'we choose the nominee, not the voters'

Yes, Mr. Haugland the party chooses the nominee. However if you don't choose who the voters want they will revolt and your nominee will lose...badly.
 
You will never recover from this if you fuck with our pick.

The Republican party will perish.
 
ZZSpPaK.gif


I wish i could photoshop Trumps head in the bomb and the GOP elephant in the dudes face
 
I can't imagine the republican party ever recovering if they deny their voters the nominee that they picked. There will be lifelong Republicans who will forever denounce the GOP if they do that.
 
TheComebackKid said:
I can't imagine the republican party ever recovering if they deny their voters the nominee that they picked. There will be lifelong Republicans who will forever denounce the GOP if they do that.
Click to expand...
If trump doesn't get a majority of delegates wouldn't that signify that a majority of the voters didn't want him? Yes it would apply to the others as well but that's the reason these rules are in place: to get a candidate that has a chance at winning. If all candidates aren't wanted by a majority of the party then you should start over because they're all most likely losing candidates
 
Trump could run as an Independent and not lose too much steam. Hell, he may add a few Bernie voters voting against the system for a cycle. This all started when the super-pacs spent > $3.60 a vote on Cruz, and Trump drumpfed him at only .60 cents a vote. That moment was when the Republican party decided it couldn't be him. Also the moment he became a legit option.
 
Mainez said:
If trump doesn't get a majority of delegates wouldn't that signify that a majority of the voters didn't want him? Yes it would apply to the others as well but that's the reason these rules are in place: to get a candidate that has a chance at winning. If all candidates aren't wanted by a majority of the party then you should start over because they're all most likely losing candidates
Click to expand...

He has dominated the polls and won the most primaries. If the Republican party doesnt nominate him they will never recover.
 
TheComebackKid said:
He has dominated the polls and won the most primaries. If the Republican party doesnt nominate him they will never recover.
Click to expand...

They'll recover but they won't be the same party. I doubt that the masses that want Trump would ever go to the DNC, even if the GOP failed to nominate a frontrunner Trump (and I doubt they would fail to do so). They're too tied into the anti-liberal positioning to do that. And I don't think there are enough of the diehards to sustain a 3rd party.

But what will change is that that subgroup will know that the GOP elite has been playing dog whistle politics with them but never intended to follow through. The GOP's credibility is shot outside their base but this would ruin it within the base. What I can't decide on is if would lead to more outright cringeworthy candidates or a move to the middle.
 
TheComebackKid said:
He has dominated the polls and won the most primaries. If the Republican party doesnt nominate him they will never recover.
Click to expand...

Yes, but Trump has only broken 50% like twice so far. So even the primaries he's won, more people didn't vote for him than did.
 
panamaican said:
They'll recover but they won't be the same party. I doubt that the masses that want Trump would ever go to the DNC, even if the GOP failed to nominate a frontrunner Trump (and I doubt they would fail to do so). They're too tied into the anti-liberal positioning to do that. And I don't think there are enough of the diehards to sustain a 3rd party.

But what will change is that that subgroup will know that the GOP elite has been playing dog whistle politics with them but never intended to follow through. The GOP's credibility is shot outside their base but this would ruin it within the base. What I can't decide on is if would lead to more outright cringeworthy candidates or a move to the middle.
Click to expand...


I thought this was a pretty good read.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/03/the-risk-of-the-third-party-solution/473499/
 
Mainez said:
If trump doesn't get a majority of delegates wouldn't that signify that a majority of the voters didn't want him? Yes it would apply to the others as well but that's the reason these rules are in place: to get a candidate that has a chance at winning. If all candidates aren't wanted by a majority of the party then you should start over because they're all most likely losing candidates
Click to expand...
If it were happening naturally , I would agree with you. But it isn't. They are colluding to create circumstances that lead to a brokered convention by trying to tank the clear front runner.

Any other election they would have pressured all but 2 candidates to drop out and there would definitely be someone who received the required delegates.
But theyre doing the opposite. Theyre keeping people in longer than whats appropriate in order to distribute the votes so Trump doesnt get the delegates he needs. Delegates that he certainly would get in a typical 2 man race.

Their plotting and scheming to take away the vote of the American people is unforgivable and treasonous.
With every attempt to do away with Trump and in turn our right to choose , they are only strengthening the resolve of Trump supporters.
 
panamaican said:
They'll recover but they won't be the same party. I doubt that the masses that want Trump would ever go to the DNC, even if the GOP failed to nominate a frontrunner Trump (and I doubt they would fail to do so). They're too tied into the anti-liberal positioning to do that. And I don't think there are enough of the diehards to sustain a 3rd party.

But what will change is that that subgroup will know that the GOP elite has been playing dog whistle politics with them but never intended to follow through. The GOP's credibility is shot outside their base but this would ruin it within the base. What I can't decide on is if would lead to more outright cringeworthy candidates or a move to the middle.
Click to expand...

I also do not see repub voters switching to the DNC. I see them checking out of the political process altogether. The sentiment that is driving Trumps support is the idea that our govt and political process is being ran by a small group of elites not the American people. If the repubs pull a switcheroo it will 100% confirm that view and create a very large and very permenant group of disillusioned, angry, and betrayed citizens. And all of the things that BLM supporters, SJWs, and minorities in general have been afraid of...mainly racist and hateful white people...will truly start manifest itself on a very large scale.

The repub party will be split and the citizenry will be highly volatile. The Dems will have all the opportunity they need to move the country left and will do so. After a a couple of election cycles that group of angry, disillusioned white people will make a renewed effort to "take the country try back" and all hell will break lose.

That's what my crystal ball tells me anyway.
 
2GunTommy said:
If it were happening naturally , I would agree with you. But it isn't. They are colluding to create circumstances that lead to a brokered convention by trying to tank the clear front runner.

Any other election they would have pressured all but 2 candidates to drop out and there would definitely be someone who received the required delegates.
But theyre doing the opposite. Theyre keeping people in longer than whats appropriate in order to distribute the votes so Trump doesnt get the delegates he needs. Delegates that he certainly would get in a typical 2 man race.

Their plotting and scheming to take away the vote of the American people is unforgivable and treasonous.
With every attempt to do away with Trump and in turn our right to choose , they are only strengthening the resolve of Trump supporters.
Click to expand...
Who is "they"?
 
Oligarchy posing as a democracy.
 
TheComebackKid said:
I also do not see repub voters switching to the DNC. I see them checking out of the political process altogether. The sentiment that is driving Trumps support is the idea that our govt and political process is being ran by a small group of elites not the American people. If the repubs pull a switcheroo it will 100% confirm that view and create a very large and very permenant group of disillusioned, angry, and betrayed citizens. And all of the things that BLM supporters, SJWs, and minorities in general have been afraid of...mainly racist and hateful white people...will truly start manifest itself on a very large scale.

The repub party will be split and the citizenry will be highly volatile. The Dems will have all the opportunity they need to move the country left and will do so. After a a couple of election cycles that group of angry, disillusioned white people will make a renewed effort to "take the country try back" and all hell will break lose.

That's what my crystal ball tells me anyway.
Click to expand...

I think you're overestimating the amount of people who are thinking in terms of the "small group of elites" and attached to Trump. I concur that there will be disillusioned, angry and betrayed GOP members. But if they drop out of the political process then the GOP will by nature move to the middle.

Trump has a relatively large following but it's not ideologically consistent (the reality for the GOP at large as well). You have your anti-elites, your anti-PC'ers, your silent racists, and those who think he has good policy ideas. Screwing over Trump won't alienate anyone in the GOP except the anti-elites.

It will disappoint the other groups but the decision to back someone else wouldn't undermine their core allegiance to the party. The anti-PC'ers will find someone new (or old like Christie). The silent racists will maintain their position and look for the next guy to take up their cause. The policy believers will simply pick someone else next time or push for Trump in 2020. Only the anti-elites will truly have justification for walking away from the party and I don't think there are enough of them to sustain a 3rd party. Polish's link was a good read as well. Look at the Tea Party's effect on GOP politics. A sizable chunk of the GOP doubled down on fiscal conservativeness. It was enough to impact the platform but it didn't lead to a party fracturing and that group is larger and more influential.

And nothing against angry, disillusioned, white people but they're a minority group too.
 
AnGrYcRoW said:
What the eff is that ?
Click to expand...

Once upon a time a village idiot decided to explode a firecracker with a hammer, others seeing how awesome it was followed, since it was a stiupid and dangerous game, the village invented the lie that it was a decade long tradition to celebrate a battle fought long ago.

Its a "festival" in a mexican town in Guanajuato, they put firecrackers on hammers and blow them up. Reddit somehow caught on it and made it popular.

http://www.atlasobscura.com/places/the-festival-of-exploding-hammers



I wonder how many idiotic (yet awesome) traditions exist in the thousands of villages around the world.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

F1980
Social Is your circle mostly made up of Harris or Trump voters?
4 5 6
Replies
114
Views
2K
44nutman
44nutman

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,254,470
Messages
56,649,015
Members
175,333
Latest member
dubhlinn

Share this page

Back
Top