It's Only a Matter of Time Before RNC Ditches Trump

jimbo · Sep 3, 2016

shrubnose said:
If you want to follow Trump off of the cliff in November you have my permission to do that.

:lol:

Don't need your permission. I'm capable of making my own decisions.

Are you sure you addressed the right post? I see nothing in your post remotely related to mine.

MaggieD · Sep 3, 2016

Rico Suave said:
wow. That is textbook racism. I presume that is not what you meant to say.

Oh, stop it.

calamity · Sep 3, 2016

Napoleon said:
Careful with the write-in option. I wrote-in Hillary in 2008 and I'm fairly certain it wasn't counted.

I'm surer they are counted last...if at all. THe confusers aren't set up for them.

calamity · Sep 3, 2016

countryboy said:
Ah, Johnson the statist. You mean the guy who says we can't call illegals illegal? Riiiight. :roll:

I've already voted for Kasich twice, I won't be making that mistake again.

Yeah, he's doing such a poor job running Ohio :roll:

Mycroft · Sep 3, 2016

calamity said:
Even as the Trumpsters spin last week's Mexican meeting as a success, the RNC, a slightly smarter bunch capable of reading tea leaves, prepares for the inevitable: quietly walking away from the Dumpster Fire.

The problems are legion. But, chief among them is Trump chasing away the Latinos, as was evidenced by this week's resignations from the National Hispanic Advisory Council for Trump following that dismal speech the Dumpster Fire gave after the Mexico trip. IMO, it was the last straw.

So...the solution is that Trump should toss away his plain-speaking persona, adopt the usual politicians tactic of trying to placate everyone...and run a Hillary-esque snow-job on the American public.

Okay.

calamity · Sep 3, 2016

Perotista said:
LOL, yeah, bonkers would be the word for it. The problem with this election cycle as I see it is we have two major party candidates that no one likes outside of their avid supporters. That no one wants either one to be our next president outside of those who support them. You have a candidate which is seen in a positive light by only 34% of all America vs. another candidate which only 38% of all Americans view favorably.

Presidential Election 2016: Key Indicators

In other words, approximately 60% of all Americans thinks both candidates suck. That is whats wrong. The two major parties gave America a choice they do not want to make. Bonkers fits. As far as I am concerned, you can take both Trump and Clinton and shove them up where the sun doesn't shine. But I am not alone in thinking that. 25% of all Americans dislike both Trump and Clinton, 24% of all Republicans dislike both Trump and Clinton, 20% of all Democrats dislike both Trump and Clinton. That is a whole bunch of dislikes and a whole bunch that want neither to become our next president. Go down to the second table to see this.

One in Four Americans Dislike Both Presidential Candidates

So both sides are trying to get America to hate the other side more than they do now. Is that even possible? The winner in November will not be one whom America wants to be their next president, it will be one who was hated just a bit less that the other candidate. It will be one whom only around 35-40% of America wanted to win.

Let's face it, we will have a president by default come 20 January 2017, not one that was wanted. Just one because we have to have one.

"25% of all Americans dislike both Trump and Clinton, 24% of all Republicans dislike both Trump and Clinton, 20% of all Democrats dislike both Trump and Clinton."

That's not really that bad. I never like both candidates. And, I'm a party flipper. The closest was 2008, and that was completely blown away when the loser announced his choice for VP.

It's only once in a blue moon that I really like either of the two. Obama would be an exception. I liked him twice. A lot.

Before Obama, I can't recall liking a candidate except Reagan in 1980..and, I soured on him by 1984. I know I hated Mondale too that year. So, I grudgingly voted for Ron-Ron since his competition was a moron. It was a vote similar to the vote I'll probably cast for Hill of Beans this year: I'll grudgingly vote for her over the moron.

The Clinton and Bush years (both Bushes) were definitely a series of elections when I voted for the lesser evil of two horrible candidates. Dukakis? Puh-lease. Dole? :lol: Yeah, right. Gore? I couldn't vote for him even though I hated W. But, at least Al was not an idiot, and he certainly was not the universe's most terrible candidate. That award goes to John Kerry, who I voted for because W was so bad I could not even give him my "hold my nose and vote for the incumbent I voted for the first time" vote like I did for Reagan in 1984.

calamity · Sep 3, 2016

Mycroft said:
So...the solution is that Trump should toss away his plain-speaking persona, adopt the usual politicians tactic of trying to placate everyone...and run a Hillary-esque snow-job on the American public.

Okay.

Well, since I believe the president should represent Americans of both sexes, all races and and every ethnicity, I'd say it's at least required not to piss off all of them except the old white men. But, hey. Maybe that's just me :shrug:

Mycroft · Sep 3, 2016

calamity said:
Well, since I believe the president should represent Americans of both sexes, all races and and every ethnicity, I'd say it's at least required not to piss off all of them except the old white men. But, hey. Maybe that's just me :shrug:

shrug...

To each his own. Myself, I prefer a candidate who expresses a principled position that people across all spectrum of our country can relate to...instead of expressing one position to one group...another position to another group...etc. Kind of makes it hard to believe any of those positions.

calamity · Sep 3, 2016

Mycroft said:
shrug...

To each his own. Myself, I prefer a candidate who expresses a principled position that people across all spectrum of our country can relate to...instead of expressing one position to one group...another position to another group...etc. Kind of makes it hard to believe any of those positions.

Except Trump's vision only pleases one demographic, the most hateful one too boot.

Mycroft · Sep 3, 2016

calamity said:
"25% of all Americans dislike both Trump and Clinton, 24% of all Republicans dislike both Trump and Clinton, 20% of all Democrats dislike both Trump and Clinton."

That's not really that bad. I never like both candidates. And, I'm a party flipper. The closest was 2008, and that was completely blown away when the loser announced his choice for VP.

It's only once in a blue moon that I really like either of the two. Obama would be an exception. I liked him twice. A lot.

Before Obama, I can't recall liking a candidate except Reagan in 1980..and, I soured on him by 1984. I know I hated Mondale too that year. So, I grudgingly voted for Ron-Ron since his competition was a moron. It was a vote similar to the vote I'll probably cast for Hill of Beans this year: I'll grudgingly vote for her over the moron.

The Clinton and Bush years (both Bushes) were definitely a series of elections when I voted for the lesser evil of two horrible candidates. Dukakis? Puh-lease. Dole? :lol: Yeah, right. Gore? I couldn't vote for him even though I hated W. But, at least Al was not an idiot, and he certainly was not the universe's most terrible candidate. That award goes to John Kerry, who I voted for because W was so bad I could not even give him my "hold my nose and vote for the incumbent I voted for the first time" vote like I did for Reagan in 1984.

So many choice you've made...so many turned out to be bad ones...and now you are going to do it again by voting for a crooked, corrupt, lying woman.

Haven't you learned your lesson yet? You need to vote the opposite of what you think. LOL!!

Mycroft · Sep 3, 2016

calamity said:
Except Trump's vision only pleases one demographic, the most hateful one too boot.

That's not true. Trump has supporter from all across the spectrum. At least the ones who are not herd animals.

calamity · Sep 3, 2016

Mycroft said:
So many choice you've made...so many turned out to be bad ones...and now you are going to do it again by voting for a crooked, corrupt, lying woman.

Haven't you learned your lesson yet? You need to vote the opposite of what you think. LOL!!

What, I should have voted for Carter in '80? Or, maybe Mondale in '84? Dukakis in 88? Puh-lease. And, I hate to tell ya this. But, Obama has been a solid president. One of the better ones of the past 5 decades.

I thought my first vote for Bush Sr turned out well, even though I never really liked the man. He was clearly an underrated president who deserved a second term. He just ran a crappy campaign against Clinton, plus Perot cut him at the knees.

My first vote for Clinton, the one for his second term, turned out well too--not only did he do a decent enough job, but that term exposed the Right as a bunch of douche bags out to ruin the country by distraction, chasing after sexual liaison, while Osama Bin Laden plotted to attack the nation.

My worst vote, by far, was the one I cast for Bush Jr in 2000. I should have voted for Gore. Bush was a disaster. Compared to him, both Clintons and Mr Obama are a dream.

Perotista · Sep 3, 2016

calamity said:
"25% of all Americans dislike both Trump and Clinton, 24% of all Republicans dislike both Trump and Clinton, 20% of all Democrats dislike both Trump and Clinton."

That's not really that bad. I never like both candidates. And, I'm a party flipper. The closest was 2008, and that was completely blown away when the loser announced his choice for VP.

It's only once in a blue moon that I really like either of the two. Obama would be an exception. I liked him twice. A lot.

Before Obama, I can't recall liking a candidate except Reagan in 1980..and, I soured on him by 1984. I know I hated Mondale too that year. So, I grudgingly voted for Ron-Ron since his competition was a moron. It was a vote similar to the vote I'll probably cast for Hill of Beans this year: I'll grudgingly vote for her over the moron.

The Clinton and Bush years (both Bushes) were definitely a series of elections when I voted for the lesser evil of two horrible candidates. Dukakis? Puh-lease. Dole? :lol: Yeah, right. Gore? I couldn't vote for him even though I hated W. But, at least Al was not an idiot, and he certainly was not the universe's most terrible candidate. That award goes to John Kerry, who I voted for because W was so bad I could not even give him my "hold my nose and vote for the incumbent I voted for the first time" vote like I did for Reagan in 1984.

It might be that bad if I hadn't forgot to type in that 54% of all independents dislike both Trump and Clinton. But it is normal to like one and not the other, but usually not both. But what are we looking at as far a favorability? Where have other presidential candidates stood compared to Trump and Clinton. Thanks to Gallup who gave us the favorability ratings, but no the unfavorable, we can see. Below are the favorable ratings of the major party candidates.

2016 Clinton 38% Trump 34%
2012 Obama 52% Romney 48%
2008 Obama 61% McCain 57%
2004 Bush 53% Kerry 51%
2000 Bush 58% Gore 55%
1996 Clinton 56% Dole 51%
1992 Clinton 51% Bush 46%

Obama, McCain Two of the Best-Liked Candidates

So you can see it is mighty unusual for even one presidential candidate to have a favorable rating of below 50%, let alone two as we have this year. G.H.W. Bush set the record for the lowest presidential candidate favorable rating in 1992 at 46%. Trump and Clinton are shattering that record as no one likes them, wants them outside of their avid supporters.

As for voting for the lesser of two evils, I don't. If I come to the conclusion that both major party candidates regardless of who wins would leave this country in far worst shape once they leave office than when their first entered, I vote for someone else. There usually are third party candidates on almost every state ballot. I refuse to vote for someone because he will leave this country just a little bit worst off then his opponent simply because they have an R or D next to their name. Voting for the lesser of two evils still leaves one voting for evil even if it is a matter of a degree or two. For the life of me, I will never be able to understand or figure out how someone can simply vote for evil when they know they are voting for evil.

calamity · Sep 3, 2016

Mycroft said:
That's not true. Trump has supporter from all across the spectrum. At least the ones who are not herd animals.

:lol: Yeah, sure he does.

eohrnberger · Sep 3, 2016

Mycroft said:
So...the solution is that Trump should toss away his plain-speaking persona, adopt the usual politicians tactic of trying to placate everyone...and run a Hillary-esque snow-job on the American public.

Okay.

It's pretty clear that the political elite of both parties need a serious wake up call vis a vie the dissatisfaction of their electorate. Anyone around who's going to take the position that the political elite don't need to change their ways?

While Trump is delivering that (hell at least 1/2 of the GOP political elite hate him), which makes the GOP further ahead as far as adopting/incorporating the much needed change, Hillary most certainly does not, which makes the Dems further behind - at least as far as wake up calls to the political elite go.

My impression/opinion is that a Trump administration would be far better, far more progress, far less scandals, far less lying and deception of the electorate, than a Hillary administration would be. Handing the most powerful office on the planet over to a known corrupt and known ethically challenged candidate certainly isn't a positive or best step forward for the nation.

calamity · Sep 3, 2016

Perotista said:
It might be that bad if I hadn't forgot to type in that 54% of all independents dislike both Trump and Clinton. But it is normal to like one and not the other, but usually not both. But what are we looking at as far a favorability? Where have other presidential candidates stood compared to Trump and Clinton. Thanks to Gallup who gave us the favorability ratings, but no the unfavorable, we can see. Below are the favorable ratings of the major party candidates.

2016 Clinton 38% Trump 34%
2012 Obama 52% Romney 48%
2008 Obama 61% McCain 57%
2004 Bush 53% Kerry 51%
2000 Bush 58% Gore 55%
1996 Clinton 56% Dole 51%
1992 Clinton 51% Bush 46%

Obama, McCain Two of the Best-Liked Candidates

So you can see it is mighty unusual for even one presidential candidate to have a favorable rating of below 50%, let alone two as we have this year. G.H.W. Bush set the record for the lowest presidential candidate favorable rating in 1992 at 46%. Trump and Clinton are shattering that record as no one likes them, wants them outside of their avid supporters.

As for voting for the lesser of two evils, I don't. If I come to the conclusion that both major party candidates regardless of who wins would leave this country in far worst shape once they leave office than when their first entered, I vote for someone else. There usually are third party candidates on almost every state ballot. I refuse to vote for someone because he will leave this country just a little bit worst off then his opponent simply because they have an R or D next to their name. Voting for the lesser of two evils still leaves one voting for evil even if it is a matter of a degree or two. For the life of me, I will never be able to understand or figure out how someone can simply vote for evil when they know they are voting for evil.

All I can say is the country was out of touch, giving Bush of 2004 a 53% favorable and Kerry 51%. Maybe they are just finally waking up? Sledgehammer shots in the chops will tend to do that.

eohrnberger · Sep 3, 2016

calamity said:
Except Trump's vision only pleases one demographic, the most hateful one too boot.

Mycroft said:
That's not true. Trump has supporter from all across the spectrum. At least the ones who are not herd animals.

calamity said:
Except Trump's vision only pleases one demographic, the most hateful one too boot.

calamity said:
:lol: Yeah, sure he does.

Yeah, I was going to call on that too.

Seems to me that there are far more people who support Trump's positions than are accounted for, and frankly, the continued denigration of those people who support Trump is little more than an Alinsky tactic anyway.

5. “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions.
9. “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.” Imagination and ego can dream up many more consequences than any activist.
10. "The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition." It is this unceasing pressure that results in the reactions from the opposition that are essential for the success of the campaign.
13. “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_for_Radicals

So I ask, 'How honest is that?' This constant unwarranted and dishonest ridicule, while yes there are some points that deserve some criticism, at lot doesn't.

The main emphasis from Trump is to secure the borders, to end illegal immigration. What of this point isn't a legitimate concern and position?

calamity · Sep 3, 2016

eohrnberger said:
Yeah, I was going to call on that too.

Seems to me that there are far more people who support Trump's positions than are accounted for, and frankly, the continued denigration of those people who support Trump is little more than an Alinsky tactic anyway.

So I ask, 'How honest is that?' This constant unwarranted and dishonest ridicule, while yes there are some points that deserve some criticism, at lot doesn't.

The main emphasis from Trump is to secure the borders, to end illegal immigration. What of this point isn't a legitimate concern and position?

You tell me.

"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."

Donald Trump speech, debates and campaign quotes | Newsday

At least he assumes some are good people.

eohrnberger · Sep 3, 2016

calamity said:
You tell me.

At least he assumes some are good people.

Of course he does. He applauded the Mexican people in his most recent press conference with the president of Mexico after his meeting with him.

You'd consider the criminals (by definition) that illegally cross the border as 'fine upstanding people' ?
The people that smuggle drugs across the border as 'fine upstanding people' ?
The criminals that do cross the border are more likely to commit crimes while in country as 'fine upstanding people' ?

So really, the characterization that those people who do cross the border as ones with 'problems' and 'not the best that Mexico has to offer' appears to be quite accurate.

calamity · Sep 3, 2016

eohrnberger said:
Of course he does. He applauded the Mexican people in his most recent press conference with the president of Mexico after his meeting with him.

You'd consider the criminals (by definition) that illegally cross the border as 'fine upstanding people' ?
The people that smuggle drugs across the border as 'fine upstanding people' ?
The criminals that do cross the border are more likely to commit crimes while in country as 'fine upstanding people' ?

So really, the characterization that those people who do cross the border as ones with 'problems' and 'not the best that Mexico has to offer' appears to be quite accurate.

Yeah, just like some black people are not rapists, drug dealers and murderers. Right?

That you don't recognize the inappropriate nature of his comments speaks volumes. Good day.

Casper · Sep 3, 2016

QuadpolarNutjob said:
nonsense. trump received more primary votes than any republican in history. with 17 candidates in the race. 'dumping' trump destroys the republican party, which is exactly why democrats and 'others/centrists/independents/insert imnotademocrateventhoughiam here's' want so badly for it to happen. you cannot win, trump is the most popular republican in American history, and in November you won't be able to deny it anymore.

HISTORY! Trump Shatters Republican Primary Vote Record by 1.4 Million Votes

Ramblings from the Far Side.:roll:

Hawkeye10 · Sep 3, 2016

MaggieD said:
"Chasing away Latinos" presumes they were Republicans until now. No....

The new survey asked Latinos to rate the importance to them of five issues that might be discussed in this year’s midterm elections: education, health care, immigration, jobs and the economy, and conflicts in the Middle East.

Among Latino registered voters, two issues rate highest in importance. Fully 92% say education is an extremely (49%) or very (42%) important issue to them personally, and 91% say jobs and the economy is an extremely (46%) or very (45%) important issue. Following these two issues is health care, which 86% of Latino voters rate as extremely important (40%) or very important (46%). These three issues have consistently rated as the top three among Latino voters in Pew Research Center surveys (Krogstad, 2014), and the ranking is similar to that seen prior to the 2012 presidential election (Lopez and Gonzalez-Barrera, 2012).

Top Issues in this Year's Election for Hispanic Voters | Pew Research Center

Trump has the ability to hit all of the top three Latino concerns. He needs to do better but I am looking for him to get 40% of their votes, something that only Shrub in 04 has over accomplished.

http://latinousa.org/2015/10/29/the-latino-vote-in-presidential-races/

Hawkeye10 · Sep 3, 2016

2012:

When asked what are the most important issues facing the Latino community that Congress and the President should address, respondents ranked immigration, 47% as top priority followed by the economy 44%. Education and health followed with 20% and 12% respectively.

Immigration and Economy Are Top Concerns for US Latinos | Business Wire

THe D's seem to have not yet figured out that immigration has fallen from the #1 concern of Latinos to #4 according to the two polls I have linked. THe R's figured it out spring of 2015, when they decided that pandering to the Latino Political Pressure Groups demands for open borders and amnesty was a bad call. Most of the anyways, JEB! never got the memo.

Trump can and should hit 40% with them.

Hawkeye10 · Sep 3, 2016

Clinton isn’t doing better than previous Democrats with Latinos — even against Trump

But some Democratic strategists fear that Clinton has already missed a unique opportunity and warn that counting on Hispanic voters to turn out just because they hate Trump is not a reliable strategy. Unlike President Obama four years ago, Clinton has run virtually no Spanish-language television ads in the general election, with the exception of a spot that aired during a one-day soccer event.

“I’m worried literally to death now that because Donald Trump is so visceral that they’ll think that Latinos will turn out because of that alone,” said Chuck Rocha, president of Solidarity Strategies, a Latino political-consulting firm that worked with Bernie Sanders in the Democratic primary season. “Hate alone won’t motivate somebody to vote. . . . They need something to vote for.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...able-main_clintonlatinos-540am:homepage/story

I have seen no evidence to date that The Latino Street hates Trump. The Latino elite in America do, but they speak only for themselves.

eohrnberger · Sep 3, 2016

calamity said:
Yeah, just like some black people are not rapists, drug dealers and murderers. Right?

That you don't recognize the inappropriate nature of his comments speaks volumes. Good day.

Play the race card?

To be honest I have people of color that I respect and am proud to associate with, I call them my friends and go shooting at the range with them every month. So you can take this play of the race card ans stuff it up where the sun doesn't shine. That's not the issue at all here.

The fact that you take this as a race issue speak volumes about you, and your tactics, and values, and parroting the typical liberal / progressive / Democrat line more so than it does about me.

How about you answer the questions posed as opposed to playing an invalid race card for once?

You'd consider the criminals (by definition) that illegally cross the border as 'fine upstanding people' ?
The people that smuggle drugs across the border as 'fine upstanding people' ?
The criminals that do cross the border are more likely to commit crimes while in country as 'fine upstanding people' ?
Do you consider securing the border the sovereign right of a nation?

I fault no one for wanting to improve their opportunities in life, all I ask is that they do so in a legal manner.

It's Only a Matter of Time Before RNC Ditches Trump

Privileged

Privileged

Genius is where you find it.

Privileged

Privileged

Genius is where you find it.

Privileged

Genius is where you find it.

Genius is where you find it.

Privileged

Privileged

Privileged

Privileged

Privileged

Buttermilk Man

Buttermilk Man

Buttermilk Man