The Trump/Republican Primary/General Election Megathread

[PaulF]

Let it go, bug.

There are bigger fish to fry, especially now.

Constant bickering between INGOers becomes personal. When that happens good INGOers become former INGOers.

This road has only one destination...please stop before someone reaches the point of no return.

 

[Tombs]

Let it go, bug.

There are bigger fish to fry, especially now.

Constant bickering between INGOers becomes personal. When that happens good INGOers become former INGOers.

This road has only one destination...please stop before someone reaches the point of no return.

Can't we come together here and realize the ultimate goal is to keep hillary out of office come november instead of constant infighting? Hate Trump all you like, but don't be so down on people who are doing the best they can to keep hillary out of office.

The party and the people have nominated a candidate to get behind. I don't want the supreme court stacked with radical progressive judges who see my rights as nothing more than privileges, and that is ultimately the most important aspect of this election to me.

 

[pudly]

Interesting article written by a Democrat who will be voting for Trump. I don't agree with all his points, but overall I found them good points and well thought out.

I (was a lifer) am a Dem and I’m Voting for Trump. Let’s talk about it… #DemExit

 

[PaulF]

Can't we come together here and realize the ultimate goal is to keep hillary out of office come november instead of constant infighting? Hate Trump all you like, but don't be so down on people who are doing the best they can to keep hillary out of office.

The party and the people have nominated a candidate to get behind. I don't want the supreme court stacked with radical progressive judges who see my rights as nothing more than privileges, and that is ultimately the most important aspect of this election to me.

Alright, Tombs...here's my olive branch. I offer this in good faith. Take it, leave it. Your choice.

Let's cover the ground we can agree on first:

-We don't want HRC as our next president.
-We don't want the supreme court stacked with judges that treat our rights as disposable privileges.
-We don't want to create a situation that leads to full Democratic control of the House and Senate.

...Okay. Are we good so far, at least?

Now,

I understand that the reality of the situation is that our next president is either going to be Trump or HRC.

I understand that you, and the other Trump supporters, believe that Trump is less likely to nominate activist progressives to the court that HRC.

I understand that you believe that Trump will enact policy that is beneficial to American Ideals, or (at the very least) the bulk of the American population.

I understand that you believe that Trump can defeat HRC in the general election.

Do you understand that I believe no such thing?

From my perspective, Trump is no better than HRC. He is not any more likely to nominate Constitutional judges to the bench than HRC. He has a long history of making shady deals that only benefit his interests, so when faced with a decision between MY rights and HIS wants, I believe he will bargain away my rights in a heartbeat. He, like HRC, is a very divisive figure in the public sphere. When he speaks, some people hear "brave truth", but please understand that great many Americans hear ignorant, untenable, unworkable drivel served up to pander to one small group of voters.

-He isn't going to build a wall across the entire southern border, and even if he did it would be the greatest boondoggle of the 21st century. The Mexican drug cartels are sneaking millions of TONS of cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine, and marijuana through existing underground tunnel networks, mule vehicles, hell...submarines. If a wall popped up overnight, human trafficking just becomes one more revenue stream for the cartels. Repeating this "wall" nonsense over and over makes him look downright foolish. Supply and demand. There is a demand for cheap labor here...who do you think is cleaning Trump's hotels right now...

To me, and I imagine millions of others out there, Trump and Clinton are two peas in the same pod. I understand your distaste for Clinton, believe me...I really do. But please understand that I don't honestly think Trump is any better, just because (as of about 2012) he puts an "R" behind his name. I don't trust him to do what he says, because what he says changes from day to day. I don't trust him to do what is right for others, because he has a long history of looking out only for himself.

When faced with a choice between my rights and his interests I do not trust him to choose my rights.

When it comes to the electoral landscape, I believe that Trump solidifies support for on the left, and dissipates support on the right. At the end of the day, on a national level, I honestly believe he is unelectable. I believe that the Trump nomination is necessarily equal to HRC victory in November. Furthermore I believe that if he were to get elected, the backlash would be so great that both houses of congress would fall to full Democratic control in the next midterm election, as opposed to HRC, who is likely to add some seats to both houses for Republicans. I am far more comfortable with the idea of a republican stacked congress and a feckless HRC than I am with a veto-proof Democratic congressional majority and a RINO at the helm...

Tombs, if this guy is your guy...great. Support him. Vote for him...but he is unconscionable to me...just like HRC, and that it why I cannot support either candidate this election.

...that is not in any way "coming down on you".

 

[BugI02]

I know you weren't talking to me, Paul, but I would like to add one idea

You are correct that these are perilous times. Some of us believe that in such a case the times can pick the man rather than the other way around

As far as 'electability', do you think Churchill could have been elected prime minister under any other circumstances than WWII? Do you think U.S.Grant could have been elected commanding general and then president under any other circumstances than the aftermath of the Civil War? Imperfect men who were never the less the right men for the that job at that time

I expect you might find a Grant comparison with Trump more palatable than the Churchill one, but the point is both men rose to the occasion although they would not have been expected to viewed through cold rationality. I can only speak for myself, but I believe Trump has not been tested yet and holds at least some possibility of rising to the occasion. I believe Hillary has been tested many times and been found wanting every time. I have always been looking for a Republican who can win; not will win but can, against Hilary. That that proved to be Trump I think was not anybody's first choice, but it is what it is.

 

[churchmouse]

I will say this from my perspective from watching all this come to a head in my long life.
I am not on board with Trump.
I do believe that HRC will drive to many nails in the coffin for us as a society/nation to recover from. We are still reeling from Bills BS.
Again we are faced with the lesser of 2 evils and HRC is the bigger of the 2.
The evidence is on the table.
The Clintons are on the take and make no bones about it.
Yes, Trump is a "Business" man but in the end he is a successful "Business" man and knows how to run one successfully. Success being the key in all of this.
No knock on anyone's personal beliefs but how in the name of any deity could Hillary even be considered by the electorate in light of what she has not accomplished which would be zero beside her own advancement. She is and always has been all about herself. She could give 2 cents for anything outside of that.
JMHO and vote as you will. It is your's to use.

 

[.45 Dave]

I agree with BugI02 and churchmouse. Trump is a businessman and it turns out that many of the best presidents were not necessarily politicians first. I am not saying that Trump will make a great president or anything of the like, He might be lousy for all I know, but we do know what Hillary wants and the fact that she just chose a VP that is a Bloomberg chump and a strong anti-gun candidate tells us what were in for if she is elected. Besides, we really could use a businessman that will make deals that are in his/our best interest right now. I say lets give him a chance. He certainly is a 2A supporter at the very least. And after what this country has been through and where its at right now, maybe it's time to let someone who is not a Washington insider and is a little rough around the edges have a try at it. He might surprise you.

 

[BugI02]

Amen. I wish I could go to sleep and wake up 8 November 2016, vote, and it would all be over one way or the other

 

[jamil]

Can't we come together here and realize the ultimate goal is to keep hillary out of office come november instead of constant infighting? Hate Trump all you like, but don't be so down on people who are doing the best they can to keep hillary out of office.

The party and the people have nominated a candidate to get behind. I don't want the supreme court stacked with radical progressive judges who see my rights as nothing more than privileges, and that is ultimately the most important aspect of this election to me.

If that were the ultimate goal, then why did you guys insist on nominating a guy who can't beat Hillary? Hmmm? You can't blame the people who don't like Trump for Hillary winning any more than the pro-Romney people can blame his haters for Obama winning. You have to blame yourselves for nominating a candidate who can't gain enough support to beat Hillary.

Any candidate against Hillary should be kicking her ass after Comey's press conference and testimony. Why isn't he? Because many people as passionate about their beliefs as yours, believe that he sucks as much or more than Hillary!

This is the reason people can't come together on a candidate: the party and the people have nominated a douche to compete against a turd. That was essentially the same argument many current Trumpers gave in 2012.

A vote against the douche is a vote for the turd.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Republicans Cheer for Hillary Clinton's Positions When Delivered by Ivanka Trump

http://www.nationalreview.com/artic...m_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=July23McCarthy

For a generation since Ronald Reagan left Washington — that would be the Ronald Reagan who knew that “I’m from the government and I’m here to help” was a punch line — the “conservative” Republican party has sown an incoherent statism that has trouble telling the good guys from the bad guys. On Thursday night came the harvest: The party was formally taken over by an incoherent statist whose “conservatism” is not done justice by scare quotes.

 

[Ericpwp]

Well this sounds like INGO 4 years ago. No one got behind BHO's opponent but feel it's okay to complain about him for four years.

 

[jbombelli]

Who here, and this is a serious question, would rather see Hillary in office than Trump?

 

[jamil]

I know you weren't talking to me, Paul, but I would like to add one idea

You are correct that these are perilous times. Some of us believe that in such a case the times can pick the man rather than the other way around

As far as 'electability', do you think Churchill could have been elected prime minister under any other circumstances than WWII? Do you think U.S.Grant could have been elected commanding general and then president under any other circumstances than the aftermath of the Civil War? Imperfect men who were never the less the right men for the that job at that time

I expect you might find a Grant comparison with Trump more palatable than the Churchill one, but the point is both men rose to the occasion although they would not have been expected to viewed through cold rationality. I can only speak for myself, but I believe Trump has not been tested yet and holds at least some possibility of rising to the occasion. I believe Hillary has been tested many times and been found wanting every time. I have always been looking for a Republican who can win; not will win but can, against Hilary. That that proved to be Trump I think was not anybody's first choice, but it is what it is.

If by "times" you mean circumstances, that's the case with every election. I strongly suspect that you all believe all that because you want it, and not because the evidence supports it. Since Trump became the presumptive nominee I've said that I would likely vote for him because he gets the benefit of the doubt against a sure thing. But after the convention and seeing more of him, I am left less convinced as the doubt about his character fades into more surety that he is a douche running against a turd.

And I am even less convinced by fierce loyalty. I'm sorry, I can't stand that. I have always been skeptical of leaders and I firmly believe that is a healthy thing. Everyone should be fully capable of calling out even the leaders they support, when they say or do something that sucks. So please forgive me if I'm unmoved by people who have shown no ability to be critical of their own candidate.

I agree with BugI02 and churchmouse. Trump is a businessman and it turns out that many of the best presidents were not necessarily politicians first. I am not saying that Trump will make a great president or anything of the like, He might be lousy for all I know, but we do know what Hillary wants and the fact that she just chose a VP that is a Bloomberg chump and a strong anti-gun candidate tells us what were in for if she is elected. Besides, we really could use a businessman that will make deals that are in his/our best interest right now. I say lets give him a chance. He certainly is a 2A supporter at the very least. And after what this country has been through and where its at right now, maybe it's time to let someone who is not a Washington insider and is a little rough around the edges have a try at it. He might surprise you.

If Trump University is any indication of what Trump is as a businessman, I don't think that's all that positive. Trump University was a diploma mill. A scam. That's not the kind of business acumen I find all that beneficial. Now in fairness, I will say Trump is capable of accomplishing great things in business. Jack Welch is a guy I respect. Mostly. He related a story about Trump coming in and finishing a project that was up to that point a failure. So I'll give him that. But to hear Trump's side of that story from the "Art of the Deal" perspective, Trump conned Welch into the deal, promising things he didn't know if he could deliver, but somehow pulled it off in the end, by hook or by crook. That's not how I prefer my presidents to behave.

 

[LPMan59]

if trump loses, the GOP is dead. They will win elections locally and might get control of congress during midterm elections but the fact is that the country is turning blue and if the GOP can't defeat Obama or HRC, then they are completely ineffectual.

 

[foszoe]

, Trump conned Welch into the deal, promising things he didn't know if he could deliver, but somehow pulled it off in the end, by hook or by crook. That's not how I prefer my presidents to behave.

Can you name some politicians that don't promise to deliver on thing they aren't sure they can deliver? Past Presidents? Or pull off shady deals?

I'm not sure there is a great gulf fixed between big business and political deals.

 

[churchmouse]

Well this sounds like INGO 4 years ago. No one got behind BHO's opponent but feel it's okay to complain about him for four years.

Exactly.......I just cringe when I hear the "I am not voting in protest" position.
A non-vote is in fact a protest but who in the hell actually is effected/cares.
We have had horrible choices for so many election cycles it has a numbing effect.
Sit it out, vote 3rd party if you wish. Your right to do so.
Just please keep your pie hole shut if and when the Hildabeast comes to power.

Question.......who on the right could have been put inn the position to run that would have a chance at beating the Clinton war machine. Who.

 

[indiucky]

Question.......who on the right could have been put inn the position to run that would have a chance at beating the Clinton war machine. Who.

Me....It was looking good then things got a little funky during the vetting process.....The '80's and all....

 

[Expat]

Question.......who on the right could have been put inn the position to run that would have a chance at beating the Clinton war machine. Who.

According to the same people that assured us we had to support Romney, McCain and Dole in order to beat the Dems, Jeb Bush was the guy that could win, win, win.

 

[Jimb]

Now, this is douchebaggery. And a firm example of corruption.

Most anything in media politics has become a circus.....with the conventions being the main pep rallies

 

[ATM]

Exactly.......I just cringe when I hear the "I am not voting in protest" position.
A non-vote is in fact a protest but who in the hell actually is effected/cares.
We have had horrible choices for so many election cycles it has a numbing effect.
Sit it out, vote 3rd party if you wish. Your right to do so.
Just please keep your pie hole shut if and when the Hildabeast comes to power.

Question.......who on the right could have been put inn the position to run that would have a chance at beating the Clinton war machine. Who.

I can't think of any reason I'd shut my pie hole regardless of whether or how I vote or who comes to power. Would you care to expand on the reasoning behind your request?