ADDED: Whoa! Sanders is going to beat Hillary?
AND: CNN talk is all about Trump but the big news is Hillary's humiliation.
AND: And Cruz slinks off.
AND: Horns emerge from the head of Donald Trump:
May 3, 2016
Polls have closed in Indiana, Trump already declared the winner.
Let's talk about it.
ADDED: Whoa! Sanders is going to beat Hillary?
AND: CNN talk is all about Trump but the big news is Hillary's humiliation.
AND: And Cruz slinks off.
AND: Horns emerge from the head of Donald Trump:
ADDED: Whoa! Sanders is going to beat Hillary?
AND: CNN talk is all about Trump but the big news is Hillary's humiliation.
AND: And Cruz slinks off.
AND: Horns emerge from the head of Donald Trump:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
313 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 313 of 313Chuck is working up to campaigning for Hillary.
Poor Carly. All dressed up and her date cancelled...
http://althouse.blogspot.com/2016/01/hillary-clintons-lead-over-sanders.html?showComment=1452539944462&m=1#c701211229117333909
Months
That's 'cause they're the ones who still give a shit.
You misspelled "snit".
You misspelled projection.
"Chuck is working up to campaigning for Hillary."
Or Trump, Hillary's financier.
Cruz supporter here. I'll vote for Trump in November, mainly for the possibility that he will follow through on his promise to appoint conservatives to the Supreme Court. Plus, I suppose, there's a chance he'll surround himself with some sensible advisors and not be as bad on policy as Hillary or Bernie, who will stock the Court with nutjobs.
Vicki fromPasadena
You are mostly right except Trump is a grown up with no taste for towing the PC line. He is to the right of Hillary but just barely. Unlike Hillary he has never gotten anybody killed although he has burned a few investors who would probably choose losing money to death. Made more than that rich. He is close to Bernie on a lot of issues. A pragmatist. Laugh all you like but he will crush Mrs. Clinton is she does not expire before the election. She is lower energy than Jeb. LOL.
Birches said...
It's going to be Boehner.
Boehner probably would be a good choice, much like Biden was for Obama. Someone who knows how to get things done in Congress. And, they are already color coordinated.
Phil 3:14: "Must It always be about demonizing your opponent?"
I believe that those, like garage mahal, who cheered the abuse of state power against political opponents should be strongly opposed and I'm sorry your delicate sensibilities treats that opposition as "demonizing".
As for the lefts long march thru the institutions, does your opposition to Trump now require you to pretend that long march did not happen?
Beyond that, what the heck are you blathering about?
ARM
I really hope that he does not want to "get things done in Congress." We ave gotten way way too much done. We need to get some things undone.
Now we just need the FBI investigation of Hillary to wrap up a few weeks before the Dem convention, and we'll have Trump versus Biden. It'll be a hair-plug-a-palooza.
It's the whoremaster vs the whore. 99% of the time I would side with the whore, but Hillary is whoring the power entrusted to her, so it's different this time.
Trump and Newt is the ticket. And Callista.
victoria: "I think its funny that the Republicans are going to end up with, not a principled conservative, but a liberal who is almost more liberal than Hillary."
It one fell swoop victoria blows up every dem talking point about Trump and I'm betting she didn't even notice.
April Apple wins and I will shut up now:
"Trump-Sheen 2016."
Michael said...
I really hope that he does not want to "get things done in Congress."
You don't think corporate tax reform would be a good idea?
Xmas: "Now we just need the FBI investigation of Hillary to wrap up a few weeks before the Dem convention, and we'll have Trump versus Biden. It'll be a hair-plug-a-palooza."
Trump does not have hair plugs.
So, other than that, great observation.
ARM: "You don't think corporate tax reform would be a good idea?"
Not specific enough.
The Trump women behind him are fab.
You can tell they love the gays. The gays dress them and apply their makeup and accoutrements.
They shop in NYC and the gays tell them what is hot and they are grateful.
The republican party and it's former policies are now dead.
Good riddance.
Trump will be a new and abs fabulous republican!
Gays, transgender bathrooms, and support for Planned Parenthood. Making America Great Again!
NYC values will be a nice and fascinating contribution to the southern confederacy that now dominates the republican party.
Being a republican will now mean urban, fab, gay friendly and East Coast....finally!
Welcome to the 21st century republicans and we are thrilled you have joined the coastal elites!
And your elite east coast venues (fox news, drudge, fatbag) showed you the way.
Keep listening stupids!
What I was hoping Senator Cruz would do is suspend his campaign and tell all his supporters to vote for the only Republican left in the race, Governor Kasich.
That would have been impressive!
And as strategy it might be brilliant.
Crux doesn't have principles; he has dogma. Two different things.
On paper, Cruz was my candidate. Unfortunately, every other thing about him was very creepy. Among other things, in several senate hearings, he came across as a blowhard. Like with Obama, "everyone" says Cruz is smart, but, like with Obama, I never saw it.
I think a Trump-Kasich ticket is likely. I know, I know, Kasich has said "no way," but that's what they all say until they say "sure!" Kasich is a governor with congressional experience (something Trump has said he would look for in a VP) who polls well against Hillary and, according to the media narrative during this campaign, is the "sensible" Republican. And he's from Ohio.
@Phil 3:14 I'll give you NY, Conn and MA, but remind you in other key contests in PA the R's were only 100,000 votes back, in Ohio the Rs got 2 million vs D 1.2, FL the R count was 2.3 million vs D 1.6 million and VA where the Rs were 1.015 million vs D 783K. Looks a bit like a horse race to me.
Titus regales us with condescension and bigotry.
Tax revenue runs no higher than 20% of GDP. If the federal government is pared back to that level, I would be thrilled. The other option is eventual default and ruin.
Joe, Cruz was a Supreme Court law clerk. You don't get to be a Supreme Court clerk unless you're smart.
The Kasich pick makes so much sense. Hope Trump considers it. He has to be careful to not appear to be pandering by picking Susanna Maritnez, Rubio, or Tim Scott.
Time to rally around the Governor, boys!
And I'll tell you something. You know that word, "inevitable"? Loser word! For losers!
Do not quit until the fight is won or lost. Do not quit!
Kasich vs. Trump, one on one. You're still here, John Kasich. Why? Time to step up, boy. Win California!
A little more; WI = R 1.088 million vs Dem 999K; MI = R 1.298m vs D 1.193m
John Kasich is not going anywhere.
@tim in vermont,
😎
Two good lines tonight about Cruz's speech and suspension were 1) that this was the opening speech of the 2020 Campaign, and 2) we now know why Cruz had to bring in Fiorina of Hewlet Packard fame...he needed someone with her skills to fire his staff.
Trump's new theme seems to be Americans Greatly loving one another Again. After Obama's massive division of all Americans, that is the best move he can make.
So it turns out that Trump is a loyal old dog, like Zeus. He was just acting like a pit bull temporarily to beat the pit vipers that surround us pretending to be Pure Conservatives.
Zeus and Trump are Labradors types like that Rescue dog in Ecuador who died from exhaustion from rescuing 7 victims.
I still think the "Conservatives" at National Review made a monumental mistake in January with their "Against Trump" editorial.
The conservatives splintered their vote among 5 or 6 viable candidates, while Trump consolidated his support with a non-traditional crowd.
Then NR saw the rise of Trump, and doubled-down with their "Against Trump" editorial, which further splintered the vote.
Eventually, they picked Cruz, but it was far too late in the game.
I think it's fair to state that Trump - despite his loudness and lack of discipline - won the GOP primary fairly and squarely.
#NevervoteHillary
Blogger Phil 3:14 said... Last time a Dem won Indiana was '64 so no surprise more Republican votes.
Obama won Indiana in 2008.
Cruz elbowed and punched his wife while hugging his dad. The video is priceless.
And you know his dad was involved with Lee Oswald in the killing of Kennedy.
Trump stated that fact today....lol.
"The Kasich pick makes so much sense. Hope Trump considers it. He has to be careful to not appear to be pandering by picking Susanna Maritnez, Rubio, or Tim Scott."
I'm amazed the number of Trump supporters in discussing his potential Veep selections hoping he does something smart politically.
when has he ever done anything "smart" politically?
(Hopefully that was only limited blather for Drago.)
Kasich is a loser. Trump will see that in a minute. How many votes did he get outside Ohio - 20,000? Trump needs a woman, a black, or Hispanic. (God I hate the necessity for ethnic identification.) Nikki Haley would have been be good if she hadn't done herself in. I'm still rooting for Joni Ernst. Here's her info.
Kasich will take it to the convention..
"I'm still rooting for Joni Ernst. Here's her info."
Interesting thought, I still think it will be Gingrich.
Trump still has a fight on his hands. The GOP establishment. How many people in the country read National Review?
Shot:
If Donald Trump is the Republican nominee, then a few months from now America may be treated to something it has never seen before: a presidential nominee being called to testify in his own defense while being sued for fraud.
Chaser:
But perhaps the biggest challenge to her candidacy is yet to come. As the Federal Bureau of Investigation drills down on Clinton's handling of classified information on an insecure email network, the Democratic front-runner faces the possibility that she and her top aides could be indicted for compromising national security.
Pass the popcorn.
That still screen if Cruz could not look more like the Peanuts/Arrested Development sad walk trope if it had been on purpose!
thinking about down ballot races, I think it might be better if the Senate goes Dem. the Donald and Harry Reid are sympatico.
Kinda like Michael Corleone and Senator Geary. And probably no need for dead prostitutes.
Trump now has to prepare to fight the Hildabeast.
Blogger William said..
here was no mention of crooked Hillary and how disgusting her bathroom habits are.
--
Maybe he'll say something about what Hil did at his (latest) wedding.
Trump that Bitch!
Coupe with the Canada shit..awesome.
May 10 Nebraska, West Virginia
May 17 Oregon
May 24 Washington
June 7 California
That's your battleground map, John Kasich! California is the prize. Can you take it?
Cruz did not slink off; shame on you Professor.
Trad guy,
Are you sure pit bull is the animal that best suits Trump?
Actually..when you see these reports about pit bulls doing great harm, a good many of the owners just can't own up to what they have enabled...
Blogger AprilApple said...
What will Trump and his wild eyed supporters do without Cruz to kick? I doubt Trump has it in him to really go after Hillary the way he trashed his fellow R's.
At first it'll be all sunshine and roses, just like it was between Trump and Cruz.
But it'll get nasty if Trump isn't winning.
And what's with all the people declaring #nevertrump tonight and that they have left or are leaving the Republican party? It's a lose/lose position for you.
Either
A: You succeed in NeverTrump and Hillary wins and we all lose.
Or
B: You fail and Trump wins and you still lose.
It's always better to take a position where you've got a chance of winning.
Blogger Michael K said...
"I'm still rooting for Joni Ernst. Here's her info."
Interesting thought, I still think it will be Gingrich.
I hope you're right about Gingrich. I wanted him to win in 2012 over Romney, but like Trump, he was demonized as a Democrat liberal progressive. Never made any sense to me. Those people must not have lived through the 90's.
I think the evil party/stupid party dichotomy is an appropriate observation right about now!
I actually don't like Gingrich as he ran out on the GOP Congress he helped elect. Too much concern with his book and his ego with the Air Force One story. He left things with Hastert, a crook if there ever was one. Still, he does know about Washington.
I think he hurt Romney badly in 2012.
Will Limbaugh be selling the "conservatism works everytime it's tried" axiom tomorrow?
And what's with all the people declaring #nevertrump tonight
Not just worried about 2016! Worried about 2020 and 2024. Nominating Trump is like nominating David Duke. A sure loser move. All these guys know to keep their distance. Except for Christie (with his huge appetite) and Ben Carson (with his Christian duty to love his enemies).
If Donald Trump is the nominee, I hope he's smart enough to put Carson on his ticket. Maybe Ben can get him to go to Bible study! I think if and when Donald flips over to the angels, he will be a powerful force for good in the world. He's a powerful force, I don't deny that part! But he needs to be saved. Right now he's a very dangerous man, a wannabe Caesar. No thanks.
Simon Sez:The only explanation for voting for Trump is stupidity, viciousness, mendacity, and misogyny. Fuck every single one of them.
I already lived through losing the Catholic Church to a hostile takeover by a hostile force with values antithetical to our own in the last few years; to see the same thing play out in the GOP is too much to bear.
So, suicide, then?
Arrested Development: Peanuts Moments
"Ben Carson (with his Christian duty to love his enemies)."
That's good. About the only way to make sense of ole Ben.
When I hear Trump's promise to do executive orders right, I imagine Carson sitting with hands at side, eyes closed..muttering "We the people"
Phil 3:14: "Hopefully that was only limited blather for Drago.)"
And don't think that I am not grateful!
khesanh0802 said...
Of he were principled he would not have caused the shutdown that left the R's with egg on their face.
5/3/16, 7:01 PM
WTF are you talking about? 2014 midterms followed. Historical congressional majorities for R's. Joni Ernst, Tim Scott, Tom Cotton in the Senate.
You don't get to be a Supreme Court clerk unless you're smart.
What a load of shit.
I realized one thing tonight, and that was that the Trumps really are the beautiful people. Not a one is really average looking. I first noticed the women, but my partner pointed out that the men are hot too. Jr is apparently gorgeous (to her), perfectly groomed, and very articulate. Not a single "ah" when he was talking. Hot wife too. Would really enjoy seeing him debate Chelsea. Wouldn't even be close.
John Kasich: "I am staying in until Donald Trump hits the magic number."
He's got such a negative way of putting things! But I like his indomitable will, and his determination not to quit until the battle is finished.
It reminds me of this.
What a load of shit.
I think that each Justice gets 4 clerks these days, which means 36 SCOTUS clerks per year. There are maybe 40k law school grads a year, which makes them roughly 1/1,000. But, if I remember right, Cruz clerked for the Chief Justice, which makes him maybe 1/10,000. And, according to Liberal Harvard law prof, Alan Dershowitz, Cruz was off the charts brilliant, one of his very brightest, best, students. I think that he was probably one of the most brilliant people ever to run for the Presidency. You are, of course, entitled to your own opinion.
Trump has a huge following who say the government has to STOP HURTING them, on trade, on the economy, gender politics, global warming craziness, dangerous and feckless foreign policy, high taxes, stifling regulations etc.
Sanders has a huge following who say the government has to START HELPING THEM MORE, on pet issues such as "equality", "social justice", "free this and that for all, paid for by The Rich", etc.
There's your choice.
A Saul Alinsky acolyte told me years ago:
"Here's how it is in politics:
You make the game and its rules. OR
You play the game following it rules. OR
You are made game of."
We groundlings obviously don't make the game, so:
Do you want to play the game?
If so, choose which side you're most closely aligned with, and vote.
Or do you want to stay home, and be made game of???
"I'm amazed the number of Trump supporters in discussing his potential Veep selections hoping he does something smart politically.
when has he ever done anything "smart" politically?"
**************
Huh? He just destroyed Ted Cruz!!!
I'll tell ya, Trump is going to make Mount Rushmore so much better. So much better.
"Slinks"?
What a gratuitously nasty comment, the sort that reflects poorly on its maker.
I assumed the horns were photoshopped! Just curious, is Trump an authentic populist? When was the last time a populist was this popular? William Jennings Bryan?
Joni Ernst, as suggested above, would be a good VP choice for Trump.
Kasich, another Democrat in Republican clothing, and I'll be voting third party for sure.
I live in the one upstate NY CD that held Trump to under 50%. Kasich got 34% or so. I don't know a single person who will admit to voting for Kasich. None of the people I know who talk about politics knows a single person who admits to voting for Kasich. My drive to work is 36 miles or so, and the week before the primary I took 5 different routes along the back roads. Yard signs for Bernie. And if there's one in a yard, there's usually several. Enthusiasm. Yard signs for Monica Lewinsky's ex-boyfriend's wife. Yard signs for Trump. Yard signs for Cruz. Never spotted one single yard sign for Kasich. I have no idea who all these silent Kasich voters are. Anyone here an actual Kasich voter who can explain his appeal?
Time for Trump to turn his sights to Hillary's many flaws. Will that help Sanders.
So we get to choose amongst the geriatrics for President. Boomers need to get out of the way. Retire already.
So, to sum it up, Cruzers WERE losers.
Thought so . . .
coupe said...
We can now say that the tea party is dead.
Shows a basic misunderstanding of what "tea Party" is all about.
ho do you think is voting for Trump.
The inevitable happened a little earlier than I expected--I figured Cruz would wait until at least the first ballot at the convention before dropping out.
And now the GOP is nominating its weakest candidate in modern times, with the only saving grace being that the Dems are doing the same. A true low point for our politics, but as they say, give the people what they want--good and hard.
With no love for either candidate this year, at least I hope it'll be entertaining. If the primaries were any indication, it will be. Enjoy the decline!
It's a dream election, each side gets their dream opponent.
So, to sum it up, Cruzers WERE losers.
Be nice, we need our friends to defeat the Crony to the Billionaires.
After just a couple more elections of not voting, or maybe just this one, you won't have to waste any time voting ever again.
I'm a conservative. Explain, exactly, what reason I would have to wait in line for hours to vote for him.
I think a Trump-Kasich ticket is likely. I know, I know, Kasich has said "no way," but that's what they all say until they say "sure!" Kasich is a governor with congressional experience (something Trump has said he would look for in a VP) who polls well against Hillary and, according to the media narrative during this campaign, is the "sensible" Republican. And he's from Ohio.
Which makes him even LESS electable to me.
How is Trump going to win without people who attend Church regularly and white, married women? Are they suddenly apart of the establishment?
Evangelicals = people who claim to be religious when the pollsters call. The establishment finds this so strange and incomprehensible that it must invent a demographic for them. And of course the establishment is surprised when they vote outside the bible-box the establishment has put them in.
I believe the Trump phenomenon is a one-off thing. Although not mistake-prone he does make mistakes. He made a couple with Wisconsin. He’s human. But Trump happens to fit the times. He seems to appeal to a variety of disparate groups. If the GOP allows it I think Trump could revitalize the GOP.
People keep pointing at Trump’s reality show, claiming that(among other things) the name recognition and reality show experience gave him the tools that Trump uses to campaign so effectively. I think they have it backwards. I am beginning to believe that Trump is a communications genius. And of course for a communication genius it would be duck soup to produce a highly rated reality show – a mere exercise in fundamentals.
I would like to see the GOP go back to the old Reagan principles: A free market economy and a strong national defense. Anyone who believes in those tenets should be welcome in the Republican Party – as they were during the Reagan era. I could join that kind of political party. Maybe.
I would like to see Cruz on the SCOTUS. I believe a former clerk to William Rehnquist can be relied on to be a conservative voice on the court. He’s young and would provide decades of yeoman service to the conservative cause. On the other hand, I am relieved to see Cruz’s VAT is no longer a danger to the tax codes.
On George Will and other hysterical figures: They are intelligent, very intelligent. The more intelligent the person the easier it is for them to rationalize their emotional behavior. They are frightened that Trump will make them irrelevant. And that fear leads to rationalizations that only serve to help cause that fear to come true – like a feedback loop. They have rationalized themselves into a corner. The cognitive dissonance must be a bitch.
"Slinks?" I would have said, "slithers."
"It's a dream election, each side gets their dream opponent."
This election may feature far more voters voting against someone than voting for someone, and ultimately result in the most unpopular election winner to date. There's likely to be a majority of voters depressed about the result, including many who resigned themselves to vote for the winner only because they couldn't stand the opponent even more. And when one of them loses, everyone can say to the primary voters who nominated them "you managed to pick the one person who could lose to someone as unpopular as [Hillary/Trump]."
Store up guns and booze, conservatives--it'll be a long four years no matter what.
I would like to see the GOP go back to the old Reagan principles: A free market economy and a strong national defense. Anyone who believes in those tenets should be welcome in the Republican Party – as they were during the Reagan era. I could join that kind of political party. Maybe.
That isn't happening again. You clearly don't NEED to as the guy who basically opposes most of Reagan's policies won the nomination pretty easily.
We'll see Republicans remain Democrat-lite --- but, man, they'll be willing to talk a big game against other Republicans. Which means the party will be what it is now --- now just more to the left.
I wish Trump well. I sure as hell won't vote for him.
On George Will and other hysterical figures: They are intelligent, very intelligent. The more intelligent the person the easier it is for them to rationalize their emotional behavior. They are frightened that Trump will make them irrelevant. And that fear leads to rationalizations that only serve to help cause that fear to come true – like a feedback loop. They have rationalized themselves into a corner. The cognitive dissonance must be a bitch.
Or perhaps they're conservatives and realize Trump is not conservative nor terribly serious or informed.
Oh well. The GOP is dead. Good riddance.
Store up guns and booze, conservatives--it'll be a long four years no matter what.
Indeed. Republicans keep ignoring that conservatives exist. What is in it for ME to stand in line, for hours, to vote for somebody who has supported gun control for years, is quite pro-abortion, supports eminent domain, etc? I could just vote for Hillary if I wanted that.
The country I knew is dead. And I have zero loyalty to the country that replaced it.
Store up guns and booze, conservatives--it'll be a long four years no matter what.
It's already been a long four years. At least the next four years will be,................different.
Be nice, we need our [Cruz} friends to defeat the Crony to the Billionaires.
I'll be nice when they stop their "Racist! Sexist! Mussolini/Hitler" Bullshit.
Well, not only did he lose yesterday, but his hometown in burning.
https://twitter.com/TerryReithCBC/status/727631638385975297/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
I'll be nice when they stop their "Racist! Sexist! Mussolini/Hitler" Bullshit
It always bothered me about Cruz how badly he wanted to win. Too badly, IMHO, but he has conceded now. Take 'em on as they come, as individuals, not as a group. It's stupid to alienate people who may be sympathetic.
Holy Crap, I am a Trumpist!
I saw Hillary as a flawed candidate from the beginning and I wondered for awhile if she would be indicted. But as time went by I realized that she would never be indicted. The Democrats could have perhaps made a substitution early on but it is way too late now.
I think it would be best for Trump to save his best ammunition against Hillary until after the Democratic convention. He wouldn’t want to destroy her before then. Bernie seems ready to run against her all the way to the convention and Trump could let Sanders carry that load for him for now. But to a certain extend that is up to Hillary. As we have seen Trump is loathe to allow an attacker to hit him without immediate retaliation.
As for down-ballot voting fears in regards to Trump’s performance in the general: I believe the congressional Republicans will find that Trump has coat-tails longer than the island of Manhattan. Here’s an idea: After the GOP convention why don’t they poll Trump’s strength among the individual electorates in their home districts and campaign accordingly? I believe they will discover that their voters like Trump.
That isn't happening again. You clearly don't NEED to as the guy who basically opposes most of Reagan's policies won the nomination pretty easily.
Are you wondering, readers, as I am just what ARE those policies of Reagan’s that Trump “opposes?” Other questions that could be asked: Why are the anti-Trumpsters so vague? What do they have against specificity, anyway? Are blanket condemnations with hazy underpinnings all they are capable of?
"That isn't happening again. You clearly don't NEED to as the guy who basically opposes most of Reagan's policies won the nomination pretty easily."
The "Reagan" era of the party lasted from 1980-2016. Not a bad run for free market libertarianism fused with boosters of strong national defense, religious conservatives and limited government advocates. But now it is taking a more "European" direction, tacking against free trade and immigration, favoring greater social safety nets, and greater central government power.
"Or perhaps they're conservatives and realize Trump is not conservative nor terribly serious or informed."
Yeah, I don't buy this "gravy train" theory to write off Trump's conservative critics--Sean Hannity's Trump ass-kissing hasn't hurt him. Maybe George Will actually belies Trump would be a disaster for conservatives. If you think he's wrong, explain why. But I don't buy this "George just wants to keep going to the right cocktail parties so he decides to be anti-Trump" nonsense.
"Indeed. Republicans keep ignoring that conservatives exist."
Oh, they know conservatives exist--they just hope enough of them are so negative towards Hillary that they'll elect her old friend and supporter who supports a lot of the same damaging policies. The difference is when Trump does this stuff he can take all the blame onto the GOP, where if Hillary does it she and her party will own it.
We'll see how many conservatives get in line.
"I think it would be best for Trump to save his best ammunition against Hillary until after the Democratic convention. He wouldn’t want to destroy her before then. "
Just from a tactical standpoint, that's a bad idea. Hillary is getting nominated, no matter what--and voters' opinions tend to calcify by the end of the summer. Solidifying their opinions in the spring is absolutely necessary, and you can believe Hillary's team is going to be doing that right away with Trump (they're already airing ads and establishing the narrative that he's a bigot and sexist). Wait until late summer and it is too late.
But the other big question for the GOP is what are they doing about a ground game? I'm not aware of Trump having one, and it's pretty late to start one from scratch.
The main reason for suspending your campaign is you're out of $$$ ... plus you have no chance to win.
This applies to that other guy also, what's his name? The guy who went to bed early last night. The guy who could only get 46.8% in his home state but won all 66 delegates because it was winner take all. The golly gee fella. I'll think of his name later.
Indeed, the Dems process is unfair with Super Delegates, but the Rep's as well w/their winner take all and not proportional breakdown ie:
SC where Trump won 32.5 to 22.5 for Rubio and 22.3 for Cruz but Trump got all 50 delegates.
Hillary won SC 73.5 to 26 winning 39 delegates and Sanders 14.
The process is set up to favor front runners. The problem Rep's had, their deep bench was laughable against Trump in the year of the outsider. Plus they had wayyy too many candidates and canceled each other out.
So let's some up Rep primary voters ~ rude, crude, politically incorrect and pissed much like their second coming, Trump. Plus Trump knew 50 to 60% of Reps are birthers and they were like putty in his hands. Their savior has arrived and he is them.
Again, the core Republicans currently comprise 25% of the electorate, so Trump has a solid 50/60 % of 25%.
But, but, but he's running against Hillary so keep hope alive!
Brando, one could argue that Hannitys ass kissing has hurt. CNN has beaten FNC in the ratings for 5 of the last 8 months in key demographics.
Simon: The only explanation for voting for Trump is stupidity, viciousness, mendacity, and misogyny. Fuck every single one of them.
We can hope that one of these days, the "conservatives" melting down here will come to understand that globalism and conservatism cannot co-exist. (Sorry, your constitution and traditional American liberties cannot survive the "free" trade globalism enthusiastically supported by "real conservative Republicans".) Once that light dawns, a great deal that is inexplicable, or explicable only as "stupid people being stupid" will become clear.
If the above strikes you as a complete non sequitur (or post-bong-hit gnosticism), you might be one of the above, aka "conservatives who don't actually ever conserve anything".
. . .in key demographics
Yeah, left-leaning losers.
Well, that's some deep bench on the part of the Democrats, isn't it? Basically Bernie is the bench and the front runner is the coach's daughter who has no game, as everybody with game was cut from the team before the season even began. America, as a whole despises Hillary and her only hope is that America hates Trump more! That's a what a deep bench looks like, isn't it?
"Brando, one could argue that Hannitys ass kissing has hurt. CNN has beaten FNC in the ratings for 5 of the last 8 months in key demographics."
Hmm--maybe the "gravy train" was part of his sacrifice! Though I wonder how that'll affect Hannity directly.
The "gravy train" theory might have made sense if Republicans were bailing out on John McCain a while back when he and his pals ended the use of earmarks in appropriations legislation. You could see a direct disadvantage to a congressman who no longer could direct funds to his favored interests, and a big anti-earmark politician embodying that threat.
But I have yet to see where a pundit or politician stands to lose something if they got behind Trump. If anything, Cruz seemed the more likely budget-cutter, and far less likely to get along with Congress. And pundits only have to care that they get good ratings.
"Hmm--maybe the "gravy train" was part of his sacrifice!"
I meant to say "maybe Hannity did in fact sacrifice his gravy train."
http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2016/03/30/fox-news-channel-ratings-top-all-cable-networks-for-first-time.html
Or perhaps they're conservatives and realize Trump is not conservative nor terribly serious or informed.
Oh, I didn’t know … is it a conservative principle now to urge readers to vote for the Democratic Party candidate? So … if you are a “true” conservative you have to vote for Hillary? If I were a Republican primary voter I think I would be a bit puzzled at this particular reaction to Trump’s success. It’s the equivalent of a pundit fainting spell. Someone needs to send George Will some smelling salts and recommend a good crisis counselor.
Oh well. The GOP is dead. Good riddance.
“Dead” to the commentor, maybe. But I believe the Grand Old Party has a little life left in it and luckily for Trump many GOP voters apparently feel the same way. The voters actually determine the life-span of ANY party but I’ve noticed that the anti-Trumpsters are never very democratic in their basic approach to politics. Everything is subservient to the “rules,” rules that they claim is their right to change anytime they see fit. They seem to believe they have exclusive rights to the GOP and Trump supporters need not apply. No big tent GOP for them.
"America, as a whole despises Hillary and her only hope is that America hates Trump more! That's a what a deep bench looks like, isn't it?"
I still wonder how the Dems let that happen. After 2008, you'd think they would have seen Hillary as vulnerable and some governors or senators (besides Webb and O'Malley) would have raised money and jumped in, and had donors and staffers behind them. How could they have found her "inevitable" when we saw that play before?
Deep bench aside, the major party's have a habit of nominating the candidate who came in second in the prior cycle or in the Dem's case the prior two cycles as Obama was easily elected and easily re-elected.
Of course (4) years ago Santorum came in second, which is a clear indication of how weak the Rep bench is ie Santorum came in second to Romney.
Trump took a look at the Rep's "deep bench" and said why not me. Win or lose I'll still be a billionaire when it's over so WTF.
Solidifying their opinions in the spring is absolutely necessary, and you can believe Hillary's team is going to be doing that right away with Trump (they're already airing ads and establishing the narrative that he's a bigot and sexist). Wait until late summer and it is too late.
Like I pointed out – Trump never allows insults to slide by. If Hillary is firing her guns at him Trump will fire right back. We know that if we know anything.
But Sanders has indicated he’ll campaign against her up to the convention. Considering her recent embarrassment in Indiana she may be too busy dealing with Bernie to do much against Trump.
Seen at: http://www.shotinthedark.info/wp/?p=58673
Crexit
Posted on May 3, 2016 by Mitch Berg
So I guess the withdrawal of Ted Cruz from the presidential race means November will be a contest between an ignorant, cynical, morally bankrupt New Yorker who has accomplished nothing and been obscenely overpaid for it…
… And Donald Trump.
One problem with this is that Hillary Clinton isn't ignorant. She's far from ignorant. She often pretends not to know things. This would work better if the word "ignorant" was removed. Perhaps it could be replaced by "pandering"
"America, as a whole despises Hillary and her only hope is that America hates Trump more! That's a what a deep bench looks like, isn't it?"
Brando said...
I still wonder how the Dems let that happen. After 2008, you'd think they would have seen Hillary as vulnerable and some governors or senators (besides Webb and O'Malley) would have raised money and jumped in, and had donors and staffers behind them.
There was another Governor or a Senator besides Webb and O'Malley who raised money and jumped in. Not even a former Governor or Senator like Webb and O'Malley.
You may have heard of him.
http://www.sanders.senate.gov/
http://cnnpressroom.blogs.cnn.com/2016/04/26/cnn-1-in-cable-news-in-prime-time-beats-fox-news-for-5-of-the-past-8-months/
And, grackle, not voting is a perfectly acceptable response when neither candidate is acceptable. I will not waste hours of my time to vote for a terrible candidate. I am protesting the lack of a worthwhile candidate.
He is not conservative so, as a conservative party, the GOP is dead. It'd be like somebody buying the rights to the name Kodak. So Trump is the Republican nominee. I doubt he wins, largely because he still has no ground game and few are willing to support him.
"There was another Governor or a Senator besides Webb and O'Malley who raised money and jumped in. Not even a former Governor or Senator like Webb and O'Malley."
Yes, but considering the circumstances I would have expected candidates from all over the Democratic coalition. Dems were given the choice between socialism and criminality.
Yes, but considering the circumstances I would have expected candidates from all over the Democratic coalition. Dems were given the choice between socialism and criminality.
That assumes they are opposed to either.
Socialism works, it just hasn't been "really" tried yet. And it's never criminal lf a Progressive does it because ends justify means and all.
"Slink" was exactly the right word. It was perfectly descriptive. Look it up. Watch the video.
Sorry if it hurts your feelings, but it wasn't "nasty" of me to use the word. It was an effort at concision and clear statement.
"And now the GOP is nominating its weakest candidate in modern times"
Such a statement is proof of either a highly biased or of a shallow, one dimensional thinker. Or both I suppose.
Ann Althouse said..."Slink" was exactly the right word. It was perfectly descriptive. Look it up. Watch the video.
Isn't the problem, Professor, the way your choice of word has made people feel? Even if it's an accurate word to have used it's apparently making people feel bad so the issue isn't the word but people's perfectly valid feelings. You should address that issue, Professor--you wouldn't want to be accused of lacking empathy and/or creating a toxic environment.
Sorry if it hurts your feelings,
No you aren't.
but it wasn't "nasty" of me to use the word.
Yes it was.
It was an effort at concision and clear statement.
No, it was more an effort to express your dislike for a man who challenged your foundational beliefs as a social liberal. I used to think better of you, Professor. Sorry to find I'm wrong.
April Apple: "What will Trump and his wild eyed supporters do without Cruz to kick? I doubt Trump has it in him to really go after Hillary the way he trashed his fellow R's." Bullshit, my dear. Utter horseshit.
So many of my least favorite commenters here offer unsolicited voting advice aimed at converting anti-Hillary votes into neutral or pro-Hillary votes. Why is that?
You are going to see self-serving accusations of sexism and plays at victimhood like you have never seen them before. By comparison Obama will have barely seemed to have played the race card.
(recall victim Hillary's success in the NY Senate debate when the mean opponent 'bullied' her by proving her either incompetent or a liar)
Post a Comment