The Republican Primary Race Is Filling Up

[seedubs1]

This.

So the people who are fed up with the status quo are stupid?? I get it now. Either vote for the person the party thinks is best for you or your stupid. Gotcha!!

The Democrats and Republicans don't have a Trump problem. They have a pissed off electorate problem.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

So the people who are fed up with the status quo are stupid?? I get it now. Either vote for the person the party thinks is best for you or your stupid. Gotcha!!

The Democrats and Republicans don't have a Trump problem. They have a pissed off electorate problem.

You're painting the entirety of Trump's supporters as this "status quo" thing.

No. No no no.

I see plenty of them that actually buy what he's saying. Actually think there's going to be a 15,000 foot wall along Mexico's border. Actually think he's going to make Apple build hardware here in America. People that truly believe in the "Make America Great Again" nonsense, and the questionable legality of the fascism he's talked about imposing on private businesses and individuals.

No, the vast majority of his followers believe what he says, and are not very smart. The small, small minority are the ones that think this "status quo, middle finger" stuff is real... and don't mind sending America into a ****ty four years for whatever selfish reasons they tell themselves.

Every time "maybe they just support him because they're tired of..." comes up, this needs to be said. That is wrong. It's baseless, it's wrong, and it's NOT why people support him. They aren't "fed up". They aren't "middle finger to the blah blah". They're just people, millions of people, that believe what he's saying.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Oh hey, Trump is responding to Romney now.

Mmm, decorum. Maybe the world needs more blowie references in the SOTU.

Trump on Romney wanting endorsement in 2012: "I could have said, Mitt, drop to your knees, and he would have dropped to his knees.”

Also

"Mitt is a failed candidate. He failed. He failed horribly." (like Palin)

Also calls Romney a "choke artist"... is that the go-to name for people with the initials "MR"?


Romney predicted Trump would respond by insulting him while ignoring all of the substantive issues he raised. Exactly what Trump is doing.. Like his followers.


Edit - just now: 'Don't think of the Trump University lawsuit as a big deal. I have other suits pending too'

oh, ok.

 

[T.Lex]

Question: what Republican national politician would be immune to the "loser" label? Honestly - I can't think of one that hasn't failed at one thing or another. Even in terms of insults, that's kinda weak.

I'd be kinda interested to see GW Bush come out swinging (rhetorically). He always seemed to be able to connect with people at a human level, maybe more than any other Republican in my adulthood. But, his legacy is already tainted. Not sure it would be worth the ongoing ridicule.

 

[Expat]

Question: what Republican national politician would be immune to the "loser" label? Honestly - I can't think of one that hasn't failed at one thing or another. Even in terms of insults, that's kinda weak.

I'd be kinda interested to see GW Bush come out swinging (rhetorically). He always seemed to be able to connect with people at a human level, maybe more than any other Republican in my adulthood. But, his legacy is already tainted. Not sure it would be worth the ongoing ridicule.

I certainly don't think there is anyone on the political stage that we could not tear down sufficiently to make them unacceptable to the purists.

 

[chipbennett]

Oh hey, Trump is responding to Romney now.

Mmm, decorum. Maybe the world needs more blowie references in the SOTU.

Trump on Romney wanting endorsement in 2012: "I could have said, Mitt, drop to your knees, and he would have dropped to his knees.”

That's not necessarily a sexual reference. Taking the knee/bending the knee is a sign of subservience to another.

Also

"Mitt is a failed candidate. He failed. He failed horribly." (like Palin)

Palin lost an election?

Also calls Romney a "choke artist"... is that the go-to name for people with the initials "MR"?

Is there a better way to describe Romney's performance in the 2012 election? He was in the lead after the first debate, then choked.

Romney predicted Trump would respond by insulting him while ignoring all of the substantive issues he raised. Exactly what Trump is doing.. Like his followers.

What did Romney offer of substance in his speech?

Edit - just now: 'Don't think of the Trump University lawsuit as a big deal. I have other suits pending too'

oh, ok.

Because no one is ever the target of lawsuits for political purposes...

 

[Twangbanger]

You're painting the entirety of Trump's supporters as this "status quo" thing.

No. No no no.

I see plenty of them that actually buy what he's saying. Actually think there's going to be a 15,000 foot wall along Mexico's border. Actually think he's going to make Apple build hardware here in America. People that truly believe in the "Make America Great Again" nonsense, and the questionable legality of the fascism he's talked about imposing on private businesses and individuals.

No, the vast majority of his followers believe what he says, and are not very smart. The small, small minority are the ones that think this "status quo, middle finger" stuff is real... and don't mind sending America into a ****ty four years for whatever selfish reasons they tell themselves.

Every time "maybe they just support him because they're tired of..." comes up, this needs to be said. That is wrong. It's baseless, it's wrong, and it's NOT why people support him. They aren't "fed up". They aren't "middle finger to the blah blah". They're just people, millions of people, that believe what he's saying.

1. Project much?
2. What time is your next tarot reading?

 

[T.Lex]

On the "Trump University" thing, he isn't supposed to call it that anymore. It isn't and wasn't a "university."

Trump University: Yes, It Was a Massive Scam

First thing first, Trump University was never a university. When the “school” was established in 2005, the New York State Education Department warned that it was in violation of state law for operating without a NYSED license. Trump ignored the warnings. (The institution is now called, ahem, “Trump Entrepreneur Initiative.”) Cue lawsuits.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

That's not necessarily a sexual reference. Taking the knee/bending the knee is a sign of subservience to another.

Is that what Trump meant? We know he's not vulgar...

Palin lost an election?

Half of one.

Is there a better way to describe Romney's performance in the 2012 election? He was in the lead after the first debate, then choked.

But repeating oneself is bad these days.

What did Romney offer of substance in his speech?

Rather than argue the semantics of "substance"... Romney had concerns about a Trump presidency. Romney expected Trump to do exactly what he's doing right now... Because that's what he's done this entire campaign. That's the point.

Because no one is ever the target of lawsuits for political purposes...

I thought Trump U was being targeted because it was a financial scam. Not political.

To be honest, I had to re-read your username to see who was posting this reply.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Les Moonves Exposes the Trump Media Game

Moonves called the campaign for president a “circus” full of “bomb throwing,” and he hopes it continues. “Most of the ads are not about issues. They’re sort of like the debates,” he said. “Man, who would have expected the ride we’re all having right now?#…#The money’s rolling in and this is fun,” he said. “I’ve never seen anything like this, and this is going to be a very good year for us. Sorry. It’s a terrible thing to say. But, bring it on, Donald. Keep going,” said Moonves. “Donald’s place in this election is a good thing,”

 

[chipbennett]

Is that what Trump meant? We know he's not vulgar...

Even if it was, it only puts all three candidates in the same basket.

Half of one.

That was McCain's election, and McCain lost it. Because McCain.

But repeating oneself is bad these days.

I wasn't aware that Trump had addressed Romney previously.

Rather than argue the semantics of "substance"... Romney had concerns about a Trump presidency. Romney expected Trump to do exactly what he's doing right now... Because that's what he's done this entire campaign. That's the point.

There is so much logical fallacy in this tactic by Romney. That otherwise intelligent people fall for crap like this is why I speak out about it.

I thought Trump U was being targeted because it was a financial scam. Not political.

As if the lines never blur? Rick Perry was targeted ostensibly for ethical reasons, not political.

To be honest, I had to re-read your username to see who was posting this reply.

I'm not a Trump supporter. I just tire of the ridiculous attacks against/criticism of Trump, to the exclusion of what could be substantive concerns.

 

[MisterChester]

Question: what Republican national politician would be immune to the "loser" label? Honestly - I can't think of one that hasn't failed at one thing or another. Even in terms of insults, that's kinda weak.

I'd be kinda interested to see GW Bush come out swinging (rhetorically). He always seemed to be able to connect with people at a human level, maybe more than any other Republican in my adulthood. But, his legacy is already tainted. Not sure it would be worth the ongoing ridicule.

Nope. The W presidency is still very much not missed by most people who pay attention.

 

[T.Lex]

Les Moonves Exposes the Trump Media Game

From Art of the Deal:

I learned a lot from that experience: good publicity is preferable to bad, but from a bottom-line perspective, bad publicity is sometimes better than no publicity at all. Controversy, in short, sells.

 

[BugI02]

A[STRIKE]n independent run[/STRIKE] brokered convention deal in the smoke filled room would affirm that

a. [STRIKE]He was[/STRIKE] The GOPe is completely in this for [STRIKE]himself[/STRIKE] themselves, and [STRIKE]has[/STRIKE] have no interest in Conservatism or helping the party win.
b. [STRIKE]He's[/STRIKE] The GOPe is completely fine with President Clinton.

...

FTFY

 

[BugI02]

And he absolutely must know that. It would just be spiteful to carry that independent campaign to fruition... but maybe that's the plan. The guy's a Democrat, and perhaps he wanted this from the beginning. Spend months conning millions of people into believing in you, then pull them away from the party you pretended to be a part of so your buddy Hillary Clinton can finally achieve the goal she's wanted for so long.


I think Cruz and Rubio need to unite, today. Figure out the order of the ticket later... but unite now. If Trump does this, there aren't many routes remaining to keep Clinton out of office.

You mean like fusion in DBZ. Would we call it Cruzio or Rubiuz?

 

[BugI02]

So, where did Trump threaten to go third party/independent? How does answering (repeated) hypothetical questions constitute a threat to act on that hypothetical?

Yet another non-story, in the same vein of Trump not refuting a non-endorsement.

They used to have a big box of colorful straws. Sadly, with all the grasping and grasping, supplies are running low and the selection seems a bit ... threadbare

 

[BugI02]

The Republicans need to settle on what they want. First they need to decide if Trump as a nominee is acceptable to them. If so, let it ride. If not, they need to decide if they want to attempt to force a brokered convention, or if they want to clear the field and compete head to head. But they need to decide that now. Right now. And they need to pick the guy they think has the best chance of beating Trump. That's probably not Carson, Kasich, or even Rubio. It's probably Cruz.

I have to agree with T.Lex, if Trump lost the nomination in a brokered convention it would just be the process playing out correctly. That so much was brought to bear against his nomination would be a self-inflicted wound. Ted Cruz would be an acceptable substitute to me. Rubio would not. But I think its moot, I really don't think either one of them will be able to overcome the bitterness instilled by this fight and win in November

 

[BugI02]

Romney speaking right now. People think this is pointless... but no Republican of stature has attempted something like this. Might fail, but it's worth trying.

Keeps Cruz and Rubio from being bogged down by it. Romney said to watch how Trump reacts... that he won't address what Romney says, but instead continue the low road of insults.

He's not holding back at all, being pretty specific with the sorts of things Trump is hiding in his tax returns. Emphasizing Trump's behavior, "is this how you'd want your kids/grandkids to act?"

Well Mitt would know all about that, wouldn't he

Believe in America (but invest in the Caymans)

 

[Tombs]

Every time "maybe they just support him because they're tired of..." comes up, this needs to be said. That is wrong. It's baseless, it's wrong, and it's NOT why people support him. They aren't "fed up". They aren't "middle finger to the blah blah". They're just people, millions of people, that believe what he's saying.

Until he moves to the left on an issue, I have trouble finding fault.

I can call all the candidates liars and easily prove it if I want to. They're all a roll of the dice. So far, Trump seems to be selling the best platforms to me.

I can't vote for someone assuming everything they say is a lie, have to give them a chance to prove one way or another. If he picks a decent VP, it'll be the deal maker or breaker as to where his heart is.

 

[jamil]

Cruz didn't succeed with the voter groups he should have succeeded with. Rubio is succeeding with groups he should be doing well with. It's Rubio.

First, I didn't say Cruz has the best chance because I like him or because I want him to win. My favorite is out. At this point I almost don't give a **** which non-trump candidate gets the nomination.

I just don't see the math that says Rubio has a better shot at beating Trump than Cruz.

Trumpers don't seem to understand the not-trump voters. You won't acknowledge that Trump scores the worst in the no-****ing-way category. Cruz also has a problem with that but not nearly as much as Trump. Said another way, Trump is not second on anyone's list, he's either first or last. Cruz is last on many peoples list but he's at least second on many people's list too. If Cruz bowed out, probably a few Cruzers would become Trumpers. But I doubt the Venn diagram between Trump and Rubio voters overlap much at all. Cruz hasn't had nearly as many Republicans vow not to vote for him as Trump.

I don't see how anyone sees more likely path for Rubio than Cruz. Since the fat ass pussbag pulled Rubio's britches down in the debate, he hasn't really recovered. Rubio really should have won Virgina.

A couple of other points:

1. without the middle finger in the race, Cruz probably would have easily won the evangelical states.

2. I wouldn't assume that the performance of Trump vs Cruz vs Rubio is all due to people who want Trump as POTUS. In states with open primaries Trump has especially killed it. Exit polls have revealed 3 reasons why Democrats have been crossing over to vote for Trump in primaries. 1) They have middle fingers too. 2) They hate Hillary too and are afraid of the Bern more than Trump. 3) Strategic Hillary voters want to put the weakest candidate against Hillary. Polls show Hillary is more vulnerable to Kasich, Rubio, and even Cruz and they know it.

You know, that brings to mind that this whole idea of a "Republican establishment" as a monolithic thing is a bit of a fantasy. If it were real, we wouldn't have this problem.

To your point, though, I'll decide if Trump is acceptable once he's clear about what he'll do and how he'll do it, in concrete terms. With the others, there is a history of public office upon which to rely. With Trump, there is no such history, so he'll have to be more specific on details.

The "Republican establishment" isn't monolithic. It's more like a sort of club with unspoken rules. Members may have diverse opinions on stuff, but in the end they follow the same basic rules.

And when I wrote that I meant Republican party bosses not rank and file Republicans. In public they've seemed to be kinda hands off, let it play out. Behind closed doors, I'll bet not. I think that different Repubs saying different things shows the party doesn't really know what to do about Trump.

You're talking about a difference-of-differecnes of 23 delegates: 0.1% of all delegates.

But the point is: Cruz badly underperformed in his likely-strongest states, and with his likely-strongest demographics. Rubio won Minnesota and performed well in Virginia, which are representative of his likely-strongest states and likely-strongest demographics.



I suppose that pledged/bound delegates could go to whomever their candidate endorses. But I think it is more likely that, if their candidate is not qualified to be presented for the first ballot, then they are free to vote for whomever (i.e. they become unpledged/unbound).

CB, man, I respect you because you usually reason things out logically. But dude, yer making me think you're deciding these things from bias and not reason. Cruz isn't doing as well as he should with evangelicals because they're splitting between the middle finger and kindred spirit. I think Cruz's shenanigans in Iowa against Carson really turned some off. And, still, most of Carson's support is Evangelicals. Probably not many of them going to Trump when he bows out, except for those buthurt over Cruz.

Still Cruz is getting it done better than Rubio. He over-performed where he had to win. He went home Tuesday night with more delegates than the polls predicted. I'm not sure I've heard any pundits say that Rubio is in a stronger position than Cruz.

You seem to be a Trump guy, I dunno, I guess I'm a bit shocked by that. Imma not-trump guy at this point. I'll take either Rubio or Cruz over Trump at this point. And I think Cruz is in a stronger position than Rubio. The clear marker for Cruz to get out was Tuesday. If he lost Texas, he was done. He won handily. Rubio's most clear moment of reckoning is Florida. If he loses that it's over aside from a brokered convention.

I mean that Cruz should have swept the south, and he barely got two states in total. Rubio has done well with the moderate/economic/urban republican vote. My point is if Cruz can't win in the south he can't win anywhere, period.

I still think you're overstating this. The states he won wasn't "barely". And the states you think he should have won, he lost for the reasons I stated above.

Trump is the only one who has the potential to do so. Can he? Who knows. Will he? Who knows.

But Cruz, Rubio, or Kasich would just be more of the same.

At worst Cruz, Rubio, or Kasich is more of the same. At worst Trump could be much worse than that. My guy is out. So I'm down to looking at risks. I think the downside risk of Trump outweighs his potential upside benefits at this point. I can't see the floor on the downside. At least I can see the floor on Cruz and Rubio.