2016 Republican Thread

[ChiSox_Sonix]

Fox cancels next debate after Trump drops. Has them by the balls I guess.

 

You're such a fanboy.

 

Kasich also dropped out so Fox had to cancel it. Not much of a debate to have Ted Cruz, or anyone else, up there by himself.

[illinilaw08]

I showed the video of his literally disavowing of Duke but I guess that's handwaving away. I found it ridiculous he had to do it every interview. It's gotcha political discussion at its absolute worst. A grand wizard just supported Hillary too but I'm sure she won't be asked about that. And she shouldnt. Stop wasting your breath on these people. This is the reason these discussions go literally nowhere. You're not convincing me and I'm not convincing you here, clearly. I commented on his birtherism the last page back and it really goes hand and hand with everything. You're being played by even giving it attention.

 

I've addressed this Sanders stuff too already like a lot. We're going in circles on everything. I like him. He'd be my second choice. He just has had 0 chance of getting elected and getting threatened by his supporters was a big turnoff for me, but I don't really hold it against him. What I do hold against him was his response to the aftermath of Friday.

 

BW, quick question for you here:

 

As I read your responses, one of the big selling points to you with Trump is that he isn't beholden to special interests and you want to see money move out of politics.

 

There are no current rules that keep money out of politics. In fact, the Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United led to the majority of these PACs and Super PACs.

 

Trump is someone who has benefitted from the lax campaign finance laws. As he likes to continually point out, candidates on both sides of the aisle have curried his favor, seeking his money and influence.

 

Do you honestly think that a Trump Presidency would change campaign finance laws? Do you think Trump would put justices on the Supreme Court who might overturn Citizens United? Wouldn't Trump be a one-off? A billionaire capable of financing his own campaign is an anomaly - it's not something that would alter the system.

 

I guess what I'd like to drill down on is why a Trump Presidency would have any change on the impact of money and special interest in politics generally.

[StrangeSox]

I showed the video of his literally disavowing of Duke but I guess that's handwaving away. I found it ridiculous he had to do it every interview. It's gotcha political discussion at its absolute worst. A grand wizard just supported Hillary too but I'm sure she won't be asked about that. And she shouldnt. Stop wasting your breath on these people. This is the reason these discussions go literally nowhere. You're not convincing me and I'm not convincing you here, clearly. I commented on his birtherism the last page back and it really goes hand and hand with everything. You're being played by even giving it attention.

 

I've addressed this Sanders stuff too already like a lot. We're going in circles on everything. I like him. He'd be my second choice. He just has had 0 chance of getting elected and getting threatened by his supporters was a big turnoff for me, but I don't really hold it against him. What I do hold against him was his response to the aftermath of Friday.

Man that's a lot of hand waving and not addressing anything. You're right, these conversations go nowhere because you've deluded yourself on issue after issue and incident after incident when it concerns trump. Paying attention to trumps s***ty racial politics is "being played", ok.

 

Eta a search of the last page doesn't show any comments on birtherism

Edited March 16, 2016 by StrangeSox

[Buehrle>Wood]

You're such a fanboy.

 

Kasich also dropped out so Fox had to cancel it. Not much of a debate to have Ted Cruz, or anyone else, up there by himself.

 

Blame cnn for burying that.

http://money.cnn.com/2016/03/16/media/dona...-fox/index.html

 

U.S. +

 

 

 

0:00

 

Fox News cancels GOP debate after Donald Trump pulls out

 

March 16 LOS ANGELES

Fox News has canceled its March 21 Republican presidential debate following Donald Trump's decision not to attend, three sources told CNNMoney on Wednesday.

Dan Hayes, the general manager of the Salt Palace Convention Center, which was scheduled to host the debate, said he had "received verbal statements from Fox News" that the debate would no longer be taking place.

Two Fox News sources familiar with the decision confirmed the debate had been canceled.

[Jenksismyhero]

Man that's a lot of hand waving and not addressing anything. You're right, these conversations go nowhere because you've deluded yourself on issue after issue and incident after incident when it concerns trump. Paying attention to trumps s***ty racial politics is "being played", ok.

 

Eta a search of the last page doesn't show any comments on birtherism

 

I don't agree with B>W or his support of Trump, but Christ if this isn't just a typical SS post here. "You don't agree with me therefore you're a deluded irrational moron!" Just call him a bigot and we can all go home.

[StrangeSox]

I don't agree with B>W or his support of Trump, but Christ if this isn't just a typical SS post here. "You don't agree with me therefore you're a deluded irrational moron!" Just call him a bigot and we can all go home.

 

Nah, he's been called out by people all over the political spectrum for posting a combination of nonsense and stuff that simply isn't true regarding trump and his positions. He ignores the numerous corrections and challenges to some of his claims, and he just waives away the rest by insisting it doesn't matter for unexplained reasons. I don't think he's wilfully lying, I think he's convinced himself of the nonsense ie has deluded himself.

 

[Buehrle>Wood]

BW, quick question for you here:

 

As I read your responses, one of the big selling points to you with Trump is that he isn't beholden to special interests and you want to see money move out of politics.

 

There are no current rules that keep money out of politics. In fact, the Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United led to the majority of these PACs and Super PACs.

 

Trump is someone who has benefitted from the lax campaign finance laws. As he likes to continually point out, candidates on both sides of the aisle have curried his favor, seeking his money and influence.

 

Do you honestly think that a Trump Presidency would change campaign finance laws? Do you think Trump would put justices on the Supreme Court who might overturn Citizens United? Wouldn't Trump be a one-off? A billionaire capable of financing his own campaign is an anomaly - it's not something that would alter the system.

 

I guess what I'd like to drill down on is why a Trump Presidency would have any change on the impact of money and special interest in politics generally.

Few things:

 

Yes, I find it ridiculous it takes Trump, a billionaire who has bribed the very politicians he's running against, to do this. The problem though is with politicians accepting money. Trump merely gave it, and has no reason to accept it. The system is completely broken, and Trump, being the foremost expert on it, is the first to admit that.

 

Would Trump be an anomaly? Perhaps. That's why I want him to destroy the Republican party. Connections between corporations and politics would be ruined if he's able to oust the Republican leadership. Those connections would hardly be irreparable so yes, its going to take more than Trump. My hope for Trump is to open the eyes of the voter base and I do believe he's the perfect man to do it. I get people hate his showmanship but it's a huge benefit here. He grabs the attention of absolutely everyone, love him or hate him. Trump has done a great job of calling out Bush, Cruz, Rubio, and now Kasich for their connections but it needs to hit overdrive in the GE. Thanks to Trump, the debates vs Hillary will likely be among the most watched television shows in U.S. history. What better platform than for Trump to come out and tell the world how she took bribes from him as well as expose her as the most calculated political machine of our time.

[Buehrle>Wood]

I don't agree with B>W or his support of Trump, but Christ if this isn't just a typical SS post here. "You don't agree with me therefore you're a deluded irrational moron!" Just call him a bigot and we can all go home.

Ha thanks. I have more posts by far of anyone in here which have almost all come very recently. I try to get to everyone and every post but the overall combativeness certainly makes me less motivated.

[bmags]

And then to blame all of the white mans problems on minorities, and tell the rest of the world to shove off!

 

Trump is a temper tantrum.

 

Being the governor of a 330 million person diverse nation is hard, being governor of the most influential country in the world is harder and more important.

 

You want to change those things, you work on getting a bunch of house/senate/pres candidates that offer to change consitution to prevent that money influence.

 

Removing the leadership doesn't remove their influence, they'll just fund the next groups.

[illinilaw08]

Few things:

 

Yes, I find it ridiculous it takes Trump, a billionaire who has bribed the very politicians he's running against, to do this. The problem though is with politicians accepting money. Trump merely gave it, and has no reason to accept it. The system is completely broken, and Trump, being the foremost expert on it, is the first to admit that.

 

Would Trump be an anomaly? Perhaps. That's why I want him to destroy the Republican party. Connections between corporations and politics would be ruined if he's able to oust the Republican leadership. Those connections would hardly be irreparable so yes, its going to take more than Trump. My hope for Trump is to open the eyes of the voter base and I do believe he's the perfect man to do it. I get people hate his showmanship but it's a huge benefit here. He grabs the attention of absolutely everyone, love him or hate him. Trump has done a great job of calling out Bush, Cruz, Rubio, and now Kasich for their connections but it needs to hit overdrive in the GE. Thanks to Trump, the debates vs Hillary will likely be among the most watched television shows in U.S. history. What better platform than for Trump to come out and tell the world how she took bribes from him as well as expose her as the most calculated political machine of our time.

 

So, let me make sure I understand the argument. Your position is that a Trump presidency would destroy the Republican Party. The establishment are the ones who take money from special interests, and that could create a ripple effect altering the system.

 

If my understanding of your argument is correct, it still doesn't alter the point that it takes millions of dollars to run for office at the federal level, in part because of the way the system is set up. Do you think that Trump would make changes to that system (ie, advocating campaign finance reform or putting justices on the Supreme Court who might overturn Citizens United)? Without that, then even if you are correct and a Trump presidency creates a shock to the system and collapses the entrenched Republican establishment, the money and the special interests are just going to latch on to the next crop in Washington... unless the entire political system is going to be filled with self-supporting billionaires who can finance their own campaigns.

 

That's why I'm struggling with your argument. I'm following what you would like the end result to be. I just don't see how Trump accomplishes that.

 

[Buehrle>Wood]

I mentioned you need more than Trump himself. I get the next group will be the same as the previous one. Trump is merely the starting point, and it's a lot easier to start from the top. Him reeking havoc on both parties isn't likely to exist in a vacuum if he's able to take the presidency.

 

Edit: this was to bmags.

Edited March 16, 2016 by Buehrle>Wood

[StrangeSox]

But you still haven't explained how corporate influence actually goes away, and you don't seem to understand why this model of trumps is limited to his particular circumstances.

 

He can self fund his campaign because he is a billionaire. He started with decades of name recognition and media prominence. He's gotten billions in free media coverage already.

 

How does this translates to any other presidential candidate, let alone Senate, house, Governor, state and local races? Campaigning is hard, grinding work that requires dedicated staff and volunteers and money to pay for advertising, rallies, gotv efforts etc. Trump has been able to short circuit that, but again that's because he's trump.

 

If you're concerned about an oligarchy, the last thing you should be supporting is a campaign model that only billionaires can afford.

Edited March 16, 2016 by StrangeSox

[StrangeSox]

And then to blame all of the white mans problems on minorities, and tell the rest of the world to shove off!

 

Trump is a temper tantrum.

 

Being the governor of a 330 million person diverse nation is hard, being governor of the most influential country in the world is harder and more important.

 

You want to change those things, you work on getting a bunch of house/senate/pres candidates that offer to change consitution to prevent that money influence.

 

Removing the leadership doesn't remove their influence, they'll just fund the next groups.

 

This one neat trick to topple corporate influence that politicians hate!

[Buehrle>Wood]

So, let me make sure I understand the argument. Your position is that a Trump presidency would destroy the Republican Party. The establishment are the ones who take money from special interests, and that could create a ripple effect altering the system.

 

If my understanding of your argument is correct, it still doesn't alter the point that it takes millions of dollars to run for office at the federal level, in part because of the way the system is set up. Do you think that Trump would make changes to that system (ie, advocating campaign finance reform or putting justices on the Supreme Court who might overturn Citizens United)? Without that, then even if you are correct and a Trump presidency creates a shock to the system and collapses the entrenched Republican establishment, the money and the special interests are just going to latch on to the next crop in Washington... unless the entire political system is going to be filled with self-supporting billionaires who can finance their own campaigns.

 

That's why I'm struggling with your argument. I'm following what you would like the end result to be. I just don't see how Trump accomplishes that.

I'll address this a lot further in another post but I've spent way too much time in this thread today so I'll take a bit of a break. Yes, I expect him to do everything in his power to change campaign finance reform. He's got an ugly, personal vendetta against super pacs and I doubt he suddenly forgets that if he were to take office. I think the rest of the disconnect here involves not acknowledging that in this hypothetical Trump will be the President of the United States. That makes him the de facto leader of the Republican party or whatever it is by that point. This is perhaps more key than any appointment or piece of legislation. Pacs/Corporations/Donors will still be at odds with the man, and as a leader, it should have ripple effects. I'll get into why into another post but I just don't see the Donald Trump movement ending at one guy especially when he's the most powerful person in the world.

[Big Hurtin]

The ironic part of a Trump presidency is that the most disappointed will be the ones who vote for him. The rest of us expect that he'll be a failure. Watching those goobers chant "build that wall" just has me shaking my head. Yeah, he's going to get Mexico to pay for a f***in' wall, suuure.

[greg775]

Sure. I'll start with the false narrative that Trumps supporters are all redneck white trash, or whatever idea is being pushed around here. The polls show differently (hes won across all demos), so I think people just get confused on how vocal his supporters are. One of Trumps slogans mentions the silent majority supporting him. Theres Probably something to that. I can think of  at least 2 other prominent Soxtalk members who I'm 95% sure support Trump but won't say it. Easy to see why. So far I've been referred to at least indirectly as "retarded", "white trash" "racist" "uneducated" "coward" etc and thats just in the last few pages alone. I don't blame them for not wanting to be on the receiving end of that. I feel I've been a good sport about it, as I cant help but laugh it off. You know how you could laugh at people who said Obama was the anti-christ and would bring us 500 years of darkness? Now it's the same from the otherside. First Trump was Hitler, then he was the KKK, then Mussollini. Just last night CNN compared him to Fidel Castro.

 

Anyways, onto why I support him. I read The Art of the Deal way back when. Terrific, terrific book. It's funny, his whole campaign strategy is laid out in there. You'd think his opponents and detractors would simply give it a read and maybe, just maybe they can take him down. It gives great insight to who he is as a person. Reading a book is hardly the reason I support him now. Just the opposite actually for a time (particularly in 2012). I saw him as a showman who'd do anything to grab his own headlines to the detriment of the party. Now he still is that, but I've learned to appreciate it since the people whose political careers he is ruining are not good people and certainly don't have our best interests in mind.

 

Trump really came onto the scene for me politically about 2 years ago when he came out and exposed TPP for what it was: a trade deal negotiated in secrecy that benefits absolutely no one in the US other than the top line of big businesses while doing nothing but hurting the American workforce. It sort of exposed to me the idea that America has basically become a corporate oligarchy. The politicians in charge do not care about who they are meant the serve. Instead, they're all basically puppets, with every word out of their mouths carefully manufactured by whatever money is funding them. From TPP to Obamacare, nothing is getting passed unless the powers at be basically write it themselves.

 

So shouldn't  I find it ridiculous that the solution to this problem is to elect a man worth 6 billion dollars? Of course I do. But that's where we are right now. Better him than someone who is taking millions each from Comcast, Google, Soros, Koch Bros Goldman Sachs, CBS, etc. Having self interest is better than corporate interest. There are reasons every billionaire big-wig, including his past friends, and media source hate the man more than anything. They fear that, finally, a man they can't control is about to take over.

 

I truly believe the single most important issue of our time is the amount of money in politics and Trump can be the first step towards solving that. I'm sure you'll say, well he can't do it alone, one election wont change anything, and that's very true. It is why it's very important he destroys the Republican party en route to the White House. He's doing a great job of it already.

 

I'm also tired of the neocon foreign policy that has dominated Washington for 16+ years now and has caused more problems than solutions. Under Clinton, I'd imagine that would continue. People like to talk about what the president can and can't do. You may hear "how much damage could Trump really do?" I of course don't think he will do much damage, but this is one area I believe he can change basically overnight. Most other things he wants to change will admittedly be tough.

 

Few other smaller things:

 

-Planned Parenthood: Not that my vote would ever take this into consideration, but  my god, he has such a refreshing and shockingly simple "solution" to this controversy than whatever the hell other Republicans are trying to pull.

 

-Calling for lower taxes on the middle and lower class while closing corporate loopholes. Cool with me.

 

-Audit the fed: lol they'll never let him do this.

 

-Basically supports a different version of Universal healthcare to replace Obamacare

 

-Despite all the hilarious things he called Rosie O'Donnell, he has a lot better track record dealing with women's issues than anyone else on the Republican side.

 

Theres more but this is too long anyways and you've probably quit reading by now.

 

I will say this. Every time I hear Trump I like what he says. I have said I'm not sure I'd vote for him because of the comparisons to Hitler with his fan support out of control. His fans kinda scare me. But I do like Trump and his style.

[RockRaines]

So his base is in line with people who voted in 2012? I imagine that's everyone's base because that's the American voting base. 53% of voters didn't graduate college. 41% in 2012 made less than 50k which is actually more than the Newsweek poll I read, which had 33% of Trump voters making less than 50k. Most of these national polls right now are pretty ridiculously inaccurate and outdated though so I won't even use that. I'd look at state by state exit polling if you want to try and tell a story here.

The polls I read were weeks ago and it's ok if that's your base, you just cannot accept it. Trump is making huge waves based on his base being angry and not really caring about how things are actually going to get done. It's worked in politics before.

[NorthSideSox72]

Few things:

 

Yes, I find it ridiculous it takes Trump, a billionaire who has bribed the very politicians he's running against, to do this. The problem though is with politicians accepting money. Trump merely gave it, and has no reason to accept it. The system is completely broken, and Trump, being the foremost expert on it, is the first to admit that.

 

Would Trump be an anomaly? Perhaps. That's why I want him to destroy the Republican party. Connections between corporations and politics would be ruined if he's able to oust the Republican leadership. Those connections would hardly be irreparable so yes, its going to take more than Trump. My hope for Trump is to open the eyes of the voter base and I do believe he's the perfect man to do it. I get people hate his showmanship but it's a huge benefit here. He grabs the attention of absolutely everyone, love him or hate him. Trump has done a great job of calling out Bush, Cruz, Rubio, and now Kasich for their connections but it needs to hit overdrive in the GE. Thanks to Trump, the debates vs Hillary will likely be among the most watched television shows in U.S. history. What better platform than for Trump to come out and tell the world how she took bribes from him as well as expose her as the most calculated political machine of our time.

Not going to go full-parse, but on the bolded... you really think this corporate magnate who's known for gaming the system is going to somehow do damage to the influence corporate America has on politics? Because it seems clear to me he'd do the opposite.

 

[southsider2k5]

Not going to go full-parse, but on the bolded... you really think this corporate magnate who's known for gaming the system is going to somehow do damage to the influence corporate America has on politics? Because it seems clear to me he'd do the opposite.

 

This is literally the biggest draw dropper about the Trump bandwagon. How in the world would people really believe him when he talks about changing the things that literally made him rich.

[bmags]

draw dropper?

[southsider2k5]

draw dropper?

 

Ha. Jaw, not draw.

[NorthSideSox72]

Ha. Jaw, not draw.

Maybe he dropped his drawers.

 

[southsider2k5]

Maybe he dropped his drawers.

 

Always a real possibility.

[MexSoxFan#1]

...

Done in by predictive text, you don't seriously think I don't know the difference between you're and your, do you?

 

OTOH, analysts across all political spectrums do agree on something...that a large segment of Trump supporters aren't educated and he's attracting the lowest common denominator. Explains why his rallies are often times rowdy and violent. The same isn't happening with Clinton, Sanders, Cruz, Kasich and before he dropped out, Rubio nor any of the other candidate's rallies...coincidence? No.

[StrangeSox]

PBS Newshour story on first time Trump voters/volunteers featured this woman: