trump is serious!!!!!

[Scooter]

[Burning Petard]

I found Mr. Romney's speech this morning interesting for all the things it did not do. a) it offered no hope to those who support Trump now because of anger toward a party that has its major objective to be to refuse to cooperate with the president on anything and are also afraid of terrorist activity such as happened in San Bernadino, CA. b) it proposed no alternative to Trump, so he continues to 'win' with the majority split among many others. c) it made no mention of Trump's non existent memory--Trump IS a failed presidential candidate. He ran for President in 2000 under the banner of the Reform Party and then pulled out in the middle of the race, citing among other things, David Duke and the KKK, which knowledge then seems now to have slipped his memory. At the time he said: "So the Reform Party now includes a Klansman, Mr. Duke, a neo-Nazi, Mr. Buchanan, and a communist, Ms. Fulani. This is not company I wish to keep.".

Maybe if someone could find three people within the current Republican party who are not company he would wish to keep, The Donald will drop out of this race.

snailgate

[Scooter]

[Lord Jim]

it proposed no alternative to Trump, so he continues to 'win' with the majority split among many others.

There is a school of thought within the growing Stop Trump movement (nice to see this finally happening) that the best way at this point to prevent a Trump nomination is to shoot for a contested convention. This strategy involves the three remaining candidates staying in and picking up wins in various states and accumulating delegates in order to deny Trump an outright majority prior to the convention.

I'm not sure I buy this reasoning, (maybe it makes sense for Rubio and Cruz to both stay in, but Kasich still looks like a spoiler for Trump to me at this point. Maybe he can win Ohio, but if he weren't in the race most of his votes would probably go to Rubio, and Rubio would win the state; he's going to peel votes votes away from Rubio in Michigan too.) but it's pretty clear Romney buys it.

Ordinarily a contested convention is the very last thing a party wants, because it's extremely divisive. About the only thing worse would be a Trump nomination...

[Bicycle Bill]

Of course not, Scooter.  They're looking for intelligent life.

-"BB"-

[Gob]

it proposed no alternative to Trump, so he continues to 'win' with the majority split among many others.

There is a school of thought within the growing Stop Trump movement (nice to see this finally happening) that the best way at this point to prevent a Trump nomination is to shoot for a contested convention. This strategy involves the three remaining candidates staying in and picking up wins in various states and accumulating delegates in order to deny Trump an outright majority prior to the convention.

Your system is nuts.


(Don't tell me it's not, any system which allows Bush The Chimp or Trump the insane, any political responsibility above and beyond posting Candidate's leaflets door to door, is insane.)

[Lord Jim]

any system which allows Bush The Chimp or Trump the insane,

GWB was Pericles compared to Trump...

Your system is nuts.

Why don't you just make that your sigline and save yourself the key strokes?

[BoSoxGal]

Oh, was he comparing Drumpf to them? I thought he was comparing Mr. Reagan to them...

In my view it's pretty much equally insulting to the Roosevelts' memory if he was.

[BoSoxGal]

Ordinarily a contested convention is the very last thing a party wants, because it's extremely divisive. About the only thing worse would be a Trump nomination...

I predict that BOTH conventions will be very divisive this year, and that both will be visited by massive public protest outside the convention venue.

[Econoline]

[BoSoxGal]

Or not.

[wesw]

wow. I thought they were gonna whip 'em out right on stage....

de-bate

de-troit

de-motor city madman!!!!

[Lord Jim]

I can assure you that "all" the Republicans do not want to vote for Donald Drumpf....

[wesw]

all the ones on stage last night said that they would....

that is big.

[BoSoxGal]

I watched the debate last night on YouTube; I literally felt like puking. I've never been so ashamed of American politics; I thought Pat Buchanan at the '92 convention was disgusting, but compared to Trumpy, he was the epitome of an elder statesman.

If Trumpy is elected I am moving abroad.

[Econoline]

Well, the word "debating" might be an exaggeration...

[Scooter]

all the ones on stage last night said that they would....

that is big.

They said it because it is a condition of being a candidate that you agree to support the eventual nominee. If they said otherwise, they would disqualify themselves. What they do in the secrecy of the voting booth will be another matter entirely.

[oldr_n_wsr]

If Trumpy is elected I am moving abroad.

I have heard this before when others were elected. Never seen anyone move.

[Big RR]

all the ones on stage last night said that they would....

that is big.

They said it because it is a condition of being a candidate that you agree to support the eventual nominee. If they said otherwise, they would disqualify themselves. What they do in the secrecy of the voting booth will be another matter entirely.

First of all, I'm not sure any rule requires that candidate always support the eventual winner. Second, an endorsement speaks much louder than any one man's vote, and could sway some to vote Trump who otherwise would not do so. Politics or no, there's no excuse for this sort of pledge.

[Scooter]

If Trumpy is elected I am moving abroad.

I have heard this before when others were elected. Never seen anyone move.

Do you think this might be a special case.

Just one example, which I read about after the "debate" (I refused to watch the side show), was when he was asked about the possibility of the military refusing to obey illegal orders. Instead of attempting to dial back some of his earlier comments, by saying something like, "I would never give an illegal order, so the military would never have a reason to disobey me," he chose to double down and insist that the military will follow whatever order he gives them, because he is a "leader".

For the first time in your history, you have a presidential candidate campaigning on a promise to commit war crimes and to insist that the military will obey him in doing so. If I were a soldier, that would be reason enough to desert at first opportunity and head for Argentina, because I sure as hell would not want to have the pregnant wife of a terrorist suspect in front of me and be ordered to skewer her through the stomach with a a bayonet. Because to do so would be to piss on the graves of every soldier before me who fought and died to preserve ideals that Trump is so facilely proclaiming to be yesterday's garbage.