Jump to content

2016 Republican Thread


southsider2k5

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Mar 2, 2016 -> 12:33 PM)
Yeah, I thought that post was a great one, but I think you are severely underscoring those WTA states, with a lot of them being states where Trump is heavily favored. With no one exiting, I see it pretty unlikely Trump loses a good chunk of those states. I also think "winner" momentum is a real thing.

 

I hope to hell you are right, but at this point, I have given up most any hope possible around a quality candidate. I have decided I'm going to have to give Cruz more attention and start to dig more on him to see if their is more than meets the eye. I just think so much of what is wrong in Washington is everyone holing up to their party alliances and no one being willing to actually broker a deal and do real legislation, etc. I see Cruz as a president who will usher a gigantic standstill (unless the repubs have control everywhere, which with what is happening now, I find far more unlikely). Now if someone can actually somehow just get Trump by the jugular and dominate from here on out and win normally, that would clearly allow the party to get back in control of things (but at this point, outside of murder, Trump seems unstoppable).

The problem with this is that Cruz is not the guy who will allow the GOP establishment to take back control. He's hated by the GOP and many of his fellow Senators. He had been planning on running on the track that Trump is since he won his senate seat. Cruz doesn't even work well with other Republicans, let alone with Democrats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Mar 2, 2016 -> 10:36 AM)
The problem with this is that Cruz is not the guy who will allow the GOP establishment to take back control. He's hated by the GOP and many of his fellow Senators. He had been planning on running on the track that Trump is since he won his senate seat. Cruz doesn't even work well with other Republicans, let alone with Democrats.

Which is why I just said I don't see Cruz working well with anyone. I see him being more of the same, if not worse, when it comes to working with others. Unless I'm mistaken, I made the point that nothing would ever get accomplished in a Cruz administration unless repubs had full control of everything. That said, repubs might have to hate him a heck of a lot less now, when the alternative is the Don.

 

I actually think Donald would probably surprise us and end up working more with the democrats than anyone other than Kasich (who is just cut differently and has a demonstrated history of sticking to his guns on certain matters, but also being more than willing to compromise for the good of the country).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there any truth to this NY Times report that Trump indicated the whole talk about a wall, etc, is just talk and never has any intentions of doing it? If so, I'd think that would do him in with his base? Or is this just Cruz pushing something non existent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Mar 2, 2016 -> 12:45 PM)
Is there any truth to this NY Times report that Trump indicated the whole talk about a wall, etc, is just talk and never has any intentions of doing it? If so, I'd think that would do him in with his base? Or is this just Cruz pushing something non existent.

NYT people have said the tape exists, so it's not totally made up. But who knows what he actually said, and the NYT says they won't release unless Trump asks them to.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Mar 2, 2016 -> 07:18 PM)
NYT people have said the tape exists, so it's not totally made up. But who knows what he actually said, and the NYT says they won't release unless Trump asks them to.

New York Post tears into the Times for purposely leaking this in an Editorial Board off the record meeting with Trump, as editorial boards do with candidates. Says they are out to get him and it was unethical to leak this. Why he would meet with the Times board shocks the world as they want Hillary desperately to win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Mar 2, 2016 -> 12:45 PM)
Is there any truth to this NY Times report that Trump indicated the whole talk about a wall, etc, is just talk and never has any intentions of doing it? If so, I'd think that would do him in with his base? Or is this just Cruz pushing something non existent.

 

Welcome to Trump Land. The man talks, but is 100% full of s***. You literally have no idea what his intentions are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ Mar 2, 2016 -> 12:15 PM)
Ha, nothing would "do him in" with his base.

I think if they heard a recording of him saying something like, between me and you, all the wall talk is total bs and I'm just milking these people to get in and than from there, I'll make a real difference and blah blah blah, it would irate his base. Oddly enough, it might make those who can't stand him at all, feel a little better about him (other than the fact that he'd be lying through his teeth to get elected, even more so, than the normal politician).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 2, 2016 -> 03:12 PM)
Welcome to Trump Land. The man talks, but is 100% full of s***. You literally have no idea what his intentions are.

Eh, this is Cruz were talking about. He's lied so much about trump that I doubt anything he says here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Mar 2, 2016 -> 03:13 PM)
I think if they heard a recording of him saying something like, between me and you, all the wall talk is total bs and I'm just milking these people to get in and than from there, I'll make a real difference and blah blah blah, it would irate his base. Oddly enough, it might make those who can't stand him at all, feel a little better about him (other than the fact that he'd be lying through his teeth to get elected, even more so, than the normal politician).

It's probably something closer to everything being negotiable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 3, 2016 -> 11:31 AM)
He is 100% right on pretty much every count. This is the ultimate con job.

 

 

He's absolutely right. Oliver torched him in the same fashion on Sunday. His supporters don't care though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Mar 3, 2016 -> 11:34 AM)
Not sure the establishment could geat more pathetic if they tried. Nevermind, they totally will.

 

 

They should though shouldn't they? He can't win the general. Isn't that the whole point?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Mar 3, 2016 -> 11:35 AM)
They should though shouldn't they? He can't win the general. Isn't that the whole point?

Hes the best shot they have and they know it. It just scares them that they can't control him to be a puppet.

 

And no they shouldn't go like this if they want to stop him. This stuff just fuels trump voters. Trump is playing chess while the establishment is playing checkers.

Edited by Buehrle>Wood
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Mar 3, 2016 -> 11:35 AM)
They should though shouldn't they? He can't win the general. Isn't that the whole point?

 

Yeah, Hillary has to be loving this. She is going to get to run against the biggest empty shirt in the history of American politics. She is running against the ultimate con artist, which is saying something considering she is a part of the Clinton Machine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 3, 2016 -> 11:31 AM)
He is 100% right on pretty much every count. This is the ultimate con job.

 

It's too bad the messenger doesn't exactly ring with fidelity for many voters, but he might for some of the swing voters which is who matters ultimately anyway. I don't see his speech doing much for the Trump faithful, who have decided that he's somehow "more honest" despite lying right in front of them on every topic.

 

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 3, 2016 -> 11:43 AM)
Yeah, Hillary has to be loving this. She is going to get to run against the biggest empty shirt in the history of American politics. She is running against the ultimate con artist, which is saying something considering she is a part of the Clinton Machine.

 

As long as Clinton isn't indicted (which I think is highly unlikely), she has smooth sailing ahead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Mar 3, 2016 -> 11:54 AM)
It's too bad the messenger doesn't exactly ring with fidelity for many voters, but he might for some of the swing voters which is who matters ultimately anyway. I don't see his speech doing much for the Trump faithful, who have decided that he's somehow "more honest" despite lying right in front of them on every topic.

 

 

 

As long as Clinton isn't indicted (which I think is highly unlikely), she has smooth sailing ahead.

 

The great thing for Trump followers is you can literally find any position you want in his speeches. You can hear anything you want in his speeches. If you only listen to his words, and not compare it to his life and record, you can even believe his lines.

 

I will say this with 100% confidence. The one thing I know about Donald Trump is that he does not give a s*** about anyone other than Donald Trump. If someone is expecting him to even do a fraction of what he is saying, they might as well kick themselves in the nuts right now, and get it over with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is the point of the GOP rallying against Trump? They made him sign an agreement the he wouldn't run 3rd party if he failed to get the nomination, but they obviously aren't playing fair. I think if they somehow succeeded, it would lead him to run 3rd party and be a guaranteed loss for the GOP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (The Gooch @ Mar 3, 2016 -> 12:50 PM)
What is the point of the GOP rallying against Trump? They made him sign an agreement the he wouldn't run 3rd party if he failed to get the nomination, but they obviously aren't playing fair. I think if they somehow succeeded, it would lead him to run 3rd party and be a guaranteed loss for the GOP.

The agreement was both ways. Be fair to each other. The GOP hasn't kept up their side of the deal. If it continues, he absolutely should run 3rd party and destroy the gop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...