• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump’s Vile Candidacy Is Chemotherapy for the GOP

joG said:
I don't think you do your credibility any good by quoting an article that describes the situation is a way that everyone that saw it knows is less a poor description than a rude lie and slander.
Click to expand...

SouthernDemocrat said:
Could someone attempt to diagram this sentence? I can't figure out what the poster here is trying to convey at all. ;)
Click to expand...
:lamo

He's got a few problems with is/in/it's, and could use a comma or two there - that's for sure!

But, I did get it.
 
DiAnna said:
Wow. The entire article just toasted the guy, and not just Trump, but all the GOP namby-pambies who are either standing beside him, or too damned cowardly to call him out publicly. I'd say it was a good read, but it truly just adds to my terror of what a Trump presidency would look like.
Click to expand...

Yeah he skewers Mike Pence as well. The fact is no decent man would have agreed to be on that ticket. For example, Kasich told them no when they offered the job to him.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
Yeah he skewers Mike Pence as well. The fact is no decent man would have agreed to be on that ticket. For example, Kasich told them no when they offered the job to him.
Click to expand...

Which is just one example of why I would have given serious consideration to voting for Kasich if he'd been the nominee. I am not wedded to either party, and kinda wish Biden had been up for a WH run, but alas, that was not to be.
 
Fenton said:
Again, all your'e doing is repeating the same partisan Hillary approved talking points over and over
Trumps a " rampant sexist, racist, homophopic, bigot " and thats why Hillary's qualified to be President.
Click to expand...

Those are not just Hillary's talking points. To say that Trump has ran as a racist, bigot and sexist is simply an observation that any decent individual regardless of their politics can see.

Again, no one's going to abandon their GOP rep over a bunch of contrived DNC talking points.

Hillary's a disater too, you people are just too blind to see it.
10's of millions of Americans consider her a corrupt above the law criminal elitist who with the help of a broken and corrupt system was able to influence the outcome of her own FBI Criminal investigation.

Thats not going to change when she wins and nothing grows the Conservative base faster than subjecting people to the consequences of the Progessive agenda.

How do you think the GOP won back the Senate in the first place ?
Click to expand...

THe GOP won the Senate back because their voters were more motivated than Democratic voters at the time. When Democrats take the Senate, the opposite is true.
 
DiAnna said:
Which is just one example of why I would have given serious consideration to voting for Kasich if he'd been the nominee. I am not wedded to either party, and kinda wish Biden had been up for a WH run, but alas, that was not to be.
Click to expand...

I may well have voted for Kasich as well. I actually vote for moderate Republicans over Democrats in state and local elections all the time. However, the nutjobs in the Republican base have imposed a ceiling on those moderates and wont let them through to national races.
 
Harshaw said:
The "end" of the GOP has been predicted with wild abandon over the last several years.

From a low point in 2008 to now in 2016, they control the House, the Senate, and 34 states.

The Democrats control the White House and 16 states.

The nomination of Trump was a horrific and avoidable gaffe and is going to cost them the most winnable election since 1984, by likely a wide margin. But it's not going to make any Republicans vote out their rep or Senator, nor is it going to make any sitting official switch parties.

By the way, those of you who are drugged out on the idea that the Republicans LOVE Trump ought to read a lot more of National Review.
Click to expand...

Republican intellectuals for the most part hate Trump, but they are a tiny fraction of the base. The bulk of the Republican base loves the guy.

I agree that the GOP will be around for a long time. However, it could be decades before they win the presidency again if they don't make some significant changes. The fact is they won the popular vote for the presidency just one time since 1988. If they don't moderate their positions on some issues and thus do a better job of appealing to anyone outside of their older white base, they can't win the White House. As I said earlier the base keeps thinking they need another Reagan when what they really need is another Eisenhower (in fact the country needs another Eisenhower to bring us back together).
 
Last edited:
Chomsky said:
When you're hated by both Liberals *and* Conservatives, you're pretty well ******! :doh
Click to expand...

will is one of the ultimate Establishment GOP fluffers going. He's mad that Trump is as dangerous to the establishment Republicrats as he is to illegal immigrants
 
You folks that are predicting the demise of the GOP are jumping the gun.

After the election is Hillary going to continue demonizing Trump to stay popular ? Or the GOP ?

That would be pretty pathethic. No, Americans are going to start looking for results and what Hillary's offered as her " public policy " is just a continuation of Obama's policies.

Unless her private policy is to cut taxes, kill ObamaCare and incentivize private sector investment she and the Democrat party are in for a rude awakening

She either turns things around or the Conservative base wilk continue to grow.
 
Fenton said:
You folks that are predicting the demise of the GOP are jumping the gun.

After the election is Hillary going to continue demonizing Trump to stay popular ? Or the GOP ?

That would be pretty pathethic. No, Americans are going to start looking for results and what Hillary's offered as her " public policy " is just a continuation of Obama's policies.

Unless her private policy is to cut taxes, kill ObamaCare and incentivize private sector investment she and the Democrat party are in for a rude awakening

She either turns things around or the Conservative base wilk continue to grow.
Click to expand...

Why in god's name would anybody continue to talk about Trump after January? I say January instead of November because of course he'll shoehorn himself into the spotlight somehow, and the media, hating America for some reason, will go along with it. But he'll fade eventually and we as a country can pretend this has been a really bad dream.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
Those are not just Hillary's talking points. To say that Trump has ran as a racist, bigot and sexist is simply an observation that any decent individual regardless of their politics can see.



THe GOP won the Senate back because their voters were more motivated than Democratic voters at the time. When Democrats take the Senate, the opposite is true.
Click to expand...


No thats disengenous, and Im no Trump fan. He did NOT come out and run as a racist, bigot, homophobe

Thats the Democrat spin machines predicitable attempt to pidgeon hole his campaign. They've got some serious credibility issues that haven't escaped the average voter.

The Democrats will continue to push the pendulum to its breaking point and there's no stopping it from swinging back to the center.

The only way the Democrat party can check the momentum from the Right with Hillary as President would be to produce results and not BS propanda poorly disguised as results but real positive change on a National scale.

If she continues to project success while more and more people are suffering and struggling, it will be the Democrat party thats going to suffer the consequences
 
Cardinal said:
Why in god's name would anybody continue to talk about Trump after January? I say January instead of November because of course he'll shoehorn himself into the spotlight somehow, and the media, hating America for some reason, will go along with it. But he'll fade eventually and we as a country can pretend this has been a really bad dream.
Click to expand...

Well then, she needs to turn things around fairly quickly then. But then again her jobs plan is Obama's green jobs initaive part deux.

I guess she and the Democrat party are screwed then because that was a disaster. Hell, even Spain abandoned its green jobs initaive.
 
Fenton said:
Well then, she needs to turn things around fairly quickly then. But then again her jobs plan is Obama's green jobs initaive part deux.

I guess she and the Democrat party will be screwed because that was a disaster. Hell, even Spain abandoned its green jobs initaive.
Click to expand...

Well, your "green jobs" nonsense aside, most people have a pretty good idea she's going to be a one termer. To the point about jobs, we're due for a recession and if (when) that hits while she's on the clock (and it will) she's toast. The only thing that could propel her to a second term is an opponent even more unlikeable than Trump. And I think every man, woman and child would emigrate to the bottom of the ocean than subject themselves to another year of that kind of election campaign.
 
Fenton said:
No thats disengenous, and Im no Trump fan. He did NOT come out and run as a racist, bigot, homophobe
Click to expand...

I have yet to call Trump a homophobe, so I don't know where that is coming from.

However, the day he announced: “When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”

Pure nativist bigotry. He has retweeted racist propaganda from white supremacist sites. He said a judge could not be fair because he was of Mexican heritage. He has called for a ban on all Muslim immigration before..... and if you don't think he has made God knows how many sexist statements, then I don't know what to tell you.

In fact, if you don't think that Trump has ran appealing to racists, bigots, and sexists, then I don't know what to tell you. His average primary voter earned more than 70k a year. They by and large were not poor and struggling people. It wasn't the populism that appealed to them, it was the racism, bigotry, sexism and nativism.

Frankly if you don't think that the GOP has a race / bigotry problem, then why is it that hardly any minorities vote for them? Its not just blacks that don't vote for Republicans, its Hispanics, Gays and Lesbians, Religious Minorites, even Asians. Why is that Asians don't vote Republican other than they just feel like the party really isn't welcome to them and Trump who got more Republican primary votes than any candidate in history, is perfectly emblematic of that.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
Republican intellectuals for the most part hate Trump, but they are a tiny fraction of the base. The bulk of the Republican base loves the guy.
Click to expand...

So you keep saying. You have no actual evidence for this other than that 38% of those who voted in the primary voted for him.

Yes, yes; you love to harp on the raw numbers, that he got more votes than any other Republican candidate, but you conveniently ignore that he also got, by FAR, and by far more than those who voted for him, the most votes against him of any candidate, too. To say nothing that no other Republican candidate has seen such reluctance to be accepted among the rank-and-file elected members, the convention was the lowest-attended possibly ever, and the party has entirely failed to unify around Trump in general. No candidate has seen the exodus of support that Trump has, either.

A noisy, angry rump of the party voters got just enough of a plurality to win in a highly-split field. THEY seem to love Trump. The "bulk" of the party most certainly does not.


I agree that the GOP will be around for a long time. However, it could be decades before they win the presidency again if they don't make some significant changes. The fact is they won the popular vote for the presidency just one time since 1988. If they don't moderate their positions on some issues and thus do a better job of appealing to anyone outside of their older white base, they can't win the White House. As I said earlier the base keeps thinking they need another Reagan when what they really need is another Eisenhower (in fact the country needs another Eisenhower to bring us back together).
Click to expand...

Any of the Republican candidates other than Carson could have beaten Hillary this year; RCP averages showed this consistently. With some of them, it would have likely have been a blowout.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
Read more here: Donald Trump Hillary Clinton Debate Showed Again How Reprehensible Trump Is | National Review

Conservative intellectual icon George Will has done a better job of calling out Trump's candidacy for what it is than any liberal has.

He really has a good point here:



[/FONT][/COLOR]
Click to expand...

George Will has been pretty questionable as a conservative in recent years. but that's neither here nor there. Trump is a volatile candidate..
Reprehensible though... so far to me nothing Trump has said or done comes close to Hillary in the reprehensible department. She is far and away worse.
 
calamity said:
My wife said Pat Robertson defended Trump's comments as "Macho talk."

Gotta love the way these religious guys are bending over backwards for this slime.
Click to expand...

The talibornagain are pretty well known for their hypocrisy.
 
Cardinal said:
Well, your "green jobs" nonsense aside, most people have a pretty good idea she's going to be a one termer. To the point about jobs, we're due for a recession and if (when) that hits while she's on the clock (and it will) she's toast. The only thing that could propel her to a second term is an opponent even more unlikeable than Trump. And I think every man, woman and child would emigrate to the bottom of the ocean than subject themselves to another year of that kind of election campaign.
Click to expand...



Its not nonsense at all.....

If Obama's Stimulus and green jobs initaive was such a success then why did the FED spend the next 7 years implimenting unprecedented monetary policy ?

And we're due for a recession ?? Lol !! Talk about nonsense.Your'e already making excuses for Hillary.

Apparently we had a " recovery " and now we're due for a recesion. Hey, what kind of economic " recovery " coincides with 8 years of FED zero interest rate policies and 94 milion people out of the labor force ?

A contrived recovery and I've already said thats not going to work for Hillary and niether is blaming the GOP.
 
Fenton said:
Its not nonsense at all.....

If Obama's Stimulus and green jobs initaive was such a success then why did the FED spend the next 7 years implimenting unprecedented monetary policy ?

And we're due for a recession ?? Lol !! Talk about nonsense.Your'e already making excuses for Hillary.

Apparently we had a " recovery " and now we're due for a recesion. Hey, what kind of economic " recovery " coincides with 8 years of FED zero interest rate policies and 94 milion people out of the labor force ?

A contrived recovery and I've already said thats not going to work for Hillary and niether is blaming the GOP.
Click to expand...

I couldn't give a sweet goddamn about Clinton except insofar as she prevents somebody like Trump from sitting in the Oval Office. And I don't know about whether there absolutely will be a recession, it's just something that economists have said we'll be due for. But recessions and booms are cyclical, it'll probably happen on her watch, and then we can give the job to somebody else. And again, so long as that next person isn't a Trump, I'll be just fine with that.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
Could someone attempt to diagram this sentence? I can't figure out what the poster here is trying to convey at all. ;)
Click to expand...

Were you to exchange an "n" for an "s" you should be okay. ;)
 
Harshaw said:
So you keep saying. You have no actual evidence for this other than that 38% of those who voted in the primary voted for him.

Yes, yes; you love to harp on the raw numbers, that he got more votes than any other Republican candidate, but you conveniently ignore that he also got, by FAR, and by far more than those who voted for him, the most votes against him of any candidate, too. To say nothing that no other Republican candidate has seen such reluctance to be accepted among the rank-and-file elected members, the convention was the lowest-attended possibly ever, and the party has entirely failed to unify around Trump in general. No candidate has seen the exodus of support that Trump has, either.

A noisy, angry rump of the party voters got just enough of a plurality to win in a highly-split field. THEY seem to love Trump. The "bulk" of the party most certainly does not.
Click to expand...

He has a floor in the polls of around 40%. That is the base of the base of the Republican party. The problem is he doesn't get anyone outside of that base. This has been the case since the summer.

GOP Voters Are Rallying Behind Trump As If He Were Any Other Candidate | FiveThirtyEight

Any of the Republican candidates other than Carson could have beaten Hillary this year; RCP averages showed this consistently. With some of them, it would have likely have been a blowout.
Click to expand...

General election matchup polling during the primary season is worthless. For example, if you went by it, Bernie would have defeated every Republican handily in the general. Does anyone honestly think that would have been the case?
 
Cardinal said:
I couldn't give a sweet goddamn about Clinton except insofar as she prevents somebody like Trump from sitting in the Oval Office. And I don't know about whether there absolutely will be a recession, it's just something that economists have said we'll be due for. But recessions and booms are cyclical, it'll probably happen on her watch, and then we can give the job to somebody else. And again, so long as that next person isn't a Trump, I'll be just fine with that.
Click to expand...

The US averages slipping into a recession every 7-9 years or so. We're overdue.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
He has a floor in the polls of around 40%. That is the base of the base of the Republican party.
Click to expand...

You pick a minority of Republicans and call them "the base" of the party because it flatters your perceptions to do so.

The problem is he doesn't get anyone outside of that base.
Click to expand...

Correct. Not even a majority of the Republican Party. Yet you gleefully declare that the Republicans in general are in love with him.


GOP Voters Are Rallying Behind Trump As If He Were Any Other Candidate | FiveThirtyEight
Click to expand...

Uh, yeah. That poll puts him up specifically as the Republican nominee -- the only "Republican" candidate -- an specifically against Hillary Clinton. It doesn't measure happiness with him in and of itself.



General election matchup polling during the primary season is worthless. For example, if you went by it, Bernie would have defeated every Republican handily in the general. Does anyone honestly think that would have been the case?
Click to expand...

The polls said he would have. I guess you like polls when they tell you what you want to believe, but dismiss them when they become inconvenient. Very like a Trumpkin that way.
 
Harshaw said:
You pick a minority of Republicans and call them "the base" of the party because it flatters your perceptions to do so.
Click to expand...

Polling consistently shows that around 40% of voters support Trump regardless of what he says or does. If 40% of voters was a "minority" of Republicans. Then that means that Republicans make up over 80% of the electorate. Of course they don't. 40% of voters is essentually the entirety of the Republican base.

If Trump was not even getting a majority of Republican voters to support him, then he would be polling at less than 30%.

BTW, early polls in 1988 had Dukakis winning by 20%. Early polls in the 2004 primaries had Howard Dean ahead of Bush in a general election matchup. You cannot look at polls in the spring and extrapolate who is the strongest candidates in a general election from them because many likely voters are not sufficiently engaged in the primaries to show up in the polls then. So what you have is a poll of the most committed base of both parties while leaving out everyone in the middle. Thus the candidates that look the strongest are the ones that appeal the most to the core base of the parties, not the ones that would have appeal to moderates and swing voters as well.

A Year Out, Ignore General Election Polls | FiveThirtyEight
 
Last edited:
SouthernDemocrat said:
Polling consistently shows that around 40% of voters support Trump regardless of what he says or does. If 40% of voters was a "minority" of Republicans. Then that means that Republicans make up over 80% of the electorate. Of course they don't. 40% of voters is essentually the entirety of the Republican base.

If Trump was not even getting a majority of Republican voters to support him, then he would be polling at less than 30%.
Click to expand...

Still conflating actual support for Trump among Republicans when the question asked is the choice between Trump and Hillary.

You've made it clear you're going to believe what you want to believe no matter what, so I'll leave you to that. As per your usual, partisan hackery in pure form. Toodles, noodle.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom