Trump Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Robert_Bay
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
mary_bobo said:
Cool? I think it is tasteless, crude and rude, and certainly does nothing to help any interested voter (if there are any left) see the difference in the policies of the candidates. This is a serious time for our country and all this tripe is taking from the real issues.
Click to expand...
Just to clarify for the record, I agree - that comment was meant to be critical of this craze for political incorrectness, what Trump is doing. It makes me nauseous. Flannery O’Connor thought you could shock people back into their humanity (well grace/God really, but I almost hesitate to bring him into this thread conversation), however, we live in a very different world today. I was trying make people realize how awful this Trump stuff is getting…

Have to post this article -great read. For anyone seriously interested in what is behind the Trump phenomenon. Love the BBC.
bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-35836102
 
Ridgerunner said:
Do I think party control of the parties is better than popular vote control? I sure do. I was a McGovernite myself until I attended some of the organizational meeting in Hyde Park in Chicago. That latter experience was chilling, even for a lefty like I was at the time.
Click to expand...
Why, specifically, if you don’t me asking, Ridge?
 
mary_bobo said:
Cool? I think it is tasteless, crude and rude, and certainly does nothing to help any interested voter (if there are any left) see the difference in the policies of the candidates. This is a serious time for our country and all this tripe is taking from the real issues.
Click to expand...
I think FC was using sarcasm.

Crickets from the Trump supporters. I’m interested to see how they justify this.
I know! It’s dem EEEEEVIL Sanders supporters who did this, from deep inside their underground bunker. They obviously planted a doppelganger of Trump saying these things.
I knew there would be a rational explanation.
 
_Abyssinia said:
I doubt Trump will become the Republican nominee if it comes to a contested convention, and it looks like it well might. I think Cruz will get to 1237 delegates if there is a contested convention.
Click to expand...
If Kasich wins PA and does well in other states going forward, some of which I hear are not Cruz territories, although one poll I saw has him ahead in WI by 1 pt over Trump, do you still think they would give it to Ted? Even if polls showed Kasich has the best shot at electabilty?
 
_Abyssinia said:
The presidential election will work itself out, but at the state level, Republicans haven’t had as much power as they do now, since the 1920s and Democrats have a significantly weakened position since Obama took office, per these two sources:

According to The Economist, "Republicans now control both chambers in 30 state legislatures, while the Democrats control 11 and eight are split. In 24 states Republican power is unchecked—meaning they control the legislature and the governorship. The party has not had this much clout in the states since the 1920s.

Democrats have lost 900 seats during Obama’s Presidency: politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/jan/25/cokie-roberts/have-democrats-lost-900-seats-state-legislatures-o/
Click to expand...
Yes I’ve heard it said, when more people vote such as in Presidential year general elections, it favors the Democrats. When less vote such as in midterm elections, it favors the Republicans.
 
Sy_Noe said:
Besides his unfavorables with women, add to the list Trump’s unfavorables with the Latino electorate, 80% unfavorable the last I saw, and everyone else he has alienated, and it’s looking better by the day for Hillary. No wonder the GOP has a stop him movement.
Click to expand...
That’s funny, since it’s wasn’t other republican supporters who were protesting him and committing a federal felony by disrupting an event where the Secret Service was present.

And Hillary’s numbers have dropped significantly.
 
Sy_Noe said:
If Kasich wins PA and does well in other states going forward, some of which I hear are not Cruz territories, although one poll I saw has him ahead in WI by 1 pt over Trump, do you still think they would give it to Ted? Even if polls showed Kasich has the best shot at electabilty?
Click to expand...
I guess it depends how loyal each candidate’s delegates are to that particular candidate.
 
Sy_Noe said:
If Kasich wins PA and does well in other states going forward, some of which I hear are not Cruz territories, although one poll I saw has him ahead in WI by 1 pt over Trump, do you still think they would give it to Ted? Even if polls showed Kasich has the best shot at electabilty?
Click to expand...
The governor may have good numbers, but who are the undecideds? If the undecideds are the GOP base, it won’t help as much as the numbers show to pick him.

Besides, his comments on religious liberty are very disturbing. “Follow the law” he said. So did slave-owning politicians in the early 19th century.

And how does he answer the Clinton attack machine? A big reason Romney lost is because someone clearly told him to lay off Obama for the last month. A lot of good that did. Criticism can be done decently too, I might add.

Cruz is much better equipped to field the attacks (he’s been taking it from the frontrunner for weeks) and he will turn out the base.
 
Sy_Noe said:
If Kasich wins PA and does well in other states going forward, some of which I hear are not Cruz territories, although one poll I saw has him ahead in WI by 1 pt over Trump, do you still think they would give it to Ted? Even if polls showed Kasich has the best shot at electabilty?
Click to expand...
The whole maneuvering of the Republican Party now is like rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.
 
Little_Sheep said:
I appreciate your thoughts on this, but I find it unlikely. There is an outside chance that Trump may not land at 1237.

But let’s say he lands at 1150? Would it then be fair to shutter the nominee that MOST of the Republican electorate wants to see compete in the general? That is just beyond sleazy in my opinion. If the voters choose him leaps and bounds over Cruz (and I believe they will do just that), it would be a travesty for the Party leadership not to back him, however distasteful that might feel.

Would you truly support your Party ignoring what the majority of its voters desire?
Click to expand...
Because we live in a Constitutional republic for one, and for two, there’s too much at stake with the court and we do have the framework for a reason.

And what about the Rubio/Christie/Paul/Bush/ect. voters?

I can also say with confidence that it wouldn’t matter if Sanders were leading, he would not get the nomination, because he would drive mainstream donors to the GOP and his plans are impractical to say the least; no Congress Dem/Ind/Rep would work with him because it would be electoral suicide.

Personally, I think the left just wants the current frontrunner because they feel he’d be the easiest to beat. Perhaps Bush thought that, and 150 million dollars later, he’s the one who is out.

But it’s a primary election, and we have a proven conservative in Cruz who has the numbers to win. 👍
 
SuperLuigi said:
Because we live in a Constitutional republic for one, and for two, there’s too much at stake with the court and we do have the framework for a reason.

And what about the Rubio/Christie/Paul/Bush/ect. voters?

I can also say with confidence that it wouldn’t matter if Sanders were leading, he would not get the nomination, because he would drive mainstream donors to the GOP and his plans are impractical to say the least; no Congress Dem/Ind/Rep would work with him because it would be electoral suicide.

Personally, I think the left just wants the current frontrunner because they feel he’d be the easiest to beat. Perhaps Bush thought that, and 150 million dollars later, he’s the one who is out.

But it’s a primary election, and we have a proven conservative in Cruz who has the numbers to win. 👍
Click to expand...
I’m of the left and I’d rather run against Cruz or Trump over Kasich in a general. Cruz because he is just so extreme and Trump because he has such unfavorables among women and Latinos
 
SuperLuigi said:
Sorry, but we don’t have the superdelegates. All of our delegates have an equal voice. 😃
Click to expand...
Your voters don’t have an equal voice in choosing their nominee. In winner take all states, if Cruz voters prevail in a district but Trump wins the state, those Cruz voters don’t matter. On the Democratic side, if Bernie wins the voters in a particular district but Hillary wins the state, Bernie still receives a proportion of the delegate allocation.

And supers are free to have their voices go where they will. They are not bound.
 
FollowChrist34 said:
Have to post this article -great read. For anyone seriously interested in what is behind the Trump phenomenon. Love the BBC.
bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-35836102
Click to expand...
I agree - Good read!

Senator Jeff Sessions, the one that Cruz was so quick to drop his name in the early debates (and is now supporting Trump) admits he has some regrets about our trade deals. I am certain that those Republican lead trade deals are ones that are now classic “what not to do” lessons in economics classes all across America. Trump is merely cashing in on the parties stupidity…

Sadly, white blue collar worker are feeling most of the pain. However, don’t feel safe because you attended college. Just take a look around and notice the opportunity that a four year college degree is offering you? Many young graduates are moving back home with their parents because they have a huge liability on their hands in the form of student loans. The worst part is that many are working in jobs outside the fields for which they received degrees. If you’re a middle age person looking for work, you will discover that it doesn’t carry the same prestige that it once poses.

Within our society, we are always going to have that select group that does not go to college. But we cannot simple choose to ignore this segment of the population. We need to realize that if we start erasing citizens from our tax base, we are only increasing the need for greater government assistance. Which in turns will raise our deficit. Something Republicans have been so cavalier in addressing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top