Walker Withdraws Trump Endorsement

[MrT]

He said he would support the eventual nominee several times, so yes he has all the room on the planet to complain.

Except for when he said that he wouldn't and that he no longer considered that pledge to be binding.

 

[Excon]

This isn't a contract. He's free to withdraw his support for any reason or no reason. Some may think it hypocritical but that is probably a minority as well as an obtuse one.

A pledge is a contract. Whether it is enforceable or not is another matter.

 

[Excon]

Enjoy desperately trying to spin to defend this clueless big-government liberal.



Yeah. It means a Republican who isn't really a conservative, because their policy positions align more with Democrats.

You know, like:





George W Bush in 2000, and 2004, though he went big-government on us there at the end.

And that is all you have, spun bs.
"In many cases" does not mean he is not a Republican.

 

[Gaius46]

A pledge is a contract. Whether it is enforceable or not is another matter.

I'm afraid it isn't. It at least lacks consideration, if not the other elements for a contract - mutual assent and a valid offer and acceptance.

 

[Carleen]

I've listened to and known about Trump for decades. In the 90's I went to a couple of events and heard him speak. I always kind of liked the guy, and IMO he is not a racist. He is an opportunist, a egomaniac, and a person who will do and say anything for publicity and to get his face in the media. He's always been that way. That's why, IMO, he says these things about Blacks, and Mexicans, and Muslims, etc. It gets him attention, it gets the racists who do support him to cheer louder at his rallies, it gets his face on TV on Sundays. But I really don't think he is a racist. He basicly attacks anyone and everyone for attention.

I would NEVER, ever have vote for him. Not in the 90's, not now. Not 10 years from now. Not a chance. He's too thin-skinned and vindictive to be POTUS. For some reason many Republicans believe is someone is a good businessman that automatically means they will be a good president. That's not true. Especially with someone with the temperament of Trump.

Republicans are between a rock and a hard place. I feel sorry for them. They real don't want this guy but they can't do a thing about it.

 

[mak2]

They earned this, don't feel bad.

Republicans are between a rock and a hard place. I feel sorry for them. They real don't want this guy but they can't do a thing about it.

 

[cabse5]

:lamo


If you mean I value conservatism and principles over the vehicle, then yup.

But I'm an actual conservative. Unlike Trump, who is a liberal democrat, and who is an actual RINO.

Are you saying Abe Lincoln, the first GOP president, was also a RINO? This acronym isn't CINO - Conservative in name only, it's RINO - Republican in name only. Of which you are one.

 

[cabse5]

I've listened to and known about Trump for decades. In the 90's I went to a couple of events and heard him speak. I always kind of liked the guy, and IMO he is not a racist. He is an opportunist, a egomaniac, and a person who will do and say anything for publicity and to get his face in the media. He's always been that way. That's why, IMO, he says these things about Blacks, and Mexicans, and Muslims, etc. It gets him attention, it gets the racists who do support him to cheer louder at his rallies, it gets his face on TV on Sundays. But I really don't think he is a racist. He basicly attacks anyone and everyone for attention.

I would NEVER, ever have vote for him. Not in the 90's, not now. Not 10 years from now. Not a chance. He's too thin-skinned and vindictive to be POTUS. For some reason many Republicans believe is someone is a good businessman that automatically means they will be a good president. That's not true. Especially with someone with the temperament of Trump.

This bolded in ridiculous. Is BO too thin-skinned and vindictive to be president? Hillary? W Bush wasn't thin-skinned or vindictive. Did that make him a good president?

 

[SenorXm/Sirius]

Republicans are between a rock and a hard place. I feel sorry for them. They real don't want this guy but they can't do a thing about it.

I agree they are stuck between a rock and a hard place. But I don't feel sorry for them. Years of them telling their base that the GOP wants to stop illegal immigration, but them really not wanting to stop it, or even trying to stop it. In other words they flat out lied to their base. Years of of their vicious, brutal hatred directed at Obama. Hell the GOP winking and laughing off Trump's birther BS in 2012. They thought it was a big joke.

That all opened the door for someone like Trump to come along.

The GOP is solely responsible for Trump and the mess their party is in.

 

[American]

Except for when he said that he wouldn't and that he no longer considered that pledge to be binding.

Okay you're right. It took constant beating in the press, and some other Republican nominees implying they wouldn't support Trump before he did it. Don't forget it was mainly Trump that was prodded last fall to pledge his support, not the others. They all eventually took a pledge, but it appears the are backing out.

 

[Carleen]

I agree they are stuck between a rock and a hard place. But I don't feel sorry for them. Years of them telling their base that the GOP wants to stop illegal immigration, but them really not wanting to stop it, or even trying to stop it. In other words they flat out lied to their base. Years of of their vicious, brutal hatred directed at Obama. Hell the GOP winking and laughing off Trump's birther BS in 2012. They thought it was a big joke.

That all opened the door for someone like Trump to come along.

The GOP is solely responsible for Trump and the mess their party is in.

I agree with everything you are saying, but I don't hate them I pity them.

 

[American]

So you're saying Gov. Walker "evolved"? Gov. Walker has a record.

Walker was a candidate, is what I'm saying.

 

[cabse5]

I agree they are stuck between a rock and a hard place. But I don't feel sorry for them. Years of them telling their base that the GOP wants to stop illegal immigration, but them really not wanting to stop it, or even trying to stop it. In other words they flat out lied to their base. Years of of their vicious, brutal hatred directed at Obama. Hell the GOP winking and laughing off Trump's birther BS in 2012. They thought it was a big joke.

That all opened the door for someone like Trump to come along.

The GOP is solely responsible for Trump and the mess their party is in.

This is wrong. The GOP has finally allowed (with the nomination of Trump) individual voters to control the party with their primary/caucus votes. No longer controlled with the votes of elites who drag their feet about, for example, prosecuting immigration law and incompetent politicians who are more afraid of what could happen if they rile up the opposition than actually passing legislation Republican voters care about.

 

[cpwill]

Are you saying Abe Lincoln, the first GOP president, was also a RINO? This acronym isn't CINO - Conservative in name only, it's RINO - Republican in name only. Of which you are one.

:roll: no, Lincoln wasnt a RINO, RINO is a modern term, meaning a Republican who isn't a conservative, but instead sides with Democrats on major issues. Like Trump. Lincoln embodied the values of his party magnificently. Trump seems to embody no values whatsoever.

Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk

 

[cpwill]

This bolded in ridiculous. Is BO too thin-skinned and vindictive to be president? Hillary? W Bush wasn't thin-skinned or vindictive. Did that make him a good president?

It certainly made him a less has one than he otherwise would be. The current guy is thin skinned and vindictive, though less so than Trump.

Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk

 

[SenorXm/Sirius]

prosecuting immigration law and incompetent politicians who are more afraid of what could happen if they rile up the opposition than actually passing legislation Republican voters care about.

Nope, the GOP is very, very business friendly. And businesses love immigrants. Their business and Corporate masters is who the GOP was afraid to piss off, not the 'opposition'.

And Trump or no Trump the GOP is still afraid to piss off their Corporate masters. So don't expect any 'wall' or any of that BS. Actually I think many of Trump's supporters do expect that, but they will be very disappointed if by some miracle Trump is elected. There will be no 'wall'. It will be the same old, same old.

The business lobbyists put money in the GOP's local and state politicians coffers, not Trump.

 

[clownboy]

Nope, the GOP is very, very business friendly. And businesses love immigrants. Their business and Corporate masters is who the GOP was afraid to piss off, not the 'opposition'.

And Trump or no Trump the GOP is still afraid to piss off their Corporate masters. So don't expect any 'wall' or any of that BS. Actually I think many of Trump's supporters do expect that, but they will be very disappointed if by some miracle Trump is elected. There will be no 'wall'. It will be the same old, same old.

The business lobbyists put money in the GOP's local and state politicians coffers, not Trump.

We've heard this nonsense before, the last time a wall was proposed. And guess what, the wall got built. There were no "corporate masters" pissed off. Just a lot of democrat senators who threw hissy fits throughout the process.

 

[Linc]

Gov. Walker is trying to save the seat of Sen. Johnson against former Sen. Feingold, of McCain/Feingold fame .

 

[SenorXm/Sirius]

We've heard this nonsense before, the last time a wall was proposed. And guess what, the wall got built. There were no "corporate masters" pissed off. Just a lot of democrat senators who threw hissy fits throughout the process.

So Dem senators, even when the GOP controls the Congress and the WH have that much power huh? Bush 2 wanted to give amnesty. Reagan did.

Corps love immigrants, legal and illegal. They work cheap and keep wages down, thus increasing profits. If you don't think that's reason #1 BOTH sides look the other way when it comes to illegals you're either naive or your partisan glasses are blinding you. Or both.

 

[cabse5]

:roll: no, Lincoln wasnt a RINO, RINO is a modern term, meaning a Republican who isn't a conservative, but instead sides with Democrats on major issues. Like Trump. Lincoln embodied the values of his party magnificently. Trump seems to embody no values whatsoever.

Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk

When you say RINO means a Republican that isn't Conservative, you imply one must be Conservative to be a Republican. Else one would correctly and succinctly say CINO. Where do you get this nonsense? As I've shown, certainly not from the trends of GOP voters from presidential elections (since the inception of the Conservative movement in 1965).

Sidenote: the Republican Party began in 1856 and the first Republican president was Lincoln in 1860. You are delusional when you say RINO means Republican that isn't Conservative. From the Republican point of view, the Conservative that doesn't adhere to party affiliations is a RINO.

 

[cabse5]

Okay you're right. It took constant beating in the press, and some other Republican nominees implying they wouldn't support Trump before he did it. Don't forget it was mainly Trump that was prodded last fall to pledge his support, not the others. They all eventually took a pledge, but it appears the are backing out.

Looks like FOX NEWS was behind all this pledge taking in an attempt to embarrass Trump.

 

[cabse5]

So Dem senators, even when the GOP controls the Congress and the WH have that much power huh? Bush 2 wanted to give amnesty. Reagan did.

Corps love immigrants, legal and illegal. They work cheap and keep wages down, thus increasing profits. If you don't think that's reason #1 BOTH sides look the other way when it comes to illegals you're either naive or your partisan glasses are blinding you. Or both.

Hey, most of us Trump supporters agree with you on this: elites in the GOP have been establishing GOP platforms, determining which laws to execute and placating ideologues of different political ilks rather than push agendas that the GOP electorate want pushed. The fuss about the prosecuting judge in the Trump U. case is a recent example of GOP politicians and pundits being too concerned about not ruffling others' feathers to be useful or effective. Or are they pouncing on any chance to injure Trump?

Sidenote: Hey Newt Gingrich, would you rather vote for Trump or have Hillary control the White House and SCOTUS (I'm using the facetious grin Newt used to use when he posed this question to other #neverTrumpers)?

 

[Cryptic]

It isn't about racism it is as always all about Trump and ONLY about trump.
Lets face it as far as he is concerned nothing else in the universe matters. Not his family, not his future ex-wife and definitely not the silly Americans who think he gives a hoot about them.

All very true. Then again, it also sounds alot like Hillary Clinton (though she does tend to present herself a little better).

 

[Quag]

All very true. Then again, it also sounds alot like Hillary Clinton (though she does tend to present herself a little better).

Yeah cant argue with that, though when it comes to narcissism Trump is in a league of his own.

 

[Cryptic]

Yeah cant argue with that, though when it comes to narcissism Trump is in a league of his own.

I agree completely. One illustration of this is that he refuses to make even a token apology to that hispanic federal judge. Gosh, was I hoping that he would make even a muted apology.