GOP Abandonment of Trump Accelerating

[JosephDredd]

Takes two to tango.

In MN Governor (D) Mark Dayton allowed the state to shutdown for 19 days. Its not the fed shutdown, but it goes to show Dems will not shy away from a shut down.

In the fed shutdown, people on both sides of the aisle were going on vacation and barely working to end the shutdown. It was sickening.

What could the Dems do? They kept trying to negotiate and the GOP insisted they would only end the shutdown if Obamacare was repealed.

Never heard about Mark Dayton. Will put that on my list of things to read about.

 

[ShinkanPo]

GOP spent the last eight years whipping up their voters into crazy tards, something many Republicans have openly lamented since Trump hit the scene. The GOP wanted no part of Trump, but the crazy-ignorant voters (Frankenstein's monster) was out of control and voted him in.

But they voted him in to the nomination as presidential candidate, with voting open only to Republicans. Now he has to get more votes than Hillary in an election open to EVERYONE. And there just aren't enough crazy assholes in America to put him in the Oval Office.

So it seems years of Pandering to the crazies have bit them in the ass.


But what about the religious right why did they voted for Trump? I don't see Trump as sort of a religious person unlike Ben Carson.

From what I know Ted Cruz is an evengelical could it be the more secularist republicans got so tired of the religious pandering of the Bush,Cruzs that they are willing to vote Trump?

This is kinda confusing to be honest.

 

[JosephDredd]

So it seems years of Pandering to the crazies have bit them in the ass.


But what about the religious right why did they voted for Trump? I don't see Trump as sort of a religious person unlike Ben Carson.

From what I know Ted Cruz is an evengelical could it be the more secularist republicans got so tired of the religious pandering of the Bush,Cruzs that they are willing to vote Trump?

This is kinda confusing to be honest.

The religious right has not embraced Trump. That's where Cruz beat him and even now he's doing very badly in strong religious communities. The religious right, the moderates... maybe a few other GOP demographics have resisted him. It's only the crazy assholes and the white nationalists that have embraced him. Studies seem to indicate that uneducated people love Trump. And at one point he actually yelled into the microphone, "I love uneducated people!" at a rally. And people cheered him for that.

(EDIT: since I read this I found an article that 79% of Republicans support him. So quite a bit more support than I indicated in this post... but still less than Hillary, supported by 90% of Democrats.)

Anyways, crazy-asshole support was enough in the primaries, but not for the general election. That's why everyone thought he was going to change his act to be less crazy and more presidential because, at one time, massive amounts of Sanders supporters were indicating they'd vote Trump. Now it's something like 8% of Sanders supporters will vote Trump.

 

[AnGrYcRoW]

For people that dislike Trump it should be clear that the GOP has to be the main reason for his rise.
They have created the environment for some one like Trump to flourish the last 8 years.
And people wanted his endorsement and celebrated him, even when he was talking the same kind of stuff he did during his campaign no problem at the time.

And now all of a sudden the GOP establishment wants to wash its hand of all of that. Trump won that nomination fair and square if anything the deck was stacked against him.
Think about Trump what you want, but the GOP now turning on Trump is pathetic.

Funny , the GOP turning on Trump restored my faith in them a little lol

 

[Big_Chief_Stove]

Her Wiki page looks fucking impressive. We've been over this.



When was the last time there was a president you couldn't level these charges at? Take Dubya:

1. incompetent? Check. Before and after becoming president.
2. anti-gay views? Check.
3. Receiving money from Sauds? Check. Hand-holding, kissing, adopting Bindar Bush... and then getting them out of the country after 9/11. And then covering for them in the 9/11 report.
4. Pro-Iraq past? Fucking check. Don't know if any politician fucked the dog as badly as Bush did with Iraq.
5. Lying to families of Benghazi? How about lying to the entire world. And then killing many, many thousands of people.
6. Also regarding Benghazi, more embassies killed and more American embassy staff killed under Bush's watch than Obamas.
7. Accomplishments? Barely graduated, ran a baseball team, served as governor for a bit. Fucking amazing guy.

So you're attacking Hillary for things that would definitely condemn Trump and would condemn at least one previous president in the past few decades.

But thinking Hillary is as bad as Trump... not even the fucking Republicans agree with you. The party that would literally do and say anything to win an election has found the one thing it can't do: let Donald Trump get real power. That should tell you volumes. And not about some establishment fearing for the safety of the status quo.

I don't put a lot of stock in Wikipedia, I remember saying this to you. I do take a look at Hillary's own campaign webpage and see that she's had a difficult time coming up with any real accomplishments though. I see a lot of "Helped with..." and "Worked with..." in her accomplishment section.

Being the first woman in a law firm is not a real big accomplishment IMO, its not like she was the first woman ever in a law firm. She was the first for that specific firm. Even so, that has nothing to do with her time as a politician.

President Obama:
-Incompetent? Nope.
-Anti-gay views? Nope.
-Receiving money from Saudis? Nope. Not at least any known right now.
-Pro-Iraq past? Nope.
-Lying to Benghazi families? Check.

That's where Obama starts leaning towards the "Check" column.

I'm not for Trump either, mind you, but i'm definitely against Hillary.

Donald Trump:
-Incompetent? Check.
-Anti-gay views? Nope. (Says SSM should be a state issue)
-Receiving money from the Saudi's? Nope.
-Pro-Iraq past? Nope. (Was public about being against the invasion under Bush.)
-Lying to Benghazi families? Nope.
-Accomplishments: Completely revitalized the previous foreclosed Swifton Village in Cincinnati, Ohio in 1972 and he built Trump Tower in 1983 that would house many people and employ many people.

Between the two, its very clear who is the more accomplished and the consistent.

Hillary says she is pro-SSM, yet she was against it like 3 years...why the change of heart?

Hillary markets herself as being anti-war, yet voted in favor of empowering Bush to invade Iraq and has said she would go to war with Iran if they ever attacked Israel.

Hillary markets herself as a champion for Women's equality issues, yet accepts mult-millions of dollars from Saudi Arabia through the Clinton Foundation, a place where women are definitely NOT equal.

Hillary markets herself as someone concerned about the environment, yet is very much in favor of the keystone pipeline...

I'm not voting for Trump, but at least with him what you see is what you get.

 

[JosephDredd]

I don't put a lot of stock in Wikipedia, I remember saying this to you. I do take a look at Hillary's own campaign webpage and see that she's had a difficult time coming up with any real accomplishments though. I see a lot of "Helped with..." and "Worked with..." in her accomplishment section.

Being the first woman in a law firm is not a real big accomplishment IMO, its not like she was the first woman ever in a law firm. She was the first for that specific firm. Even so, that has nothing to do with her time as a politician.

President Obama:
-Incompetent? Nope.
-Anti-gay views? Nope.
-Receiving money from Saudis? Nope. Not at least any known right now.
-Pro-Iraq past? Nope.
-Lying to Benghazi families? Check.

That's where Obama starts leaning towards the "Check" column.

I'm not for Trump either, mind you, but i'm definitely against Hillary.

Donald Trump:
-Incompetent? Check.
-Anti-gay views? Nope. (Says SSM should be a state issue)
-Receiving money from the Saudi's? Nope.
-Pro-Iraq past? Nope. (Was public about being against the invasion under Bush.)
-Lying to Benghazi families? Nope.
-Accomplishments: Completely revitalized the previous foreclosed Swifton Village in Cincinnati, Ohio in 1972 and he built Trump Tower in 1983 that would house many people and employ many people.

Between the two, its very clear who is the more accomplished and the consistent.

Hillary says she is pro-SSM, yet she was against it like 3 years...why the change of heart?

Hillary markets herself as being anti-war, yet voted in favor of empowering Bush to invade Iraq and has said she would go to war with Iran if they ever attacked Israel.

Hillary markets herself as a champion for Women's equality issues, yet accepts mult-millions of dollars from Saudi Arabia through the Clinton Foundation, a place where women are definitely NOT equal.

Hillary markets herself as someone concerned about the environment, yet is very much in favor of the keystone pipeline...

I'm not voting for Trump, but at least with him what you see is what you get.

Iraq? Trump was for invading Iraq.

Saudi money? Trump sent emails begging world leaders to fund his campaign. Outright illegal for obvious reasons.

Competence? This campaign and that Newsweek article has convinced me he has far less of it than Bush.

Lies? Trump literally lies about everything.

 

[Big_Chief_Stove]

What could the Dems do? They kept trying to negotiate and the GOP insisted they would only end the shutdown if Obamacare was repealed.

Never heard about Mark Dayton. Will put that on my list of things to read about.

What could the dems do? Same as the reps. Refuse to accept a shutdown as an option, no matter what.

That MN shutdown effected a lot of people. Anybody who depends on the state for a paycheck like welfare recipients, municipal workers and state forest/park personnel didn't get a check until the shutdown ended. Semi truck drivers had to put in longer hours, because all the rest stops were closed, making it less safe to drive for them...A lot of bad shit happened because politicians on both sides of the aisle decided to use the shutdown as leverage.

People trying to camp in the parks or go hiking were arrested for trespassing during the shutdown. True story.

 

[Big_Chief_Stove]

Iraq? Trump was for invading Iraq.

Saudi money? Trump sent emails begging world leaders to fund his campaign. Outright illegal for obvious reasons.

Competence? This campaign and that Newsweek article has convinced me he has far less of it than Bush.

Lies? Trump literally lies about everything.

According to Factcheck.org, There's no clear evidence of Trump ever being for the Iraq war, however there's no evidence of him being against it either. The best factcheck.org could find was that after couple of months of being in Iraq, Trump began being vocal about being against the war because of the cost and the direction it was going. There's also evidence that Trump was in a position to profit monetarily from NOT invading Iraq.

http://www.factcheck.org/2016/02/donald-trump-and-the-iraq-war/

Trump sent emails requesting foreign donations, however he did not receive any and there is no current investigation into the matter as far as I've seen. Unless you have a source?

Trump is a liar and a bad one. That is much preferable over Hillary who markets herself as honest and wholesome, yet is a corrupt, dishonest hag. There's an honesty in knowing to expect that someone is dishonest. There's a consistency there.

All that being said, I'm still leaning towards Gary Johnson.

 

[lifelessheap]

This line of thinking always makes me shake my head.

What are his stances on the many issues?
How educated is he on the many issues?
What are his proposed solutions?
Are his solutions realistic and how will he pay for them?

People seem to brush these important questions off as trivial and just go with "well, is he anti-establishment? Well, he's got my vote!"

It seems a lot of Trump supporters live in some weird reality where being anti-establishment and being non-PC automatically means good President.

We know Hilary's stances. She will sell America out for personal profit and let us die for political gain. She is a monster.

 

[JosephDredd]

According to Factcheck.org, There's no clear evidence of Trump ever being for the Iraq war, however there's no evidence of him being against it either. The best factcheck.org could find was that after couple of months of being in Iraq, Trump began being vocal about being against the war because of the cost and the direction it was going. There's also evidence that Trump was in a position to profit monetarily from NOT invading Iraq.

http://www.factcheck.org/2016/02/donald-trump-and-the-iraq-war/

It's weak, but it's definitely not opposing the war like he strongly states.

Trump sent emails requesting foreign donations, however he did not receive any and there is no current investigation into the matter as far as I've seen. Unless you have a source?

No, no investigation. Despite being one of several federal campaign violations.

Trump is a liar and a bad one. That is much preferable over Hillary who markets herself as honest and wholesome, yet is a corrupt, dishonest hag. There's an honesty in knowing to expect that someone is dishonest. There's a consistency there.

lol I like you, but that's crazy. Admit it: you just hate Hillary so much that it distorts your reason. If it comes to lies, you definitely can't single Hillary out over other politicians. And especially not Trump, whose sheer volume of lies should make up for whatever virtue you think there is in being a pathological liar.

 

[Big_Chief_Stove]

It's weak, but it's definitely not opposing the war like he strongly states.





No, no investigation. Despite being one of several federal campaign violations.



lol I like you, but that's crazy. Admit it: you just hate Hillary so much that it distorts your reason. If it comes to lies, you definitely can't single Hillary out over other politicians. And especially not Trump, whose sheer volume of lies should make up for whatever virtue you think there is in being a pathological liar.

lol, like I said though, i'm leaning toward Johnson.

1. Gary Johnson
2. NA
3. NA

against both Hillary and Trump, they're both awful.

 

[Madmick]

I'm having trouble telling the difference between Maduro and Trump these days.

I'm pretty sure they both think they're in TRON.

 

[JosephDredd]

lol, like I said though, i'm leaning toward Johnson.

1. Gary Johnson
2. NA
3. NA

against both Hillary and Trump, they're both awful.

May as well put this here. I feel you would support the idea.

 

[Big_Chief_Stove]

May as well put this here. I feel you would support the idea.

Like a "Truman Show" kind of show lol

 

[snakedafunky]

True, they have created this monster....but to their defense, they never thought he was gonna be this bad. Worst thing with trump is he is unpredictable. He can attack any of them and that was never the intention when creating this monster

He definitely doesn't take shit from anyone, or whatever he thinks shit is. But they have used his rhetoric for years do win elections on a state and more local level. And it came back to bite them big time.

 

[OverCoronavirus Pressure]

You read my mind.

How hard is it to read a book with one page that has its conclusion spelled out in the opening sentence?

 

[M3t4tr0n]

Funny , the GOP turning on Trump restored my faith in them a little lol

I'm not gonna lie it has for me too.

 

[method115]

Where did I say that I was pro trump? Lol

Hillary is equally as incompetent. I really don't take too much stock in what politicians say, especially from these two cunts. They're liars, why should we believe a single word either has to say?

This is how I generally feel as well. Just cause a politician said they are going to do something means I should trust they'll do it. Just look at Clintons politifact. About 78% of the time I can expect her to tell me some sort of lie.

 

[Rational Poster]

I don't put a lot of stock in Wikipedia, I remember saying this to you. I do take a look at Hillary's own campaign webpage and see that she's had a difficult time coming up with any real accomplishments though. I see a lot of "Helped with..." and "Worked with..." in her accomplishment section.

Being the first woman in a law firm is not a real big accomplishment IMO, its not like she was the first woman ever in a law firm. She was the first for that specific firm. Even so, that has nothing to do with her time as a politician.

President Obama:
-Incompetent? Nope.
-Anti-gay views? Nope.
-Receiving money from Saudis? Nope. Not at least any known right now.
-Pro-Iraq past? Nope.
-Lying to Benghazi families? Check.

That's where Obama starts leaning towards the "Check" column.

I'm not for Trump either, mind you, but i'm definitely against Hillary.

Donald Trump:
-Incompetent? Check.
-Anti-gay views? Nope. (Says SSM should be a state issue)
-Receiving money from the Saudi's? Nope.
-Pro-Iraq past? Nope. (Was public about being against the invasion under Bush.)
-Lying to Benghazi families? Nope.
-Accomplishments: Completely revitalized the previous foreclosed Swifton Village in Cincinnati, Ohio in 1972 and he built Trump Tower in 1983 that would house many people and employ many people.

Between the two, its very clear who is the more accomplished and the consistent.

Hillary says she is pro-SSM, yet she was against it like 3 years...why the change of heart?

Hillary markets herself as being anti-war, yet voted in favor of empowering Bush to invade Iraq and has said she would go to war with Iran if they ever attacked Israel.

Hillary markets herself as a champion for Women's equality issues, yet accepts mult-millions of dollars from Saudi Arabia through the Clinton Foundation, a place where women are definitely NOT equal.

Hillary markets herself as someone concerned about the environment, yet is very much in favor of the keystone pipeline...

I'm not voting for Trump, but at least with him what you see is what you get.

Trump was for the Iraq war publicly at first, but then came out against it when everyone was against it.

 

[kpt018]

Funny , the GOP turning on Trump restored my faith in them a little lol

Sadly it is not doing the same for me. They actually opposed him right from the start but took him lightly and failed miserably at stopping him. And given that so many prominent Republicans still support the guy (even people that got completely shit on like McCain and Rubio) gives me little hope. Talk me off the ledge here!

The silver lining for me is this can quite possibly be death of the GOP as it's currently structured and hopefully the bad policy proposals along with it.