Jump to content

No, Not Trump, Not Ever


Draggingtree

Recommended Posts

SrWoodchuck

You Play the Game to Win

 

The sole purpose of a political party in a representative republic is to choose and support candidates that can win elections. After eight years of Obama the 2016 election has become extraordinarily important and who the Republicans choose as their presidential nominee must win in November. Therefore, it is time for a proverbial “Dutch Uncle” talk without the usual rancor, meaningless accusations, vile epithets and unthinking loyalty to any one candidate.

 

In 2012 approximately 127 million Americans voted in the presidential election (in 2008 there were nearly 130 million). It is generally estimated that between 130 million and 132 million will vote this year in a nation with ever changing demographics and voting patterns. Donald Trump is the current leader and odds on favorite to win the Republican nomination and challenge Hillary Clinton. As of today what are Trump’s unvarnished chances to win in November?

 

In 2012, 53% of the voting electorate was made up of women. However, in 2008 women accounted for 54%. With the potential interest generated by having the first women ever nominated for president, it is estimated that in 2016 the female vote percentage will be higher than the 2008 level or 55% of all voters. Among women Trump presently records an astounding 73% negative rating (only 27% of women have a favorable opinion of Trump). In 2012 Romney won 44% of the total female vote (Romney lost women by 11 percentage points) but at present Trump is currently losing to Hillary among women by 23 percentage points. Just to get back to the level of Romney in 2012 will be a herculean and in all likelihood an impossible task considering his astronomically high unfavorable rating. It is projected that the male vote in 2016 will be about 45% of those voting. In 2012 Romney won 52% of that group. In an astonishing turn of events Trump is viewed unfavorably by 57% of men (a first for a Republican in many years of polling). It will, therefore, be a very difficult task, considering the changing racial makeup of the electorate, for Trump to get to the same level as Romney in 2012.Scissors-32x32.png

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/04/you_play_the_game_to_win.html

 

I realize that this thread is a place to vent your anger over the "choice" we've been given; it is also in a sense, a factor of the self-fulfilling prophecy of failure that Republicans seem to embrace over the unity needed to finally win the Presidency. These polls have always been so accurate that we could plan our lives around them. Never wrong. In fact, that's why Karl Rove is still undefeated in his prognostications about winning. We have a "pig in a poke." Not the best looking pig, but it will still be bacon, if we want it to be. Progressives made up their minds after losing during the Gore & Kerry elections...to never lose again...and do whatever it takes to hold power. We lost 2012 by just a few million votes in key areas...because some Republicans petulantly decided to stay home...because Mitt wasn't their ideal candidate. The Progs have Killary & a Commie for goodness sake! Those two are either evil in the flesh or insane...or both! We're one Supreme away from losing the Republic! People keep expecting a Savior to arise in the ranks that will unify the opposition to all that's wrong with the changes that Progs have dropped on America & plan on continuing if they win in November. It's not happening. We don't think about electing a Congress that has the huevos to do what is right & blunt a marginal pResident, whether there is an R or a D after their names.This election is either won or lost in our own minds...so self-fulfilling losing polls are just our justification to abdicate our responsibility to the American Republic & our children & grandchildren. After November, it is too late...and we'll just have to deal with the consequences, no matter how bad. In this mix, we also have to look at the damage done to America in the world. How long before China or Russia start dictating where America can go & what we can do? The weakness of Progressive policy is everywhere! There is no economy. We can't even get out of our own way in foreign policy. Trade is laughable...we don't produce a product that the world wants...and we're giving away our wealth at home, to people that would rather not work...and abroad, to people that openly say that they'll kill us.

 

Should we not be finding ways to get someone other than evil incarnate & insanely stupid, re-elected to rule over Americans...and instead be finding ways to control & direct a man, who...far, far from perfect...will address some of the necessary changes that need to be taken care of? The economy, foreign policy, the military, Supreme Court nominees, the unnecessary, partisan & dictatorial regulatory agencies that are strangling our economy & cutting away our freedoms. At the very least, stop the redistribution of wealth...to individuals & governments that are parasitic & malignant. Will Killary or the Commie do this? Might Trump? Sorry for the rant. I think Trump is far from perfect. He's not my choice...but out of the other choices being laid out...he's not a continued death to the Constitutional Republic. JMO

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Poll: Nearly a Quarter of Voters Wouldn’t Participate in a Trump-Clinton Matchup

 

Nearly a quarter of voters say they either wouldn’t vote at all or would cast their ballot for a third party candidate if the general election comes down to Trump v. Clinton, according to new Rasmussen Reports national survey.

 

But 16% say they would vote for some other candidate if the presidential election comes down to those two, while six percent (6%) would stay home. Only two percent (2%) are undecided given those options. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

Still, the picture appears to be improving for both candidates. In early March, 49% of voters told us they would definitely vote against Trump if he is the presidential nominee of the Republican Party, but nearly as many (42%) said they would definitely vote against Clinton if she is the Democratic Party’s nominee.

Trump is more toxic within his own party than Clinton is in hers. If Trump is the Republican nominee, 16% of GOP voters say they would choose a third-party candidate, while five percent (5%) would stay home. Sixty-six percent (66%) would vote for Trump, but 10% would vote for Clinton instead.Scissors-32x32.png

 

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/leahbarkoukis/2016/04/29/poll-nearly-a-quarter-of-voters-wouldnt-participate-in-a-trumpclinton-matchup-n2155159

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SrWoodchuck

Andrea Tantaros booted from Fox News (for supporting Trump)

http://iotwreport.com/andrea-tantaros-booted-from-fox-news/

 

tantaros-.jpg

Seen by many as the veritable pin-up girl for every conservative, red blooded, American male, the Fox News Channel (FNC) has at least for the time being dropped one of the more popular on air personalities. As reported by Josh Feldman of the Mediaite news portal, and also by Chris Ariens of TVNewser, both on Apr. 27, 2016, fan favorite Andrea Tantaros has at least for now been taken off the network's schedule.

 

Born Andreana Kostantina Tantaros to a Greek immigrant father and an Italian-American mother, the girl who was raised with a strong work ethic and even a stronger love of country was no stranger to controversy during her six years at Fox News. Yet as cited, FNC has released the following rather terse announcement to TVNewser, “Issues have arisen regarding Andrea’s contract, and Fox News Channel has determined it best that she take some time off. She is still under contract with the network.”

 

Initially hired as a political contributor in 2010, Tantaros' quick wit and keen intellect saw her as a frequent guest on Red Eye with Greg Gutfeld and The Five. Eventually, she was a full time panelist on the everything politics noontime show Outnumbered. Tantaros had quite the reputation as a hard core conservative who certainly wasn't afraid to voice her opinion.

 

While not cited by FNC as a reason for her extended vacation, Tantaros recently claimed during a taping of Outnumbered that certain GOP Establishment-types were coming down hard on her for supporting Donald Trump; "They have been doing this. Specifically, Charles Cooke, who is a writer for National Review, he tweeted out that I should give my job to somebody else. Also, I saw a tweet, it was a meme by Kevin Williamson of National Review trying to make me seem stupid. There’s a girl talking about biorhythms, or something. So I’ve gotten my fair share as well from folks on the right and the left and in the media calling me stupid and Trump supporters as well… Exactly I should give up my job according to men in the Republican Party."

 

Via iOTWReports

Link to comment
Share on other sites

clearvision

Governor Pence of Indiana seems to have been really enthusiastic about "having" to endorse Cruz....

 

“I like and respect all three of the Republican candidates in the field,” Pence said. “I particularly want to commend Donald Trump, who I think has given voice to the frustration of millions of working Americans with a lack of progress in Washington, D.C.”

 

“I am also particularly grateful that Donald Trump has taken a strong stand for Hoosier jobs when we saw jobs of the Carrier company abruptly announce leaving Indiana. Not for another state, but for Mexico. I’m grateful. I’m grateful for his voice in the national debate.”

 

“I’ve come to my decision about who I’m supporting, and I’m not against anybody.”

 

“But I will be voting for Ted Cruz in the upcoming Republican primary.”

 

 

Slate

 

Now there is an endorsement you can run with...

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why Pro-Trump Conservative Media Should Worry

 

I didn’t give up on print newspapers even when the web starting delivering all the news I needed to my laptop.

 

I kept buying the daily paper, tucking it under my arm and taking it everywhere I went that day. Sure, I could find it all online, but I loved the feel of the paper in my hands. It also connected me to my early days as a newspaper reporter, eager to read my colleagues’ work.

 

Not anymore.

 

Now, when I see the newspaper on our front lawn, cocooned in its pristine orange wrapper, I just keep on walking. I'll pick it up later. Maybe.

 

What day is recycling again?

 

Consider that a warning to conservative media outlets serving as Donald Trump’s de facto campaign arm. You’re destroying habits that have been in places for years. In some cases, decades.

 

Our behavioral tics are changing more rapidly than ever. Remember how we used to set aside time to see a favorite show? Now, we watch what we watch, when we wanna watch it, with no patience for any other way.

 

SPONSORED

 

This phenomenon extends to news-consumption habits. There are always more places to click, listen or absorb the headlines, particularly from right-leaning outlets. A habit change can be simply changing a bookmark on your web browser.

For roughly 25 years if I was near a radio from noon to 3 p.m. I turned on "The Rush Limbaugh Show." I first heard Limbaugh through my dad. We’d sit in the car together, wolfing down Sabrett hot dogs and listening to “talent … on loan … from Gawd.”Scissors-32x32.png

 

https://pjmedia.com/trending/2016/04/29/why-pro-trump-conservative-media-should-worry/

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Geee We have not subscribed to the local liberal fish wrapper for years.

 

Several years ago they would periodically drop a freebie on our drive and follow-up with a call asking if we'd like to subscribe. I told them to stop calling and stop leaving the paper because I couldn't stand their leftist views. It worked... so now I raid the "weekly specials" newspaper at the grocery when I need kindling.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why Pro-Trump Conservative Media Should Worry

 

I didn’t give up on print newspapers even when the web starting delivering all the news I needed to my laptop.

 

I kept buying the daily paper, tucking it under my arm and taking it everywhere I went that day. Sure, I could find it all online, but I loved the feel of the paper in my hands. It also connected me to my early days as a newspaper reporter, eager to read my colleagues’ work.

 

Not anymore.

 

Now, when I see the newspaper on our front lawn, cocooned in its pristine orange wrapper, I just keep on walking. I'll pick it up later. Maybe.

 

What day is recycling again?

 

Consider that a warning to conservative media outlets serving as Donald Trump’s de facto campaign arm. You’re destroying habits that have been in places for years. In some cases, decades.

 

Our behavioral tics are changing more rapidly than ever. Remember how we used to set aside time to see a favorite show? Now, we watch what we watch, when we wanna watch it, with no patience for any other way.

 

SPONSORED

 

This phenomenon extends to news-consumption habits. There are always more places to click, listen or absorb the headlines, particularly from right-leaning outlets. A habit change can be simply changing a bookmark on your web browser.

For roughly 25 years if I was near a radio from noon to 3 p.m. I turned on "The Rush Limbaugh Show." I first heard Limbaugh through my dad. We’d sit in the car together, wolfing down Sabrett hot dogs and listening to “talent … on loan … from Gawd.”Scissors-32x32.png

 

https://pjmedia.com/trending/2016/04/29/why-pro-trump-conservative-media-should-worry/

 

 

From The Comments

 

Trump support isn't about Trump, it's about reminding the politicians who they work for. Only voting for an outsider can do that, and Trump's the only outsider. Even if he turns out to be a terrible president, his election will have the politicians looking nervously over their shoulders, which is what we need.

 

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

In other words....

"I'm mad as hell and I'm not gonna take it anymore"

You average Trumper

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Valin @NCTexan Reminds me of the article that I posted a few weeks back about Trump and getting rid of the raccoons. I think I posted one of them this morning on the Porchwink.png

 

Yes, you did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

saveliberty

I can't see myself being able to vote for anyone. I see all five major candidates as variations of the same. The good news is that i am in Massachusetts and my vote doesn't count anyway.

 

Donald Trump says some appalling things, but at the end of the day, no one remembers that the convention was the place that electable candidates were chosen. At this point, if he doesn't get the delegates, voters will be outraged.

 

As I said, the good news for all who have a candidate is that my vote does not matter.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

SrWoodchuck

Kirk-2016-copy.jpg?zoom=1.5&resize=448%2

 

@Valin! Only old guys like me would understand that actor & that reference. Millennial's look at that and say, "Hey what's that PriceLine dude doing in a doorman's jacket?" Shatner is one of my heroes...not for his roles, but because he refuses to become irrelevant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Art of the Con: the Trump U Fraud Case

 

Scissors-32x32.pngNew York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman on Sunday rejected suggestions that his office’s case against presidential candidate Donald Trump’s defunct “Trump University” was at all political.

 

“This is a straightforward fraud case. We never had any idea in 2013 the guy was going to run for president,” Schneiderman said on John Catsimatidis’ “Cats Roundtable” program on AM 970. “This is not a political case. This just a case where a lot of New Yorkers were ripped off.”

 

“There were thousands of folks who thought they were going to learn from real estate experts who were handpicked by Trump and that they would learn his personal secrets,” Schneiderman said. “Thousands of people (who) paid as much as $35,000 to $45,000.”Scissors-32x32.png

 

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/05/the_art_of_the_con_the_trump_u_fraud_case.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Donald Trump Is the Quintessential 'Establishment' Candidate

 

Every four years, conservative Republicans get excited at the prospect of nominating a true believer, and every four years, they find themselves outmaneuvered by a moderate with high name recognition and serious difficulties differentiating himself from Democrats on major issues. That moderate candidate generally sweeps up the nominating contest with a strong showing in the more liberal Northeast, states like Connecticut, Delaware, and New York.

 

After real estate tycoon Donald Trump won those states in the "Acela primary," media outlets and Republican operatives started accepting his [rather quite false] declaration that he is the "presumptive nominee." These very actions led Erick Erickson to say that Trump's major challenger, Ted Cruz, must have some serious wind behind him. Erickson noted that the reports of Trump's inevitable nomination "read not so much defeatist as suppressive." Could this be because Cruz has an increasing chance at winning Indiana, after Governor Mike Pence's endorsement?

 

Indeed, the attacks against Cruz have strained credulity. Former House Speaker John Boehner actually called the Texas senator "Lucifer in the flesh" this week. At the same time, Boehner noted that Trump was his golfing buddy, and fit in some praise for Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders. This led U.S. Senator Mike Lee to say, "Donald Trump is the establishment."Scissors-32x32.png

 

https://pjmedia.com/election/2016/04/29/donald-trump-is-the-quintessential-establishment-candidate/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Daniel Pipes

(Snip)

Opposing Trump goes without saying; but whom to support? (To be clear, we are talking about my personal support, unconnected to the non-profit I head.) Other than Trump, I could have endorsed any of the original 17 Republicans (yes, even Chris Christie). But because the field was so large and confused (remember when Scott Walker led the pack?), I hung back, waiting for the emergence of a clear alternative to Trump.

 

Senator Cruz clearly became that alternative when Marco Rubio withdrew.

 

(Snip)

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where Would Trump Be If He Had Run as What He Is: the Amnesty Candidate?

 

One of the great ironies of the 2016 campaign is that Donald Trump, who has run as the immigration scourge, is actually the amnesty candidate.

 

Trump has expressly vowed to give legal status to millions of illegal aliens. For any other candidate, such a promise would have been the campaign death knell. To compare, John Kasich -- who is openly pro-amnesty -- has lost 38 of 39 primaries (the sole exception being his own state) and has never been a plausible contestant. When it comes to Trump, however, it seems that the all-important amnesty fine-print of his immigration position has been overlooked. This is no doubt due to his consciously controversial rhetoric: his fixation about building a wall on the Mexican border, his oft-repeated commitment to mass-deportation of illegal aliens, his disparaging comments about Mexicans, and his proposed moratorium on Muslim immigration.

 

Yet, Trump is the amnesty candidate. What’s more, the amnesty component of his immigration plan is the only part that has a realistic chance of happening.

 

Trump is not going to build his wall, much less make Mexico pay for it, as he has insisted our southern neighbor will do. Quite apart from the fact that much of the border is not suitable terrain for wall construction, his wall would be astronomically more expensive to build than he has estimated, and in any event, Democrats and many Republicans in Congress would block funding for it. (To be clear: I favor construction of walls and/or fencing where practical; but a wall is only one component, and not nearly the most critical one, of what must be a multi-faceted strategy if we are to be serious about border security.)Scissors-32x32.png

 

https://pjmedia.com/andrewmccarthy/2016/05/02/where-would-trump-be-if-he-had-run-as-what-he-is-the-amnesty-candidate/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

clearvision

Looks like Trump will be the nominee, if based on delegates at convention. Should take all delegates in Indiana and dominating 54 to 34 to 9. Rest of the states look strong for him barring some massive meltdown.

 

Arguments about majority and plurality also seems to be fading as Trump is getting majority once again and in a state that Cruz thought would be more favorable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, Not Trump, Not Ever !!!!!!

 

 

I am sad just for the party, but truly truly sad for our country.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • 1711649902
×
×
  • Create New...