, low class slob. Get out and go sign on with the Democrats. That's where you belong. You fifth column types are the reason the fine tradition of the GOP has been shredded to tatters.

The only tradition of the GOP I care about is protecting and advancing the interests of American citizens.

The Grand Old Party leadership has been dropping the ball on that with regard to Trade and Immigration Policy for far too long.

It comes as no surprise that for the most part GOP leadership excludes the interests of African-Americans, gay Americans, Hispanic Americans, and Muslim Americans as being entitled to protection.

And how well has your dem concern for the interests of Blacks worked out for them? Are the democratic controlled cities filled with harmony and light where the black population strolls about stately gardens while enjoying the sound of classic music in the air and discussing art and literature?

Do they do that in GOP controlled cities? Examples please....

I did not claim GOP controlled cities were working out well for blacks. I asked Clayton, who brought up blacks, how having the dems look out for their interests was working out for them.

It is a question he has not answered.

My position was that Trump's promises, to renegotiate better Trade Deals and to Deport Illegal Immigrants would be in the interests of Americans as a whole. Clayton was the one that brought up the interests of blacks.

 

[JoeB131]

Thank you for not denying that One Party Rules is what you want or what you expect, with a Path to Citizenship.

Want to take a swing at explaining how this will be better for the US, when Dems have everything their way?

You mean we'll finally get single payer health care, we'll finally get income equality, we'll finally get more rights for working folks, we'll finally get racial equality. We'll finally get sensible gun control laws.

yeah, just not seeing a downside here.

The added joy of watching the Evangelicals and Gun Nuts and Homophobes get ABSOLUTELY CRUSHED will be icing on the cake.

 

[Toro]

A lot of cherry picking. You sound like the scientist who chops all the legs off a frog, yells jump and concludes legless frogs are deaf.

No.

It's simple math.

 

[candycorn]

I will admit that I certainly thought The Donald would have been gone by now but there seems to be zero inclination on the part of GOP challengers to The Donald to take him on. It's allowed him to basically bully the field into silence.

The lack of courage on the part of Rubio, Christie, Bush, and Kasich is all at once bewildering and saddening. Much more for Rubio than anyone else. He's set up his "white house or bust" scenario by saying he is resigning from the Senate. Christie and Kasich have day jobs to go back to. Bush is the most bewildering of all in how little he seems to really want the job which was the one question mark besides his bid to start with.

Rubio's cache on the lecture circuit is far from established as a fairly incompetent Senator, a pretty lousy Republican, and someone who has been exposed as being as petulant as his age would indicate. Someone in the Rubio camp, one would think, would mention to the Senator that this is the final sets of his professional life and it's time to start spiking the ball when he can.

Trump is basically lying his way through the campaign season and nobody is checking him or calling him out. Democrats will not be as accomdating. The GOP is setting itself up for a shameful defeat and it's candidates seem content to let it happen.

Is Trump under an FBI investigation for security violations and other assorted felonies, and facing a possibility of doing time in a federal prison???

That's true, but still . . . Donald Trump of all people???

He is the one that had the brilliant idea of actually addressing the interests of the American People.

Debatable.

Immigration usually polls at 6% in off years (this is actually an off year).

Terrorism rises and falls with the actions of the terrorists.

In all cases, he basically tells you what you want to hear and has zero plans to do anything about it logistically, logically and in fact legally. No, we can't round 11 Million People up; no, we can't ban a religion.

IMO, he gets 1, 4 and 5 by a wide margin with his positions on Trade and Immigration.

Your assumption that he is lying about his intentions is just that, an assumption.

I didn't say he was lying about his intentions.

I did say that his intentions (genuine or otherwise) have zero chance of coming to fruition. Even if he could get passed the logistical impossibility of detaining 11,000,000 people, having their cases tried, and then developing the apparatus to physically transport them back to where they came from (you just cant send them to Mexico)...we couldn't afford to do that. And that is simply the case.

It would be easy as pie for every candidate to speak to what their voters want to hear but serious and responsible politicians have at least a blueprint for implementation that is somewhat workable.

 

[Correll]

Thank you for not denying that One Party Rules is what you want or what you expect, with a Path to Citizenship.

Want to take a swing at explaining how this will be better for the US, when Dems have everything their way?

You mean we'll finally get single payer health care, we'll finally get income equality, we'll finally get more rights for working folks, we'll finally get racial equality. We'll finally get sensible gun control laws.

yeah, just not seeing a downside here.

The added joy of watching the Evangelicals and Gun Nuts and Homophobes get ABSOLUTELY CRUSHED will be icing on the cake.

Income equality? Mmm, I take it for women?

More rights? vs whom? Are you suggesting government directed unionization?

Racial equality? LIke this?

Ricci v. DeStefano - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Eighteen city firefighters, seventeen of whom were white and one of whom was Hispanic, brought suit under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 after they had passed the test for promotions to management positions and the city declined to promote them. New Haven officials invalidated the test results because none of the black firefighters scored high enough to be considered for the positions. City officials stated that they feared a lawsuit over the test's disproportionate exclusion of certain racial groups from promotion under the controversial "disparate impact" theory of liability"

 

[candycorn]

Obviously the Christian Coalition won't care much for a thrice divorced man who pretty much mocked their religion.

Independents have little to like about what they know about his plans

Establishment Republicans are even less likely to show up.

The real pain for the last group is that none of their candidates are willing to stand up to this guy who is just lying his way through the election thus far. There were no thousands of celebrating muslims in Jersey, there is no way Mexico would pay for a wall that will never be built anyway, there is no fiscal planning to round up 11,000,000 people much less detain them, etc...

They have to be wondering just how empty a suit Rubio is at this point since this is an all-or-nothing bid on his part and he is not exactly set for life; especially given his perpensity to mismanage other people's money.

You're living in a world of wishful thinking.

Feel free to eleaborate with some details. Oh yeah, I forgot; Trump and his supporters don't get into details...ever

Details? You libs lose the right to whine about details when you voted for Obama.

So I guess you think Obama was a failure judging from that statement? Am I right?
....

No, I think he ran of vague generalities like "Hope and Change".

You were not paying attention:

Here is the good bad and ugly from his promises:

The Obameter: Tracking Obama's Campaign Promises | PolitiFact

 

[Correll]

Is Trump under an FBI investigation for security violations and other assorted felonies, and facing a possibility of doing time in a federal prison???

That's true, but still . . . Donald Trump of all people???

He is the one that had the brilliant idea of actually addressing the interests of the American People.

Debatable.

Immigration usually polls at 6% in off years (this is actually an off year).

Terrorism rises and falls with the actions of the terrorists.

In all cases, he basically tells you what you want to hear and has zero plans to do anything about it logistically, logically and in fact legally. No, we can't round 11 Million People up; no, we can't ban a religion.

IMO, he gets 1, 4 and 5 by a wide margin with his positions on Trade and Immigration.

Your assumption that he is lying about his intentions is just that, an assumption.

I didn't say he was lying about his intentions.

I did say that his intentions (genuine or otherwise) have zero chance of coming to fruition. Even if he could get passed the logistical impossibility of detaining 11,000,000 people, having their cases tried, and then developing the apparatus to physically transport them back to where they came from (you just cant send them to Mexico)...we couldn't afford to do that. And that is simply the case.

It would be easy as pie for every candidate to speak to what their voters want to hear but serious and responsible politicians have at least a blueprint for implementation that is somewhat workable.

IF those 11 million people were able to move here, they can be moved back.

If you rescind the nonsense of BirthRIght Citizenship, there is no big hurry.

We do NOT have to build the "apparatus" to process 11 million people. If we just process 1 million a year, it will be done in 4 or 5 years (as many would just give up and go home).

 

[Correll]

You're living in a world of wishful thinking.

Feel free to eleaborate with some details. Oh yeah, I forgot; Trump and his supporters don't get into details...ever

Details? You libs lose the right to whine about details when you voted for Obama.

So I guess you think Obama was a failure judging from that statement? Am I right?
....

No, I think he ran of vague generalities like "Hope and Change".

You were not paying attention:

Here is the good bad and ugly from his promises:

The Obameter: Tracking Obama's Campaign Promises | PolitiFact

I paid plenty of attention at the time.

Hope and Change was what it was all about.

 

[deltex1]

I will admit that I certainly thought The Donald would have been gone by now but there seems to be zero inclination on the part of GOP challengers to The Donald to take him on. It's allowed him to basically bully the field into silence.

The lack of courage on the part of Rubio, Christie, Bush, and Kasich is all at once bewildering and saddening. Much more for Rubio than anyone else. He's set up his "white house or bust" scenario by saying he is resigning from the Senate. Christie and Kasich have day jobs to go back to. Bush is the most bewildering of all in how little he seems to really want the job which was the one question mark besides his bid to start with.

Rubio's cache on the lecture circuit is far from established as a fairly incompetent Senator, a pretty lousy Republican, and someone who has been exposed as being as petulant as his age would indicate. Someone in the Rubio camp, one would think, would mention to the Senator that this is the final sets of his professional life and it's time to start spiking the ball when he can.

Trump is basically lying his way through the campaign season and nobody is checking him or calling him out. Democrats will not be as accomdating. The GOP is setting itself up for a shameful defeat and it's candidates seem content to let it happen.

Guno agrees with you...so you're fugged from the gitgo. Receiving analysis from the morons who supported Obabble for eight years tests the outer bounds of rationality.

 

[Obiwan]

For sure, Trump has been a plus to date for America---because he has absolutely routed the Political Correctness Nazis in New York and New England.

No, Trump has mad an ass of himself. That's about it. There is a difference between rebuking political correctness and being a gutter mouthed piece of trash.

Of course, you know I could QUOTE Hillary on the mouth piece of trash part....