The OFFICIAL Trump/HRC/2016 General Election Thread...

[JettaKnight]

Can we drop this bogeyman? "NeverTrump" isn't a thing. It was an insignificantly small (Trump supporter's description) group that didn't want him chosen as the nominee in the primary. He's now the nominee. The bogeyman lost, and now you've got your candidate. No more blame can be placed on this insignificantly small, non-existent group. It's now up to Trump to win... and he can't do that because he's an awful, awful candidate. There's hate for Trump because people who saw a chance at beating Hillary lost that chance when Trump was selected. You can see that clearly, given how poorly he's polling, and how badly they're taking him down with stupid old audio clips. He was chosen by the Democrats (you saw the e-mail leak, I assume) because he's easily beaten.

It's not like the warning wasn't sounded, "Don't nominate Trump, We won't support him, he can't win."

Is it too soon to say, "I told you so"?

Trump supporters send 10:1 venom to non-Trump supporting conservatives/Republicans than to HRC. Much like Trump himself.

Have you ever seen a single instance of me not getting in a dig at hitlary?

Have you, Tombs, Bug, etc. passed on bashing someone not supporting Trump?

 

[printcraft]

....Have you, Tombs, Bug, etc. passed on bashing someone not supporting Trump?

Show me (printcraft) an example of printcraft (me) bashing.
(hint: #nevertrump does not count as that is their own chosen descriptive name)

Or do you mean me bashing hitlary because she doesn't support Trump?
Yes, I admit to bashing that evil *****.
(and further anybody that supports her)

 

[BugI02]

I think if the nominees, once they had signed the loyalty pledge, had kept their word once given, much of the divisiveness of the rest of the campaign would have been minimized and down ballot unity would have prevailed.

Can I prove that? no.

Once they popularized vocal dissent, it facilitated it in the rank and file. What they really showed is that they were the politicians we have come to expect.

However, if I was doing a root cause analysis on the problems now, I would trace it right back to that loyalty pledge.

THIS. Once neverTrump's 'night of the tiny knives' floor fight failed and he was the nominee, they should have just let it go. They should have given the most minimal, tepid support that they could and be done with it. We keep hearing he was unelectable, record high negatives yada yada. If neverTrump was so confident he would be defeated, why not just let nature take its course?

By continuing to attempt the overthrow of the candidate by all means fair or foul, especially after Trump briefly closed the gap with Clinton, they have given life to the idea that 'Maybe Trump could have won this thing without the friendly fire' A significant fraction of the electorate is going to be ****ed if he suffers a narrow loss because it will be arguable that he could have won it.
Anger, like a strong static charge, will find a channel to ground. If someone gets struck by that lightning, they were in the way

Worrying who will be around to fight Clinton seems disingenuous, at best, after having done all they could to damage her only real opposition.

And actions should have consequences

 

[actaeon277]

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Or do you mean me bashing hitlary[sic] because she doesn't support Trump?
Yes, I admit to bashing that evil *****.
(and further anybody that supports her)

But in your mind, don't you think people that don't support Trump support her?

Though I don't think that's what he was getting at. I don't necessarily feel like you're bashing me or others here... just strongly disagree with the logic behind the Trump movement when it comes to consistency on what's best for the country (and yours and my freedoms).

Regarding "#nevertrumpers" though. There are some here that say it (type it) with a little spittle coming from their mouths as they do. As though it's an insulting and derogatory term. They try, and fail, to make it sound bad... but it's just silly to repeat it over and over when it's no longer a thing.

 

[miguel]

Time to turn this campaign into a Stalingrad for that ***** and all leftists.

This Blue Marble, a Global Current Events Discussion Forum - View Single Post - SHINMEN'S OPEN LETTER TO DONALD TRUMP -- TAKE OUT YOUR TOMAHAWK AND GO TO TOWN

 

[printcraft]

......Worrying who will be around to fight Clinton seems disingenuous, at best, after having done all they could to damage her only real opposition.

And remember kids..... these same guys already stopped obama in his tracks.
So we can count on them to keep up the good work once they return to Washington again and again.
Surely they will hold hitlary accountable and not let her get away with every damn thing she wants. Surely.

 

[BugI02]

Is a Democrat [STRIKE]majority[/STRIKE] POTUS what's best for the country: Yes or no?

What a great question. Waiting ...

 

[BugI02]

Who's this "We" you be talking about White Man?--Tonto

It seems to me that a life of [STRIKE]privilege[/STRIKE] criminality with no one calling [STRIKE]him[/STRIKE] them to task resulted in the [STRIKE]pigheaded bully[/STRIKE] festering cesspool we know as [STRIKE]Don Trump[/STRIKE] the Clintons.

Fixy

 

[JettaKnight]

Show me (printcraft) an example of printcraft (me) bashing.
(hint: #nevertrump does not count as that is their own chosen descriptive name)

Or do you mean me bashing hitlary because she doesn't support Trump?
Yes, I admit to bashing that evil *****.
(and further anybody that supports her)

I don't classify myself as NeverTrump and I don't know if T.Lex does either.

You might associate me with Hitlery[sic], but I assure you there is no connection.


And dude, you post something like 100 post a day - I'm not digging through that.

 

[BugI02]

Not yet.

Really doesn't answer the question. But I think you know the actual answer to it... and don't really want to admit it.

Why not let them believe what they want? Let them dislike the "GOP" candidate... but leave them alone and let them possibly win their elections so they can maintain a majority? And help Trump/oppose Clinton?

Why be vindictive and go after them, supposedly guaranteeing Democrat majority? This seems like a poor time for spite to take control, doesn't it? "If I can't win, none of you can win!" is selfish, and does real harm to the country.

The only reason to go after them is spite/revenge, and the only result of spite/revenge is negative.

neverTrump's prescription for us is 4yrs of Hillary and then they'll pick up the pieces and tell us who we are allowed to have as our candidate in 2020

Does that medicine not taste quite so good when they are forced to get a dose?

 

[actaeon277]

Unapologetically American / I Hate You for Making Me Defend Donald Trump

 

[BugI02]

I'll answer this: No. (BTW, electing Trump isn't "what's best for this country" either.)

But, this is where the lack of consistent principles by many Trump supporters is revealed. If HRC getting elected is bad, getting HRC elected with a Dem majority in the legislative branch is worse. That's a principle. Heck, that's the primary principle driving me to vote this year.

And yet, many Trump supporters are publicly disavowing the only candidates standing in the way of the Dem/HRC majority. Is that principled? Is that what's best for the country?

Fair to ask INGO Trump supporters where they stand on the more local elections. Especially those claiming to act in a principled way.

OH COME ON! You (plural) put four fish into the best realistic hope to keep The Hag out of power altogether, AND THEN you want to talk principled and best for country? Should have made that more of a priority

Besides, you've already decided I'm unprincipled simply for supporting Trump.

There are no better angels coming to the rescue

 

[Tombs]

neverTrump's prescription for us is 4yrs of Hillary and then they'll pick up the pieces and tell us who we are allowed to have as our candidate in 2020

Does that medicine not taste quite so good when they are forced to get a dose?

Not only that, they're trying to delude us into thinking they'll stop hillary when they have done nothing to stop obama.

Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice... can't get fooled again.

 

[JettaKnight]

THIS. Once neverTrump's 'night of the tiny knives' floor fight failed and he was the nominee, they should have just let it go. They should have given the most minimal, tepid support that they could and be done with it. We keep hearing he was unelectable, record high negatives yada yada. If neverTrump was so confident he would be defeated, why not just let nature take its course?

By continuing to attempt the overthrow of the candidate by all means fair or foul, especially after Trump briefly closed the gap with Clinton, they have given life to the idea that 'Maybe Trump could have won this thing without the friendly fire' A significant fraction of the electorate is going to be ****ed if he suffers a narrow loss because it will be arguable that he could have won it.
Anger, like a strong static charge, will find a channel to ground. If someone gets struck by that lightning, they were in the way

Worrying who will be around to fight Clinton seems disingenuous, at best, after having done all they could to damage her only real opposition.

And actions should have consequences

There's only small number of politicians who are actively neverTrump. The majority (like myself and Paul Ryan) are just trying to run away from the train wreck.

If someone needs to let it go - it's you. You're propping up this neverTrump strawman and trying to paint anyone that passively objects to Trump as the enemy. It is Trump's fault, not neverTrump. No one has ever given me a reason to support Trump. Just, "vote Trump or we get Hillary!" So why the hell is it Trump when it could have been any other candidate. Come'on Bug, you're one of his biggest supporters, tell me why I should vote for him. And don't tell me in such terms that I can replace a ham sandwich with Trump and it still makes sense.

And you want to talk about anger - what about us that are angry still about the outcome of the nomination? Anyone else could have this election wrapped up right now - even Kasich or Christie.

 

[actaeon277]

OH COME ON! You (plural) put four fish into the best realistic hope to keep The Hag out of power altogether, AND THEN you want to talk principled and best for country? Should have made that more of a priority

Besides, you've already decided I'm unprincipled simply for supporting Trump.

There are no better angels coming to the rescue

True. They always, and I mean ALWAYS pick candidates that suck.

 

[T.Lex]

I don't classify myself as NeverTrump and I don't know if T.Lex does either.

I was #nevertrump in March, when there was an opportunity to do something about it.

Alas, #never didn't last.

OH COME ON! You (plural) put four fish into the best realistic hope to keep The Hag out of power altogether, AND THEN you want to talk principled and best for country? Should have made that more of a priority

I can honestly say I did.

Besides, you've already decided I'm unprincipled simply for supporting Trump.

There are no better angels coming to the rescue

Well, in the ongoing effort to positively reinforce common ground, we now have 2 points upon which we agree.

Not only that, they're trying to delude us into thinking they'll stop hillary when they have done nothing to stop obama.

Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice... can't get fooled again.

Look, this is simple math.

Regardless of the POTUS election, a Dem majority would be bad, right? If # of Dems > # of Republicans, then President Trump can't get done all the great things he says, and President Clinton can achieve all the ****ty things she's saying.

That's bad.

Or wait. Are you guys saying that a Democratic majority would be better for Trump? I would be interested in that logic.

 

[BugI02]

I don't view this Trump/Republican issue the way it is being discussed in these recent posts.

The primary system has been used as a way to get the taxpayers to pay for the party's nomination process. This time it backfired on the Republicans because the people chose someone the party powers really didn't want. The same thing might have happened to the Democrats, but the Clintons have a better handle on their party apparently.

It's no surprise the Republicans aren't supporting the candidate they didn't want. The problem I think is that we paid for a nomination process that was partisan and one that we didn't really belong in.

If you are really Republican, you should have long ago been kicking out the guys that didn't match the conservative ideals, in whatever way you see them. For me, that was fiscal conservatism and small government. Because I had no success as a voter helping get those ideals in office, I left the party. (I was never really a "member" but I leaned that way)

Now you've nominated a guy that in my view doesn't fit the conservative principles nor does he fit with the rest of the party. You are trying to make an entirely new party (of what I can't really tell) and you are surprised that the dinosaur Republicans aren't supporting it.

Dusty, if they could admit that is what's really driving this bus I would have an easier time with it. Otherwise they don't make sense. I can make room for true conscientious objectors, but otherwise I don't see what is so hard to understand about Hillary Bad > Trump Bad

If I have to destroy movement conservatism to create a party that will actually heed the wishes of its constituents, c'est la guerre

 

[BugI02]

Right. It's not Paul Ryan's job to get Donald Trump elected. It's Donald Trump's job to get Donald Trump elected.

Then by that logic it's not Donald Trump's job to get Paul Ryan re-elected, either. Every man for himself, eh?

In my opinion... He's failed at that, and it's time to work toward maintaining a majority in congress to at least have a chance at encumbering Clinton. I can't imagine any scenario that involves attacking those remaining people that could hold that majority to be a good thing. Or in the case of INGO threads... a defensible thing. Maybe I don't have the Trump-smarts to understand why pushing for a Democrat majority out of spite somehow makes our guns and freedoms safer.

Maybe I don't have the neverTrump-smarts to understand why pushing for a Democrat [STRIKE]majority[/STRIKE] POTUS out of spite somehow makes our guns and freedoms safer.

 

[printcraft]

And dude, you post something like 100 post a day - I'm not digging through that.

If it happened or was in any way indicative of my normal posting you would have seen it by now then.
I'll save you the trouble and just say it doesn't happen.
You can factcheck this in real time by going to printcraftisawesome.com