The Case for a third party - LP listen up...

[Tombs]

Bug - Props to you. I can understand your concern. Thank you for understanding mine.





Oh - so "Trump really doesn't mean it"??? Iguana

Words MEAN THINGS, damn it. When you are aspiring to lead the Free World , your words carry FORCE. Hence you CAN'T be popping off like this...

Tombs - why don't you meet up with BehindBlueEyes and tell him exactly how enrolling him in a database or marking him with some kind of scarlet letter does not constitute hatred. What is your ethnic or religious background? If Trump had said that about [insert your ethnicity or religion here] would you shrug it off with "He didn't _really_ mean it... It's just the way he talks... " What if he said that about Jews?
Want to ask our friend Techres (for those that still remember him) about how he feels about it??

I may not win any friends today, but damn it - we have to see this kind of crap for what it is. PLEASE - let's not sell our souls in the process of defeating The Witch.

Let's THINK about what we are doing here.

Where did I say "he didn't really mean it?"

I said that nothing you just quoted constitutes hatred or racism. But I'm just running on the assumption you're innocently ignorant of the context of all that was said.

Politifact HATES Trump and even they call these accusations bogus. In Context: Donald Trump's comments on a database of American Muslims | PolitiFact

Sorry to break your fantasy world.

 

[ArmedProgrammer]

Tombs -

I can assure you - having now read your link, that Trump contradicted himself several times back and forth over the course of a few days. I encourage everyone to read it. If any candidate with a shred of decorum was misquoted - they would have cleared the air. Immediately. He did not.
He could easily have said - I want the refugees vetted as part of the immigration process. NOT a database of all Muslims. He. Did. Not.
He kept on muddying the water. And baiting the hatred. Read it for yourself.

Ask yourself if this man is a leader or a charlatan.

Ask yourself if you will not feel the least bit guilty when your grandchildren ask you if you voted for "him". I will answer with a clear conscience.

 

[Tombs]

Tombs -

I can assure you - having now read your link, that Trump contradicted himself several times back and forth over the course of a few days. I encourage everyone to read it. If any candidate with a shred of decorum was misquoted - they would have cleared the air. Immediately. He did not.
He could easily have said - I want the refugees vetted as part of the immigration process. NOT a database of all Muslims. He. Did. Not.
He kept on muddying the water. And baiting the hatred. Read it for yourself.

Ask yourself if this man is a leader or a charlatan.

Ask yourself if you will not feel the least bit guilty when your grandchildren ask you if you voted for "him". I will answer with a clear conscience.

Does the hyperbole ever stop with you?

"Oh, I guess I'm wrong, I better start being dramatic and whine harder about nothing!"

 

[BugI02]

Does the hyperbole ever stop with you?

"Oh, I guess I'm wrong, I better start being dramatic and whine harder about nothing!"

Easy, my friend. Edging up to the line (from the wrong side)

 

[ArmedProgrammer]

Perhaps it would be wise for me to ratchet things back a notch... please forgive my frustration with Trump's rhetoric. For some of us - it is very close to home, and quite inflammatory.

It is my belief that Trump supporters by and large are not bigots, nor mean spirited - they are (as I am) FRUSTRATED to death by Democrats trampling all over us, and by Republicans (so-called GOPe's) rolling, bending or whatever us over... Our choices are limited, and most of them are not up to the task. That is horribly frustrating to be kind.

What's hard about this situation is that I actually SHARE their pain at the above. That said, I also see things in Trump that scare the holy crap out of me.

As we try to figure out what to do, it's probably wise for us (looking at myself in the mirror) to remember that at the end of the Primary process - we have a confirmed Socialist to defeat - and we might have a felon to defeat as well. Neither Bernie nor Hillary deserve to hold any office - much less President.

In the spirit of that - no matter what our disagreements - it should remain polite. Tombs - my apologies for letting my frustrations - and my fears - outweigh my "politeness filter", sir. I try to follow in the footsteps of folks like Bill of Rights, Techres, and others around here that I admire for their skill at making a point without raising hackles too much. Today, in my frustration and fear, I was not successful. Please accept my apologies for barking so loudly.

 

[Tombs]

Perhaps it would be wise for me to ratchet things back a notch... please forgive my frustration with Trump's rhetoric. For some of us - it is very close to home, and quite inflammatory.

It is my belief that Trump supporters by and large are not bigots, nor mean spirited - they are (as I am) FRUSTRATED to death by Democrats trampling all over us, and by Republicans (so-called GOPe's) rolling, bending or whatever us over... Our choices are limited, and most of them are not up to the task. That is horribly frustrating to be kind.

What's hard about this situation is that I actually SHARE their pain at the above. That said, I also see things in Trump that scare the holy crap out of me.

As we try to figure out what to do, it's probably wise for us (looking at myself in the mirror) to remember that at the end of the Primary process - we have a confirmed Socialist to defeat - and we might have a felon as well. Neither Bernie nor Hillary deserve to hold any office - much less President.

In the spirit of that - no matter what our disagreements - it should remain polite. Tombs - my apologies for letting my frustrations - and my fears - outweigh my "politeness filter", sir. I try to follow in the footsteps of folks like Bill of Rights, Techres, and others around here that I admire for their skill at making a point without raising hackles too much. Today, in my frustration and fear, I was not successful. Please accept my apologies for barking so loudly.

And my point with all of this is, Trump has a tendency to say some silly stuff at times, as a matter of fact he goes out of his way to slip up on an answer to make it headline worthy for free political advertisements. No press is bad press is the name of the game.

But he has repeatedly demonstrated that he will throttle back on a position and clarify if the base is vocal about it.

I trust in the fact that as things progress he will have increasingly better people around him who will help keep him grounded and in the right direction, as it seems to be the direction things have been heading since the start of his campaign. I will always afford him some degree of wiggle room since he's never held elected office and this is his first serious venture into the realm of politics. Never using a teleprompter has its downsides as well.

People thinking he'd end up being some ruthless dictator are buying into his ego a bit too seriously. The highest probability I'm seeing as things go along is that he may end up doing very little of anything, but at least demonstrating that someone from outside of washington can make it into the whitehouse.

Have to remember, there's 3 branches of government, not 1. And for that matter, Trump isn't a "First" anything president. He isn't the first female president, he isn't the first black president... Someone isn't going to be ruining their entire political career to file articles of impeachment should worse come to worst.

And as far as putting refugees in a database and tracking them, we already do that. Maybe he was unaware.

 

[ArmedProgrammer]

And my point with all of this is, Trump has a tendency to say some silly stuff at times, as a matter of fact he goes out of his way to slip up on an answer to make it headline worthy for free political advertisements. No press is bad press is the name of the game.

But he has repeatedly demonstrated that he will throttle back on a position and clarify if the base is vocal about it.

I trust in the fact that as things progress he will have increasingly better people around him who will help keep him grounded and in the right direction, as it seems to be the direction things have been heading since the start of his campaign. I will always afford him some degree of wiggle room since he's never held elected office and this is his first serious venture into the realm of politics. Never using a teleprompter has its downsides as well.

People thinking he'd end up being some ruthless dictator are buying into his ego a bit too seriously. The highest probability I'm seeing as things go along is that he may end up doing very little of anything, but at least demonstrating that someone from outside of washington can make it into the whitehouse.

Have to remember, there's 3 branches of government, not 1. And for that matter, Trump isn't a "First" anything president. He isn't the first female president, he isn't the first black president... Someone isn't going to be ruining their entire political career to file articles of impeachment should worse come to worst.

And as far as putting refugees in a database and tracking them, we already do that. Maybe he was unaware.

Fair enough, sir. I view his words and lack of judgement in speaking as a heck of a lot worse than "silly". I view it in the "dangerous as hell" category... but hey, I've explained why I'm sensitive to this in posts upthread. No point in belaboring the issue any farther. History and time will have to judge our concerns and see how valid they were.

For the record, I'm less concerned with him turning into a despot than it might have appeared above. I perhaps may have come off as more alarmist than I intended. The far more likely case, in my opinion , is the case where he would be a Populist that loses control. For example - he pops off with a bunch of "silliness" about Muslims. At one end of the spectrum folks like you might consider it "silly". Fair enough. At the other end of the spectrum, someone takes it as permission. As you said above - he will retract it IF A MAJORITY JERK HIS CHAIN about it. What if the majority DON'T?? What if they follow his initial lead and demand that bad things happen to Muslims? Does he follow the majority? Is he even ABLE to back them down at some point?

He may well have not had bad intentions. But he may find himself out of control of a populist tornado of his own creation. Unwitting or not? No one will know... If you are part of the minority at the sharp end of that stick and it's YOUR family that dies or gets sent to an internment camp or ???, the notion that it was not intentional is cold comfort.

For the record - that's why I have a problem with Populists as Leaders. I don't believe that the two are _ever_ equivalent.

I really hope that my concerns and fears are misled. I would love to be wrong.

Bottom line - you and I agree about a lot of things. Probably a lot more than we disagree about. History and time will have to judge our concerns over Senor Trump.

 

[dusty88]

Bug - what about guys like me? Guys that HATE the Witch - but see something very dangerous in Trump. Because he's a small man with a Yuuuge ego. That's not *in and of itself* a problem - a lot of politicians would fit that. But when it rises to the level of say ANYTHING - including fomenting hatred based on race, religion, etc.... THAT is where my line gets drawn. No way in hell can I vote for that.

Pondering Hillary is awful.

But Trump is running a dang close second.

All I can do is hope a pray for a decent third option.

I have to be able to answer my grandkids when they asked how I voted in this election.

whether you are answering your grandkids or just your own choices:

you are only responsible for your own vote, not everyone else's vote

 

[ArmedProgrammer]

whether you are answering your grandkids or just your own choices:

you are only responsible for your own vote, not everyone else's vote

Never claimed otherwise.... I do know a LOT of people are as conflicted as I am (well, WAS) due to the situation. No conflict remaining for me. I won't vote for either one - and I'll work to see that it doesn't come down to (Trump v. Witch) in the General election.

 

[bwframe]

Wonder if the same folks buying into the Trump racist propaganda, promoted by the left, are are same one's that stayed home or threw away their votes allowing the Obama, Donnelly and Hogsett wins?

 

[Jludo]

Wonder if the same folks buying into the Trump racist propaganda, promoted by the left, are are same one's that stayed home or threw away their votes allowing the Obama, Donnelly and Hogsett wins?

Republicans have only themselves to blame putting forth terrible candidates. If you cant put forward a decent nominee you can't expect party followers to fall in line, no matter how terrible the opponent may be.

 

[dusty88]

Sign the petition to ask CNN to include Gary Johnson and Jill Stein in their candidates forum.

https://www.change.org/p/cnn-invite...=signature_receipt&utm_campaign=new_signature

 

[Hiker1911]

The time to talk about forming 3rd party is between election cycles, not seven mos. before a general election.
The establishment, behind closed doors BS (like this week's meeting) makes many want to end an era, and elect someone that is not an establishment type.

BTW, in case you are behind the curve, Trump is not a fascist (authoritarian, totalitarian, or autocrat). It's incendiary to suggest that he is one.

 

[UglyAmerican]

**** Gary Johnson.

 

[Jludo]

The time to talk about forming 3rd party is between election cycles, not seven mos. before a general election.
The establishment, behind closed doors BS (like this week's meeting) makes many want to end an era, and elect someone that is not an establishment type.

BTW, in case you are behind the curve, Trump is not a fascist (authoritarian, totalitarian, or autocrat). It's incendiary to suggest that he is one.

What do you call someone who wants to use all methods of torture and target civilians ?

 

[ArmedProgrammer]

The time to talk about forming 3rd party is between election cycles, not seven mos. before a general election.
The establishment, behind closed doors BS (like this week's meeting) makes many want to end an era, and elect someone that is not an establishment type.

BTW, in case you are behind the curve, Trump is not a fascist (authoritarian, totalitarian, or autocrat). It's incendiary to suggest that he is one.

Respectfully sir, can you please define "incendiary"?

I was the one that had a problem with what Trump was saying. I have been (look at my post history here, please) a ROCK SOLID "vote whoever the R party selects- since we HAVE to defeat the D's " kind of voice here for a LONG time.

I was not a Trump fan - but then he started riding the populist wave. And then he opened his mouth without thinking - and suggested some things that could INCITE A FIRE OF HATRED towards people because of their religion alone. I do have a problem with that. Is he a racist? I don't know - and more importantly I AM NOT SAYING THAT HE IS. Does he open his mouth and talk **** without regard for the consequences? - ABSOLUTELY! And it's that latter populist "open your mouth and spew forth without regard for the impact" that I have had a problem with. THAT is what I mean by "incendiary" . It CAN and will light fires - that travel far beyond what he thinks. His commentary on Muslims qualify as incendiary even if you DON'T see them as racist, fascist or whatever. I am on record as saying that he is a populist that has, by his words proven that he can be driven to fascism. That's my OPINION.

And if I don't like who a party elects as it's head - I will vote however I want even if it's two days before the election, thankyouverykindly.

For the record (again) I'm also on the record as saying that whomever gets elected by the R's SHOULD REPRESENT THEM. And Party shananigans should not be used to thwart the will of the people. If it comes to that, and I can't vote for Trump - then I must look elsewhere . That's MY problem. The Republican Party will have drifted away from me, NOT vice-versa. They will have elected someone whom I cannot support. For reasons that I have laid out.

 

[bwframe]

Is it worth losing our gun rights in your quest to "feel better" about your vote?

 

[BugI02]

If you want to be something more than also-ran 1.x% er's in American politics, this election is opening a possibility.

LP'ers listen up - you can save America and further the cause of Liberty.

So this time around, the D's are putting up The Witch and the R's continue along the current track with The Fascist err... Trump.

If things continue along this path (and no one gets sidetracked, assassinated or otherwise taken out) - how do the L's respond? This is truly the chance of a lifetime.

Many R's HATE the idea of a POPULIST RINO pimp like the Donald pandering his way into office. Many D's (in rare moments of lucid honest) don't want Hillary. BUT THEY BOTH WANT TO WIN - and BADLY.

So what to do? Whip out your Johnson? I think not... If this trend continues - why not draft an ex-R with some gravitas and foreign policy chops away from the R's and run him in this race? Get a pragmatic person that will adhere to mostly libertarian principles of smaller government and watch the R party dissapear into the annals of history. Let the two big parties settle on politics as usual and then stick it to both of them. Do you have a shred of courage to do what it would take? Now's your time to save the nation. Let the R's and D's slug it out with Trump and the Witch. Then draft Huntsman. Been a Republican governor and done well. Check. Been an Ambassador to CHina under Obama. Check. Is a fiscal conservative with a small government approach to things. Check. Every R that has any sense will flock to you. Every D that is not simply a corrupt Union thug or Socialist idealogue will flock to you. And the two "major" parties will stand there wondering what hit them.

Oddly enough the American center _can_ provide the force needed to win. both parties have gone so far to the fringe that this strategy will work.

But do you have the balls to do it?

Why not just infiltrate the convention and when it's thrown wide open after the first ballot, be the best organized most on message unified front and draft Rand?

That should obviate the risk of greasing the skids for a second Clinton presidency. If the groundswell of notTrump notHilary support is as yyyuuugee as you think you should be able to pull it off. If not SD&SU

 

[ArmedProgrammer]

Why not just infiltrate the convention and when it's thrown wide open after the first ballot, be the best organized most on message unified front and draft Rand?

That should obviate the risk of greasing the skids for a second Clinton presidency. If the groundswell of notTrump notHilary support is as yyyuuugee as you think you should be able to pull it off. If not SD&SU

Fair question, Bug... the only thing that keeps me from advocating that is a very strong belief in doing things according to the rule of law. I guess, if a couple of assumptions come to pass - I'd agree with that approach.

1) Trump does not have the clear majority to win by the rules (i.e. First Ballot). If he does, then it's decided. Period. Whether guys like me like it , or not.
2) If it goes to subsequent ballots , whatever the rules that the party has laid down are followed. Period. No crazy shenanigans.

The only way that that scenario could happen is if a) Trump fell short of the first ballot number to win and b) pretty much everyone else united behind ONE candidate. If such a scenario played out - I would likely vote for that candidate - barring any other issues. For example, if everyone in the place fell into line behind say Cruz on a hypothetical second ballot, and he became the nominee - then I would likely vote for him. And I'm just using Cruz as a hypothetical placeholder example. It could be Rand, hypothetically. I daresay that while I would like Rand - Cruz would be in a more likely spot to have it happen.

The key being that I don't want the nomination STOLEN from Trump. If he wins it BY THE RULES OF THE PARTY - then he wins it. If he doesn't get enough on the first ballot, and someone else does on the second (or whatever) ballot - then by definition - THEY WON, and he LOST. But that result (win or lose) must be HONEST for me to give it any credence.

 

[BugI02]

Fair question, Bug... the only thing that keeps me from advocating that is a very strong belief in doing things according to the rule of law. I guess, if a couple of assumptions come to pass - I'd agree with that approach.

1) Trump does not have the clear majority to win by the rules. If he does, then it's decided. Period. Whether guys like me like it , or not.
2) If it goes to a brokered convention , whatever the rules that the party has laid down are followed. Period. No crazy shenanigans.

The only way that that scenario could happen is if a) Trump fell short of the first ballot number to win and b) pretty much everyone else united behind ONE candidate. If such a scenario played out - I would likely vote for that candidate - barring any other issues. For example, if everyone in the place fell into line behind say Cruz on a hypothetical second ballot, and he became the nominee - then I would likely vote for him. And I'm just using Cruz as a hypothetical placeholder example. It could be Rand, hypothetically. I daresay that while I would like Rand - Cruz would be in a more likely spot to have it happen.

The key being that I don't want the nomination STOLEN from Trump. If he wins it BY THE RULES OF THE PARTY - then he wins it. If he doesn't get enough on the first ballot, and someone else does on the second (or whatever) ballot - then by definition - THEY WON, and he LOST. But that result (win or lose) must be HONEST for me to give it any credence.

Agreed. And as much as I like the Rand Paul idea I don't think I could truly advocate it. A bending of the rules that would allow Rand to be drafted (negating the 8 wins stipulation) would also allow a Mitt candidacy or (get me a tongue depressor) even a Jeb! candidacy and I could not support that. The best notTrump hope is Cruz, and Trump may be the only force that could cause the GOPe to coalesce around Cruz but I think the establishment's support for Cruz will be tepid at best and he would have his work cut out for him to get much of his program enacted. I worry about electability if Cruz gets the nod. I think many of the Trump people will be 'meh'. We would gain back some of the #nevertrump peeps but lose some of the people that wanted the sameoldsameold drastically shaken up. The thing I believe is #NeverHitlary should be job #1