2016 Republican Primary

[DSUrocks07]

Which is why JSO, and anyone else who uses that argument is full of ****.

People are saying that Cruz or Kasich are clearly better and more "Republican" candidates...but they're getting nowhere near 50% of the vote either. Which means over HALF the primary voters looked at Cruz and Kasich and said, "Nope."

Now you've done it! You've paved the way for several more lengthy, repetitive JSO posts!

Which one will claim that because I'm black I'm not intelligent enough to understand the nuances of the political process? My vote is the 4th one

[Ivytalk]

Now you've done it! You've paved the way for several more lengthy, repetitive JSO posts!

Which one will claim that because I'm black I'm not intelligent enough to understand the nuances of the political process? My vote is the 4th one

DSU, all that counts is that we're both intelligent enough to understand the nuisances of the political process.

[JohnStOnge]

People are saying that Cruz or Kasich are clearly better and more "Republican" candidates...but they're getting nowhere near 50% of the vote either. Which means over HALF the primary voters looked at Cruz and Kasich and said, "Nope."

A poll reported on March 8 indicated that if Republicans had a choice between Cruz and Trump head to head Cruz would win by an estimated 54% to 41%. The same poll indicated that an estimated 63 percent of Republicans want the Party to nominate someone else if Trump goes into the convention without the majority of delegates that would given him the win on the first ballot. See http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/201 ... one-on-one .

I don't know about Kasich. But, clearly, the majority of Republicans would rather have Ted Cruz be the nominee than Donald Trump.

See. that wasn't long at all.

[dbackjon]

Now you've done it! You've paved the way for several more lengthy, repetitive JSO posts!

Which one will claim that because I'm black I'm not intelligent enough to understand the nuances of the political process? My vote is the 4th one

No, it is because you moved back to Delaware

[DSUrocks07]

Which one will claim that because I'm black I'm not intelligent enough to understand the nuances of the political process? My vote is the 4th one

No, it is because you moved back to Delaware

Like a runaway slave, I keep getting brought back here.

[JohnStOnge]

Which one will claim that because I'm black I'm not intelligent enough to understand the nuances of the political process?

Surely you know I don't do that sort of thing.

[Ibanez]

Which one will claim that because I'm black I'm not intelligent enough to understand the nuances of the political process?

Surely you know I don't do that sort of thing.

Shirley, you're joking.

[∞∞∞]

Trump's past actions in this article are super fucked up:

http://money.cnn.com/2016/03/28/news/tr ... index.html

The extent he went to drive people out of their homes, including an old lady with cancer, is insane. It's actually terrifyingly insane. Describing him as a slumlord is putting it mildly.

[JohnStOnge]

Surely you know I don't do that sort of thing.

Shirley, you're joking.

Not at all. I reference population distributions. I do not say "you are Black therefore you can't be intelligent."

[JohnStOnge]

Trump's past actions in this article are super **** up:

http://money.cnn.com/2016/03/28/news/tr ... index.html

The extent he went to drive people out of their homes, including an old lady with cancer, is insane. It's actually terrifyingly insane. Describing him as a slumlord is putting it mildly.

As I've said: If Trump gets the Republican nomination, his background will provide a target rich environment for Democrats.

[89Hen]

So I guess I haven't watched many town halls... do they normally come out one at a time?? I tuned in to the middle and watch Kasich for almost 30 minutes. At that point I assumed that the other two didn't show up.

BTW, I do think Kasich is the best option, but he didn't do himself any favors with that format last night IMO. He came across as condescending to the people asking the questions. Several times saying "You've got to be kidding me..." referring to the issue, but it came across as if he were almost saying it to the audience member.

[CID1990]

Trump's past actions in this article are super **** up:

http://money.cnn.com/2016/03/28/news/tr ... index.html

The extent he went to drive people out of their homes, including an old lady with cancer, is insane. It's actually terrifyingly insane. Describing him as a slumlord is putting it mildly.

As I've said: If Trump gets the Republican nomination, his background will provide a target rich environment for Democrats.

Or he could pivot back to being a Democrat for the general.

Dems love themselves some eminent domain too

[DSUrocks07]

As I've said: If Trump gets the Republican nomination, his background will provide a target rich environment for Democrats.

Or he could pivot back to being a Democrat for the general.

Dems love themselves some eminent domain too

Trump embodies both the best and the worst of both sides of the aisle. he's the perfect candidate

[CID1990]

Or he could pivot back to being a Democrat for the general.

Dems love themselves some eminent domain too

Trump embodies both the best and the worst of both sides of the aisle. he's the perfect candidate

i think he has shot himself in the foot by pushing all the rhetorical buttons that set off the concern trolls, and the following point is therefore moot-

but I think he could beat Hillary if he could convincingly fall back on his record- the dude is a confiscatory big government liberal all the way

[kalm]

Trump embodies both the best and the worst of both sides of the aisle. he's the perfect candidate

i think he has shot himself in the foot by pushing all the rhetorical buttons that set off the concern trolls, and the following point is therefore moot-

but I think he could beat Hillary if he could convincingly fall back on his record- the dude is a confiscatory big government liberal all the way

As are many business leaders...including the Republican ones.

[CID1990]

i think he has shot himself in the foot by pushing all the rhetorical buttons that set off the concern trolls, and the following point is therefore moot-

but I think he could beat Hillary if he could convincingly fall back on his record- the dude is a confiscatory big government liberal all the way

As are many business leaders...including the Republican ones.

really klam

just save yourself the effort

we all take the above from you as pretty much read already

[UNI88]

Trump's past actions in this article are super **** up:

http://money.cnn.com/2016/03/28/news/tr ... index.html

The extent he went to drive people out of their homes, including an old lady with cancer, is insane. It's actually terrifyingly insane. Describing him as a slumlord is putting it mildly.

As I've said: If Trump gets the Republican nomination, his background will provide a target rich environment for Democrats.

Trump is definitely a polarizing candidate who will bring out many Democrats and Independents to vote against him. But IMO many of the remaining blue dog type Democrats and Independents will support him. Trump's appeal to the more conservative rural Democrat has been underestimated. This is especially true if Hillary is the Dem candidate. Trump will do much better in Houndawg's backyard of downstate Illinois and similar locations than recent Rep candidates.

John, I share your distaste and distrust of Trump but I don't understand how you could support Cruz instead. That guy is even more wackadoodle than Trump.

[kalm]

As are many business leaders...including the Republican ones.

really klam

just save yourself the effort

we all take the above from you as pretty much read already

Would it make you any feel better if I used the phrase 'extractionary big government conservative'?

[CID1990]

really klam

just save yourself the effort

we all take the above from you as pretty much read already

Would it make you any feel better if I used the phrase 'extractionary big government conservative'?

Your choice of descriptors is irrelevant

If you put "Conks too!" in your sig line it will save you a lot of typing

[kalm]

Would it make you any feel better if I used the phrase 'extractionary big government conservative'?

Your choice of descriptors is irrelevant

If you put "Conks too!" in your sig line it will save you a lot of typing

Good idea! I'll put it right below my "Republicans are statist too" line!

[houndawg]

BTW, as of now, the Real Clear Politics average of polls has Hillary Clinton up over Trump by 50.0% to 38.8% (+11.2) and Bernie Sanders up over Trump by 54.7% to 37.2% The trend for each match up has been towards widening gaps with Trump doing worse and worse against his potential general election opponents (see images below). I think the only shot Republicans have if Trump does get the nomination is for the Democrats to have Clinton indicted with the timing such that they can't really adjust and recover in time for the general election. That could happen. But I think that just about any candidate the Democrats run if they can get things in place will crush Trump. They could stick Biden in, for example, and HE would crush Trump because I don't think who it is matters much. There's a STRONG anti-Trump sentiment out there.

I hope that isn't what you're hanging your hat on, because all these investigations keep exonerating her.

[houndawg]

And you guys question whether the voters are progressive.

I don't know if this breaks down entirely into "progressive" and "conservative." I mean, I am probably about as "conservative" as it gets as far as such labels go and there is no WAY I'd vote for Trump. And as I noted earlier a poll released March 8 estimated that if Trump does not go into the Republican convention with a majority of first ballot votes 63 percent of Republicans want the Party to pick someone else as the nominee.

Rubio would've had a shot. A good shot. Cruz would have some shot. Both are "conservative." Trump has no shot unless the Hillary indictment scenario plays out with the right outcome and timing.

BTW I have to wonder why the Democratic "establishment" doesn't go ahead and go with Sanders. He does better in the polls against all of the Republican candidates than Clinton does and they don't have to worry about him getting indicted. Of course he's old enough where the risk that he could croak at any time could be too high.

If you have to wonder about that you're even more out of touch than you appear.

[houndawg]

As I've said: If Trump gets the Republican nomination, his background will provide a target rich environment for Democrats.

Trump is definitely a polarizing candidate who will bring out many Democrats and Independents to vote against him. But IMO many of the remaining blue dog type Democrats and Independents will support him. Trump's appeal to the more conservative rural Democrat has been underestimated. This is especially true if Hillary is the Dem candidate. Trump will do much better in Houndawg's backyard of downstate Illinois and similar locations than recent Rep candidates.

John, I share your distaste and distrust of Trump but I don't understand how you could support Cruz instead. That guy is even more wackadoodle than Trump.

So is Hillary, possibly to an even greater degree. If you look at the county by county map of the Democratic primary, Hillary lost a large majority of the counties outside the Chicago area and would have lost the State without the Machine's thumb on the scale.


And "downstate Illinois" is I-64 and north to Chicago. My backyard is Little Egypt.

[CID1990]

BTW, as of now, the Real Clear Politics average of polls has Hillary Clinton up over Trump by 50.0% to 38.8% (+11.2) and Bernie Sanders up over Trump by 54.7% to 37.2% The trend for each match up has been towards widening gaps with Trump doing worse and worse against his potential general election opponents (see images below). I think the only shot Republicans have if Trump does get the nomination is for the Democrats to have Clinton indicted with the timing such that they can't really adjust and recover in time for the general election. That could happen. But I think that just about any candidate the Democrats run if they can get things in place will crush Trump. They could stick Biden in, for example, and HE would crush Trump because I don't think who it is matters much. There's a STRONG anti-Trump sentiment out there.

I hope that isn't what you're hanging your hat on, because all these investigations keep exonerating her.

Huh? Which ones of "all these investigations"?

[Skjellyfetti]

Foggy Bottom, Vince Foster, Troopergate, Benghazi, etc.

Though, the email scandal and the Clinton Foundation corruption are legit.

Unfortunately, Republicans have slung so much BS at the Clintons that the legit scandals get lost in the fog.