The Republican Primary Race Is Filling Up

[printcraft]

QFT

 

[Kutnupe14]

It's a joke. I know what a Fokker biplane is, hero. You're not as clever as you think you are.

Well yeah, we were talking about planes, so duh.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

BRK: Mitt Romney to speak on "the state of the 2016 Presidential race" tomorrow at University of Utah.

What do you think it is? Could he run independent?

 

[Tombs]

BRK: Mitt Romney to speak on "the state of the 2016 Presidential race" tomorrow at University of Utah.

What do you think it is? Could he run independent?

The GOP is desperate to give hillary the election, it wouldn't surprise me if they tried to organize a 3rd party run so they could get their wish.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Here's hoping:

 

[T.Lex]

The GOP is desperate to give hillary the election, it wouldn't surprise me if they tried to organize a 3rd party run so they could get their wish.

Out of curiosity, do you mean "desperate to give" as in "foolishly flopping around desperately in a way that will give" or "intentionally going to give."

I don't see any scenario where the GOP wants HRC to win the general election.

 

[Tombs]

Out of curiosity, do you mean "desperate to give" as in "foolishly flopping around desperately in a way that will give" or "intentionally going to give."

I don't see any scenario where the GOP wants HRC to win the general election.

Debating a 3rd party run is a scenario they know they have no hope of winning and know full well is going to give the election to HRC. I'm not quite sure how you could spin it another way without being blissfully ignorant.

 

[T.Lex]

Debating a 3rd party run is a scenario they know they have no hope of winning and know full well is going to give the election to HRC. I'm not quite sure how you could spin it another way without being blissfully ignorant.

Thread-crossing ad homs notwithstanding, the only reason the GOP would do it is if they thought it would work.

I actually agree with you - to an extent: it wouldn't work.

If Romney thought he could've won the nomination, he would've run. If they had polling that would've had him better than Cruz, they would've "drafted" him.

 

[Alpo]

Here's hoping:

This man, Barkhad Abdi, is actually from Minneapolis (after Somalia). Might explain why Rubio did so well there.....

 

[ArcadiaGP]

This man, Barkhad Abdi, is actually from Minneapolis (after Somalia). Might explain why Rubio did so well there.....

I take it you're an Ann Coulter fan

 

[chipbennett]

BRK: Mitt Romney to speak on "the state of the 2016 Presidential race" tomorrow at University of Utah.

What do you think it is? Could he run independent?

Sit down and shut up, Mitt. You had your chance. You blew it, and are now irrelevant.

 

[chipbennett]

Out of curiosity, do you mean "desperate to give" as in "foolishly flopping around desperately in a way that will give" or "intentionally going to give."

I don't see any scenario where the GOP wants HRC to win the general election.

To the contrary, I fully believe that the Establishment would rather throw the election to Hillary, than to see Trump win.

There are not two parties in Washington. There is only the UniParty. Trump is a threat to the oligarchy.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

CARSON will tell supporters today that he does not see “path forward,” will not attend Thursday debate

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...bef352-d9b3-11e5-891a-4ed04f4213e8_story.html

 

[T.Lex]

To the contrary, I fully believe that the Establishment would rather throw the election to Hillary, than to see Trump win.

There are not two parties in Washington. There is only the UniParty. Trump is a threat to the oligarchy.

I think this is a misunderstanding. While the party platforms may be easily confused with each other, there are establishment lines between Rs and Ds. Favored institutions, law firms, accountants, PR groups, think tanks, vendors, etc. Rs have theirs, Ds have their own.

If a D wins, R-establishment gains nothing. If Trump wins, R-establishment still has an opportunity to influence. If a non-Trump R wins, then they win.

Intentionally helping HRC win would trade the opportunity to influence for a complete lack of influence. That doesn't make sense.

 

[Alpo]

I take it you're an Ann Coulter fan

Slowly roasted on an open spit with sweet & sour marinade.

 

[chipbennett]

I think this is a misunderstanding. While the party platforms may be easily confused with each other, there are establishment lines between Rs and Ds. Favored institutions, law firms, accountants, PR groups, think tanks, vendors, etc. Rs have theirs, Ds have their own.

If a D wins, R-establishment gains nothing. If Trump wins, R-establishment still has an opportunity to influence. If a non-Trump R wins, then they win.

Intentionally helping HRC win would trade the opportunity to influence for a complete lack of influence. That doesn't make sense.

And yet, the Establishment is just starting to make that sort of noise: elected Republicans declaring that they'll never vote for Trump, McConnell telling senators that they can run against Trump in their campaigns, and some even floating the idea of an independent run.

 

[Tombs]

I think this is a misunderstanding. While the party platforms may be easily confused with each other, there are establishment lines between Rs and Ds. Favored institutions, law firms, accountants, PR groups, think tanks, vendors, etc. Rs have theirs, Ds have their own.

If a D wins, R-establishment gains nothing. If Trump wins, R-establishment still has an opportunity to influence. If a non-Trump R wins, then they win.

Intentionally helping HRC win would trade the opportunity to influence for a complete lack of influence. That doesn't make sense.

You're acting like they're thinking rationally.

Is that why they have made no effort to stop obama on practically anything?

 

[T.Lex]

And yet, the Establishment is just starting to make that sort of noise: elected Republicans declaring that they'll never vote for Trump, McConnell telling senators that they can run against Trump in their campaigns, and some even floating the idea of an independent run.

Yes - all to benefit R-establishment.

Again, a 3rd party run AGAINST a populist GOP nominee has "BAD IDEA" written all over it. Until there's polling to confirm, I'd give it a very small chance at winning.

My point, though, is that it would be motivated by greed - increase R-establishment's own gain, even if it is a longshot. The effect would be to increase the odds of an HRC win. The cause, though, would not be related to that.

 

[AmmoManAaron]

Sit down and shut up, Mitt. You had your chance. You blew it, and are now irrelevant.

I agree, and I would NOT vote for Romney as an independent.

To the contrary, I fully believe that the Establishment would rather throw the election to Hillary, than to see Trump win.

There are not two parties in Washington. There is only the UniParty. Trump is a threat to the oligarchy.

Yep, call me cynical, but a President Hillary ( ) would be a very effective fundraising tool for the GOPe. Trump, Bernie, Ron and Rand Paul, and TeaPartiers like Ted Cruz are all a threat to the oligarchy in one fashion or another (NOT saying these candidates are alike) - that's why you see them all being attacked by the apparatus of their own parties.

CARSON will tell supporters today that he does not see “path forward,” will not attend Thursday debate

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...bef352-d9b3-11e5-891a-4ed04f4213e8_story.html

^^^It's about dang time!^^^

I came to the conclusion a while back that he was just staying in to help sell his book. I lost a lot of respect for him because he dragged it out like this purely for his own ego/profit.

 

[T.Lex]

You're acting like they're thinking rationally.

Totally agree, there.

Is that why they have made no effort to stop obama on practically anything?

This is historically inaccurate. Much effort has been made, with mixed results.

Gun control springs immediately to mind. Obama's efforts there were stymied consistently, forcing him to use the phone and the pen.