Trump v GOP

  • Thread starter Thread starter Abynissa
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Here’s something interesting from Nate Silver:
If Donald Trump wins the Republican presidential nomination, he’ll have undermined a lot of assumptions we once held about the GOP. He’ll have become the nominee despite neither being reliably conservative nor being very electable, supposedly the two things Republicans care most about. He’ll have done it with very little support from “party elites” (although with some recent exceptions like Chris Christie). He’ll have attacked the Republican Party’s three previous candidates — Mitt Romney, John McCain and George W. Bush — without many consequences. If a Trump nomination happens, it will imply that the Republican Party has been weakened and is perhaps even on the brink of failure, unable to coordinate on a plan to stop Trump despite the existential threat he poses to it.
Major partisan realignments do happen in America — on average about once every 40 years. The last one, which involved the unwinding of the New Deal coalition between Northern and Southern Democrats, is variously dated as having occurred in 1968, 1972 and 1980. There are also a lot of false alarms, elections described as realignments that turn out not to be. This time, we really might be in the midst of one. It’s almost impossible to reconcile this year’s Republican nomination contest with anyone’s notion of “politics as usual.”
fivethirtyeight.com/features/dont-assume-conservatives-will-rally-behind-trump/

He ends with the following:
But there are certainly some movement conservatives, and they have outsized influence on social media, talk radio, television and in other arenas of political discourse. And if you are a movement conservative, Trump is arguably a pretty terrible choice, taking your conservative party and remaking it in his unpredictable medley of nationalism, populism and big-government Trumpism.
If you’re one of these ideological conservatives, it may even be in your best interest for Trump to lose in November. If Trump loses, especially by a wide margin, his brand of politics will probably be discredited, or his nomination might look like a strange, one-off “black swan” that you’ll be better equipped to prevent the next time around. You’ll have an opportunity to get your party back in 2020, and your nominee might stand a pretty decent chance against Clinton, who could be elected despite being quite unpopular because Trump is even less popular and who would be aiming for the Democratic Party’s fourth straight term in office.
But if Trump wins in November, you might as well relocate the Republican National Committee’s headquarters to Trump Tower. The realignment of the Republican Party will be underway, and you’ll have been left out of it.
 
Thanks Throlofr. That was quite informative and an interesting read.👍
 
Trump University fraud case becomes campaign issue at GOP
debate

CNN

Donald Trump likes to talk a lot about winning, but it is one of his failed ventures that brought out daggers from his opponents in Thursday night’s Republican presidential debate. Florida Senator Marco Rubio took the first stab at trying to label Trump’s failed “Trump University” as a fake…

…Attorney General Eric Schneiderman told CNN’s “New Day” after filing suit in 2013. Schneiderman’s case argues that Trump and Michael Sexton, the former president of the program, engaged in fraudulent, illegal and deceptive conduct, and that although the program promised to offer courses taught by experts personally selected by Trump, the teachers were neither handpicked nor experts…

I believe the wheels just came off his campaign. This was way before he decided to run. But, then again, he said that even if he shot someone, he wouldn’t lose any voters…will see.
If the wheels have come off his campaign, then I must assume that Hilary is being indicted for violations of security laws…
 
Just so there is no confusion, David Duke is a former Grand Wizard of the KKK.

On Wedneday, February 24 he said this:

Unless this is a made up quote, it really shouldn’t be hard to say, “I will not except any endorsements from David Duke, or the KKK.” It shouldn’t be something to have to look into.

:(:(:(:(:(😦
The story may have legs in the general election if Trump is the nominee and runs against Clinton.
 
The story may have legs in the general election if Trump is the nominee and runs against Clinton.
I don’t think it will last another week. Seriously, they are expecting him to repeatedly disavow something when they don’t ask it of anyone else. Even Fox is now on Trump’s side on this one. It is rapidly turning into a non-story.

Rubio tried, I wonder if he will keep throwing mud until the Florida primary? I suspect he will. It doesn’t suit him well and I think it will backfire if he does.

On an aside, I was surprised by Romney’s remarks this week. Since when did he turn into an attack dog? That is not a very good role for him.
 
Seriously, they are expecting him to repeatedly disavow something** when they don’t ask it of anyone else**.
Why should they ask anyone else? No one else got endorsed by David Duke did they?
 
I don’t think it will last another week. Seriously, they are expecting him to repeatedly disavow something when they don’t ask it of anyone else. Even Fox is now on Trump’s side on this one. It is rapidly turning into a non-story.

Rubio tried, I wonder if he will keep throwing mud until the Florida primary? I suspect he will. It doesn’t suit him well and I think it will backfire if he does.

On an aside, I was surprised by Romney’s remarks this week. Since when did he turn into an attack dog? That is not a very good role for him.
What I mean is that I think the story may resurface during the general election, particularly if Clinton is the Democratic candidate. Or maybe not.
 
Are you familiar with the position of the Catholic Church on this topic of immigration - the Bishops? The Pope?
I am.
I am also aware that the Holy See accepted two Syrian families.
Are you aware of “Render unto Caesar, etc”?
Nations have the natural law right to defend their borders/sovereignty.
 
What I mean is that I think the story may resurface during the general election, particularly if Clinton is the Democratic candidate. Or maybe not.
They’ll probably turn into into a campaign add against Trump.
 
Also, the Bishop of Hungary was vocal on this in the past 3 months.
The recommendations Catholics are getting on border control seem to be contradictory:
It is not Christian to build a wall?
But countries have a right to protect their borders?
 
As to the poll question I think the GOP might split into two with the splinter nominating Cruz (probably) or some other candidate.
The question is whether the breach will be permanent which we’ll have to see in the 2018 off-year elections when there would be new “True Blue Republicans” (or whatever they call themselves) running against the official GOP. Who would win more seats in the House and governorships? Maybe just as important how would the new party fare at the city and county levels?
 
The recommendations Catholics are getting on border control seem to be contradictory:
It is not Christian to build a wall?
But countries have a right to protect their borders?
It would seem that the operative word here is “protect” (or defend). In normal use, the word implies a threat or danger. Immigration, legal or otherwise, in and of itself is arguably not a danger (bad actors notwithstanding, because bad actors exist anywhere humans exist). Immigration should be regulated of course, but there is a difference between defending a border against an invading army and “defending” a border against people largely seeking a better life. In addition, true refugees of war/famine etc. have historically had right to seek refuge outside the borders of their homeland.

It may be necessary to say no to some prosepective migrants, but that technically, to my understanding would not constitute “defending” the border, any more than locking the doors at night to keep my family safe constitutes “defending” myself against my neighbors! It would simply be called regulation, to my understanding.

Motivation also is important. Locking my doors would constitute a normal and reasonable safety precaution, but if my main motivation for doing so was to avoid sharing my family’s resources with others, then that would, in my opinion, be un-Christian.
 
There are more important things than winning at all costs, in any way, under any circumstances.
As a matter of fact, this ^^ is something I’ve been thinking a lot about. Particularly in terms of the candidate I support, Marco Rubio, aka Little Marco (Cruz being my second choice): at this point I absolutely believe he should keep trying to beat Trump, but conceivably there may come a point in the future where the best thing to do will be to graciously concede Trump the nomination (as opposed to “dirty tricks” to take it away from him – though of course what constitute “dirty tricks” is itself widely debatable, so I’ll just stop here. :))
 
… Locking my doors would constitute a normal and reasonable safety precaution, but if my main motivation for doing so was to avoid sharing my family’s resources with others, then that would, in my opinion, be un-Christian.
How much of your family’s resources do you share with strangers or with the poor?
 
As a matter of fact, this ^^ is something I’ve been thinking a lot about. Particularly in terms of the candidate I support, Marco Rubio, aka Little Marco (Cruz being my second choice): at this point I absolutely believe he should keep trying to beat Trump, but conceivably there may come a point in the future where the best thing to do will be to graciously concede Trump the nomination (as opposed to “dirty tricks” to take it away from him – though of course what constitute “dirty tricks” is itself widely debatable, so I’ll just stop here. :))
Pretty much how I see it, but in my mind Trump is way over the top. When you take a sublime position as he did with the KKK just to ensure extreme right votes I lose interest quickly. When your integrity reaches the depths of Hillary I could care less what party you are from. And indeed that imho is what happened with him. I also think what has taken place with Rubio is a good thing. He showed me he was indeed willing to be human and fight for the Presidency, this took on a different meaning now. Pretty,no, but raw emotion and honesty seem forthcoming on this path. First we fight, then we eat I guess? 😃
 
I also think what has taken place with Rubio is a good thing.
Rubio says Cruz is a liar and Trump says that Rubio is ‘Not as Smart as Cruz, And May Be an Even Bigger Liar’. These American candidates running for president of the USA seem to have the intelligence of grammar school children as they delight in playing in the mud, calling each other names. Rubio says that Trump should not be President because his hands are not large. What a ridiculous, infantile, stupid argument this American presidential candidate has.
newsmax.com/Headline/marco-rubio-calls-ted-cruz-liar/2016/02/13/id/714277/
breitbart.com/big-government/2016/02/27/trump-rubio-is-not-as-smart-as-cruz-and-may-be-an-even-bigger-liar/
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top