If Trump Wins Big Today, It's All But Over

Cruz could still have life if he does well in Missouri and Illinois.

But if Trump wins all five states tonight, he could pretty much have the thing won, even assuming Cruz begins winning 55-45 from here on out.

The good news for Cruz is that he's close in Illinois (behind by either 4 or 9) and Missouri (by 7).

The general rule is that Trump either performs at his poll level or underperforms a little, whereas Cruz routinely overperforms his polls (due to his top-of-the-class turnout operation).

Bluff or Real? Marco Rubio says that even if he loses Florida, it won't alter his campaign at all, because nobody is on pace to get 1237 votes anyway.

Well, except Trump, the guy you say you'd do anything to stop, but "anything" turns out to be only "keep doing what you've been doing to get yourself a new job."

Posted by: Ace at 01:09 PM

Comments

(Jump to bottom of comments)

1 it's all over...but the shouting. And grabbing of reporterettes.

Posted by: kathysaysso at March 15, 2016 01:11 PM (43OZ6)

2 I for one welcome our new YUUUGE overlord!

Posted by: zombie at March 15, 2016 01:12 PM (jBuUi)

3 Well, we will see by tonight.

Posted by: HH at March 15, 2016 01:12 PM (DrCtv)

4 So you're saying there's a chance...

Posted by: ajmojo at March 15, 2016 01:12 PM (1H9ox)

5 Ech. I'm so tired of winning.

Posted by: Greg at March 15, 2016 01:13 PM (DBpnn)

6 Allahpundit speculates about the possibility of the GOP changing the rules so that Trump is denied the nomination even if he wins.
http://tinyurl.com/gnqbamy

Posted by: Anon Y. Mous at March 15, 2016 01:13 PM (R+30W)

7 You didn't spring forward, did you Ace. Not so fast on your projection; assuming K and R drop out, Cruz could win delegates 90-10 and win going away. Don't forget he wins a one on one 60-40 in popular vote and most states remaining are winner take all.

Posted by: pashmr at March 15, 2016 01:13 PM (3aNC4)

8 The fringe left has become so emboldened that I fear for any candidate who gets the nomination.

Posted by: kathysaysso at March 15, 2016 01:13 PM (43OZ6)

9 >>>>If Trump Wins Big Today, It's All But Over

Sounds about right, sadly.

Math is a fickle bitch mistress.

Posted by: El Kabong at March 15, 2016 01:13 PM (datdl)

10 Can't stump the Trump

Posted by: brak at March 15, 2016 01:14 PM (MJuTN)

11 I'm looking for the angry recriminations. Is this the right place?

Posted by: Insomniac at March 15, 2016 01:14 PM (0mRoj)

12 National Review will self combust tonight

Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at March 15, 2016 01:14 PM (1JAxC)

13 Sure would have been helpful if Rubio dropped out before today, giving Kasich a better shot in Ohio, Cruz in NC/IL/MO! But nope!! Guy had to take his 2016 comping it all the way today's grim, depressing conclusion.

Posted by: Serious Cat at March 15, 2016 01:14 PM (UypUQ)

14 Ace, have you seen this?

Only 13% of Trump supporters cite "immigration as the reason for their support of him.

The ACTUAL dominant reason?

"Political Incorrectness" clocking in at 39%:

https://today.yougov.com/news/2016/03/14/ trump-rises-national-support-rubio-falls-and-carso/

Thus, the more the Left and the Establishment attack him, the stronger he gets!

Posted by: zombie at March 15, 2016 01:15 PM (jBuUi)

15 I've seen a few reports that Rubio is saying that he won't quit after tonight no matter what.

Look, even I think that's petty bitchery.

Me.

That's how petty bitchy.

Posted by: alexthechick - Team Hardwood at March 15, 2016 01:15 PM (mf5HN)

16 If Trump Wins Big Today, It's All But Over
------------------------
The fact that he's so popular and adored kinda makes me think it's been Over for quite a while, ace.

Posted by: Chi at March 15, 2016 01:15 PM (foBj9)

17 >>>15 Sure would have been helpful if Rubio dropped out before today, giving Kasich a better shot in Ohio, Cruz in NC/IL/MO! But nope!! Guy had to take his 2016 comping it all the way today's grim, depressing conclusion.

Rubio should've been out weeks ago. If this #NeverTrump thing was actually a thing. Just the GOP clinging to it's last bits of power.

Posted by: El Kabong at March 15, 2016 01:15 PM (datdl)

18 Yay. A trump thread.

Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at March 15, 2016 01:15 PM (8ZskC)

19 Well, then what?
Will GOPe stop floating the idea of a contested convention or whatever it's called to get who they want on the ticket?

Posted by: Lizzy at March 15, 2016 01:16 PM (NOIQH)

20 The good news for Cruz is that he's close in Illinois (behind by either 4 or 9) and Missouri (by 7).
______

Im old enough to remember when "good news" meant that you were leading the field.

Posted by: The Nayden Broad at March 15, 2016 01:16 PM (P8unj)

21 14 National Review American Conservatism will self combust tonight

Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at March 15, 2016 01:14 PM (1JAxC)

Fixed it for you.

Posted by: Serious Cat at March 15, 2016 01:16 PM (UypUQ)

22 The good news for Cruz is that he's close in Illinois (behind by either 4 or 9) and Missouri (by 7).

_____

Good news? That's a very charitable interpretation of the situation. Much like how it was super totes good news that Romney was only down by 3% in Ohio, which meant he was up by 3% or something.

Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at March 15, 2016 01:16 PM (1JAxC)

23 My certainty that I will be voting for Cruz today is starting to crack. If Kasich wins Ohio today, he won't drop out thus limiting the chance of Cruz being the nominee. Maybe about a 10% chance I'll vote Trump just to deny Kasich the win, up from 1% yesterday.

Posted by: Serenity Now! at March 15, 2016 01:16 PM (BDZWU)

24 #BRINGBACKOURSTRIKEOUTTAG

Posted by: Serious Cat at March 15, 2016 01:16 PM (UypUQ)

25 The Republican Party rule book is a living document.

Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at March 15, 2016 01:16 PM (FkBIv)

26 It ain't over till the fat lady sings.

Posted by: Marty Feldman at March 15, 2016 01:17 PM (mw8Dm)

27 I'm glad Ace is up and all, but I was enjoying the last thread where Pro and Anti trump Morons weren't at each other's throats.

Posted by: joe, living dangerously at March 15, 2016 01:17 PM (KUaJL)

28 Shit SO

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 15, 2016 01:17 PM (mw8Dm)

29 but I was enjoying the last thread where Pro and Anti trump Morons weren't at each other's throats.
Posted by: joe, living dangerously at March 15, 2016 01:17 PM (KUaJL)

____

Don't worry. You'll have another 8 months of it.

Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at March 15, 2016 01:17 PM (1JAxC)

30
I posted this on the thread below.... but is more apropo on this one here.

*****

Be of good cheer boys.

Either Cruz or Trump will be the nominee.

YOU HEAR THAT GOPe!!!! FUCK YOU THATS WHY!!!

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Posted by: fixerupper at March 15, 2016 01:17 PM (8XRCm)

31 Second look at GOP superdelegates?

Posted by: You gotta steal that bitch at March 15, 2016 01:18 PM (VndSC)

32 I, for one, shall continue to take the high road and discuss the merits of the issues as promulgated by the various campaigns.

Also, good god, man, Trump is getting more orange by the day. And that one strand of cotton candy he swirls around his balding pate is becoming freakishly more yellow.

I don't trust a man who doesn't accept his given pallor and hair status.

Posted by: Bandersnatch at March 15, 2016 01:18 PM (1xUj/)

33 28
I'm glad Ace is up and all, but I was enjoying the last thread where Pro and Anti trump Morons weren't at each other's throats.

Posted by: joe, living dangerously at March 15, 2016 01:17 PM (KUaJL)

Do you think Ace is masterfully pitting us against one another? Sort of a clickbait thing?

Posted by: kathysaysso at March 15, 2016 01:18 PM (43OZ6)

34 >>Thus, the more the Left and the Establishment attack him, the stronger he gets!

Yeah. That's why pointing out Trump's personal weaknesses won't dissuade support - they don't like him, they like his tactics. And thanks to the GOPe for never fighting back: you paved the way for Trump.

Posted by: Lizzy at March 15, 2016 01:18 PM (NOIQH)

35 Happy Death to the Establishment Day!

Posted by: doug at March 15, 2016 01:18 PM (Huq8w)

36 Toothless hillbillies FTW.

Posted by: Kevin Williamson at March 15, 2016 01:18 PM (8ZskC)

37 I expect Trump to win Florida and NC (though NC is proportional right?) and he has already won N.Marianas; Illinois and Missouri = toss up between Trump and Cruz; Ohio = toss up between Trump and Kasich. Ohio is interesting to see if he gets any cross over votes.

Posted by: IC at March 15, 2016 01:18 PM (a0IVu)

38 Juan Valdez will run as a Coffee Party candidate.

Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at March 15, 2016 01:19 PM (FkBIv)

39 28
I'm glad Ace is up and all, but I was enjoying the last thread where Pro and Anti trump Morons weren't at each other's throats.

Posted by: joe, living dangerously at March 15, 2016 01:17 PM (KUaJL)

=====================

I'll get you for that!

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 01:19 PM (rJSDb)

40 Looks like I picked the wrong week to stop cooking methamphetamine.

Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at March 15, 2016 01:19 PM (8ZskC)

41 ~~#BRINGBACKOURSTRIKEOUTTAG~~

No!

Posted by: rickb223 at March 15, 2016 01:19 PM (44Kmm)

42 Yay. A trump thread.

LOL; I get the you don't say that entire enthusiasm.

(Or maybe I'm wrong)

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at March 15, 2016 01:19 PM (w4NZ8)

43 While initially I welcomed Trump's presence in the race in the form of Gozer the Gozerian, sent to destroy the GOPe, the more he talks, the lower my opinion of him drops.

Having already voted for Cruz, I wonder if the temporary pain of a Trump presidency will be worth the long term damage done to my enemies in the GOPe.

As much as I may come to dislike him, I am of the opinion that he will be worth it in the long run.

But then I liked Dubya during his first term, and look how that turned out...

My precience-fu is weak.

Posted by: Azenogoth (Freedom or Fire) at March 15, 2016 01:19 PM (z/vX9)

44 I thank the candidates who didn't listen to Scott Walker. Thanks a lot for the Trump nomination. It was clear at least 2 if not 3 weeks ago that Katshit and little Mario didn't stand a snow balls chances in hell. Thanks A Lot

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 15, 2016 01:20 PM (voOPb)

45 The GOP is a dead party walking, at least the the presidential level. Trump just accelerated what had been happening for 20 years.

Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at March 15, 2016 01:20 PM (1JAxC)

46 ~~#BRINGBACKOURSTRIKEOUTTAG~~

No.

Posted by: Anon Y. Mous at March 15, 2016 01:20 PM (R+30W)

47 >>I don't trust a man who doesn't accept his given pallor and hair status.

*cough*

Posted by: Joey "choo-choo" Biden at March 15, 2016 01:20 PM (NOIQH)

48 I could see Trump only taking North Carolina and FLorida. Hope I'm wrong.

Posted by: Lord Gulgoth at March 15, 2016 01:20 PM (bWvOd)

49 I think even the most rabid anti Trumpers (includes me) will come around once they see the relentless onslaught from the media and leftist orgs (but I repeat myself). Their viciousness against Trump and all who are slightly right of center will make Trumps antics seem reasonable by November.

Posted by: GregV61 at March 15, 2016 01:20 PM (H0lcY)

50 Cruz has to take IL with its 69 delegates.

As I posted in the previous thread, it'd take a huge, huge shift to Cruz after today for him to win.

---------------
As of today, there are only 1,392 possible delegates to win left.

Trump sits at 469 delegates.
He wins FL and OH today and he'll have 635.

He only needs 1,237 to win a majority on the 1st ballot.

That's 602 more delegates, after today.

There are, after today, 604 delegates who are from winner-take-all and 120 from winner-take-most states.
Near as I can tell, Trump leads in all of those states (except maybe UT).

Cruz sits at 370.
He needs 867 more to win.
He has to take almost all of those 724 delegates plus healthy wins in the other states to win.

After
today, Rubio and Kasick are mathematically eliminated from winning the
nomination--there is no possible way they can get to 1,237. (And there
really wasn't before today either.)

Posted by: RoyalOil at March 15, 2016 01:20 PM (fQ/0p)

51 You don't understand. I coulda had class. I coulda been a contender. I coulda been somebody, instead of a bum, which is what I am, let's face it

Posted by: Lil' Marco Rubio at March 15, 2016 01:20 PM (Z9O76)

52 6 Allahpundit speculates about the possibility of the GOP changing the rules so that Trump is denied the nomination even if he wins.
http://tinyurl.com/gnqbamy

Posted by: Anon Y. Mous at March 15, 2016 01:13 PM (R+30W)

Willowed. If true I hope Cruz concedes tonight and endorses Trump.

Posted by: Golfman at March 15, 2016 01:21 PM (48QDY)

53 My precience-fu is weak.

Posted by: Azenogoth (Freedom or Fire) at March 15, 2016 01:19 PM (z/vX9)

You're not alone. I never believed Obama would be elected in the first place.

Posted by: kathysaysso at March 15, 2016 01:21 PM (43OZ6)

54 If Trump turns out to be SMOD, then I could settle for that.

Posted by: Draki at March 15, 2016 01:21 PM (laIoJ)

55 >>>Posted by: rickb223 at March 15, 2016 01:19 PM (44Kmm)

Stop posting my comments before I do!

Posted by: Anon Y. Mous at March 15, 2016 01:21 PM (R+30W)

56 Too bad the Cruz people didn't figure that out earlier.

Sad!

I might let Cruz be AG.

Posted by: Donald Trump at March 15, 2016 01:21 PM (mcm0N)

57 Unlike a lot of people, I don't "comment strategically" or "post strategically," but rather, being amongst friends, speak honestly:

I want Cruz to win the nomination, and will vote for him when CA has its primary; BUT, if Trump gets the nomination, I will most definitely vote for him in the general election.

There. I said it.

Many people whose actual feeling and intentions are exactly the same as mine will NOT reveal the second half of that statement (that they would vote for Trump in the general), but they think it is a strategic mistake to admit that prior to the nomination being decided, because that admission strengthens Trump's position in the primary race.

Too much strategery.

Not that it matters anyway. This election is in the hands of the LIVs, and nothing anyone says will sway them away from Trump and Sanders.

Posted by: zombie at March 15, 2016 01:21 PM (jBuUi)

58 Thus, the more the Left and the Establishment attack him, the stronger he gets!

Posted by: zombie at March 15, 2016 01:15 PM (jBuUi)

I think I've heard that line before in a a mid-60's JapaneseGiant Flying Space Turtle movie. If you frantically point and gesticulate and deliberatelymove your mouth out of sync with what you're saying, you'll nail it.

Posted by: troyriser at March 15, 2016 01:21 PM (UWlp+)

59 I know it's more of a city thing, but at my polling place in the leafy suburbs of Chicago, there were surprisingly few dead people voting this morning.

Posted by: ajmojo at March 15, 2016 01:21 PM (1H9ox)

60 So the Bitch of Benghazi wins after all.

It is what it is.

Posted by: Margarita DeVille at March 15, 2016 01:21 PM (T/5A0)

61 National Review will self combust tonight

Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at March 15, 2016 01:14 PM

Should be interesting...but don't forget about Poppin' Fresh and his BFF, Dondi.

Gonna be a whole lot of shakin' goin' on. Also whining.

Posted by: MrScribbler at March 15, 2016 01:22 PM (8xI/8)

62 Is it time to start burning stuff?

Posted by: Crabby cupcake at March 15, 2016 01:22 PM (kDOcL)

63 59 I know it's more of a city thing, but at my polling place in the leafy suburbs of Chicago, there were surprisingly few dead people voting this morning.
Posted by: ajmojo
--------------------------

And they were still voting for Richard J. Daley. Old habits never die.

Posted by: Roy at March 15, 2016 01:22 PM (VndSC)

64 "13 National Review will self combust tonight
Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo"

Maybe, along with others that do not wish to see Hillary as president. Pretty much guaranteed of Trump is the nominee.

Posted by: Benji Carver at March 15, 2016 01:22 PM (OD2ni)

65 Thus, the more the Left and the Establishment attack him, the stronger he gets!

They refused to understand this, and kept plodding along with the same old tactics.

Posted by: Retardo Mentalblock at March 15, 2016 01:23 PM (SEFXb)

66 Is it time to start burning stuff?
Posted by: Crabby cupcake at March 15, 2016 01:22 PM (kDOcL)

--

No... the convention is still a ways off.

Posted by: fixerupper at March 15, 2016 01:23 PM (8XRCm)

67 Sad!

I might let Cruz be AG.
Posted by: Donald Trump at March 15, 2016 01:21 PM (mcm0N)

---------------

Ah ... Mr. Trump that was going to be my position.

Posted by: Chris Christie at March 15, 2016 01:23 PM (gmeXX)

68 43 While initially I welcomed Trump's presence in the race in the form of Gozer the Gozerian, sent to destroy the GOPe, the more he talks, the lower my opinion of him drops.

Having already voted for Cruz, I wonder if the temporary pain of a Trump presidency will be worth the long term damage done to my enemies in the GOPe.

As much as I may come to dislike him, I am of the opinion that he will be worth it in the long run.

But then I liked Dubya during his first term, and look how that turned out...

My precience-fu is weak.
Posted by: Azenogoth (Freedom or Fire) at March 15, 2016 01:19 PM (z/vX9)

=================

The idea that Trump will be bad for the GOPe's aims is laughable, I think.

Just imagine, Trump, who can't keep his cornerstone of his candidacy on immigration straight, comes out and supports some kindred form of the Gang of 8 (which seems extremely likely especially if there's a promise of a wall even if it doesn't have any teeth), and the GOPe wins everything.

Trump will give them everything else that they want while representing the angry wing of the party. He'll be liberal on social issues, effectively silencing many on the right who sacrificed their believes to support him. He'll support greater government incursions into the private sector (especially healthcare), and the GOPe will shout "You'd better be happy! You gave him to us!" while celebrating in the background.

Trump causes heartburn because the GOPe thinks he'll lose the race for the White House, not because they believe he's going to govern conservatively.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 01:23 PM (rJSDb)

69 Rubio never should have bought that damn fishing boat.

Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at March 15, 2016 01:23 PM (8ZskC)

70 Actually if Trump won all 5 today and then Cruz went 55-45 that would be enough to deny Trump 1237 mathematically. For instance, going 55-45 in a heads up match in Arizona and Utah next Tuesday would yield a 98-0 delegate haul for Cruz.

Posted by: Shooter McGavin at March 15, 2016 01:23 PM (OD23t)

71 I'm gonna shoot that snow machine.

Posted by: Todd Palin at March 15, 2016 01:24 PM (gwG9s)

72 If you frantically point and gesticulate and deliberatelymove your mouth out of sync with what you're saying, you'll nail it.

Posted by: troyriser at March 15, 2016 01:21 PM (UWlp+)

I wonder of a skilled ventriloquist could do that.

Posted by: kathysaysso at March 15, 2016 01:24 PM (43OZ6)

73 11 I'm looking for the angry recriminations. Is this the right place?

-----------------

No, this is abuse. Angry recriminations is down the hall, first door to your right.

Posted by: Duke Lowell at March 15, 2016 01:24 PM (kTF2Z)

74 14 Posted by: zombie at March 15, 2016 01:15 PM (jBuUi)

What is the main unifying rage point at this very site besides Hobo Preserves?

Political correctness, something JWest, Moo Moo, ChemJeff, JeffB, BC2982, AtC, and even to a degree Malor and I agree on....

Political correctness gives the donks ~5% of their voter base IMHO.

Posted by: sven10077 at March 15, 2016 01:24 PM (g8Hfr)

75 Many people whose actual feeling and intentions are exactly the same as mine will NOT reveal the second half of that statement (that they would vote for Trump in the general), but they think it is a strategic mistake to admit that prior to the nomination being decided, because that admission strengthens Trump's position in the primary race.

------------

Some of us actually mean it when we say we won't vote for Trump.

Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 01:24 PM (gmeXX)

76 It has been over for a while, unfortunately due to Mario and his never say die retardedness. That and Ben Carson character assassinating Cruz over the Iowa bullcrap, which caused many evangelicals to run away right before Super Tuesday.

I personally believe that Cruz would have won a straight up head-to-head against Trump. Would've loved to have seen Cruz/Fiorina on the ticket. That would have been a winner, IMO. Oh well.

Exit question: Who does Trump pick for a running mate? My guess he goes completely outside the box and chooses a non-politician.

Posted by: Matty at March 15, 2016 01:25 PM (+ULpH)

77 I listened to a bit of Beck over the weekend driving home. It was a best of show so I don't know what day of the week it actually aired. But holy shit that dude is unhinged with regards to Trump. He actually believes Trump is a Hitler. Not in a Godwin type of comparison, but in a real, if you vote for him America will go fascist way.

Beck if fucking nuts.

Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at March 15, 2016 01:25 PM (1JAxC)

78 "If Trump Wins Big Today, It's All But Over"

For the other candidates, for the GOP, or for America? You're going to have to be specific, Ace.

Posted by: Qoheleth at March 15, 2016 01:25 PM (iIzG7)

79 I'm impressed with Cruz's turnout operation. I've been a Republican in Illinois for twenty-five plus years and they've run it better than anyone, primary or general.

Posted by: E.E. Knight at March 15, 2016 01:25 PM (7b4Mw)

80 67: "Ah ... Mr. Trump that was going to be my position."

I'm sure he will need an official food taster.

Posted by: Azenogoth (Freedom or Fire) at March 15, 2016 01:25 PM (z/vX9)

81 First!

Posted by: Marco Romo at March 15, 2016 01:25 PM (9eYoy)

82 There were 14 candidate today to fill dumbass Orange Boehner's seat. Will probably wind up with a preferred establishment tool. Of the three big names two were state congressmen(one a farmer and the other a small business owner) and one I'm not sure but is also a businessman. All three claim to be conservative. But ads against the businessman call him out as outsourcing to China and even having a website to assist others in outsourcing. The small businessman congressman has an ad calling the other 2 Washington Establishment preferred candidates.

Someone is probably going to win it with 20% of the vote.

Posted by: buzzion at March 15, 2016 01:25 PM (zt+N6)

83 Well, except Trump, the guy you say you'd do anything to stop, but "anything" turns out to be only "keep doing what you've been doing to get yourself a new job."

-----------

I'm not sure he was really on pace to get there. After today, he may be, but prior to today he was not.

Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 01:25 PM (gmeXX)

84 70 Actually if Trump won all 5 today and then Cruz went 55-45 that would be enough to deny Trump 1237 mathematically. For instance, going 55-45 in a heads up match in Arizona and Utah next Tuesday would yield a 98-0 delegate haul for Cruz.
Posted by: Shooter McGavin at March 15, 2016 01:23 PM (OD23t)

--------------------

Then we'd get a brokered convention and end up with Ryan or Rombley.

Posted by: Soona at March 15, 2016 01:26 PM (Fmupd)

85 Thus, the more the Left and the Establishment attack him, the stronger he gets!
=====
I think I've heard that line before in a a mid-60's JapaneseGiant Flying Space Turtle movie. If you frantically point and gesticulate and deliberatelymove your mouth out of sync with what you're saying, you'll nail it.
Posted by: troyriser at March 15, 2016 01:21 PM (UWlp+)

Hah! Fantastic.

Posted by: Ghost of kari - certified inane at March 15, 2016 01:26 PM (xuouz)

86 62 Is it time to start burning stuff?
...
Usually.

Posted by: ajmojo at March 15, 2016 01:26 PM (1H9ox)

87 75 Some of us actually mean it when we say we won't vote for Trump.
Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 01:24 PM (gmeXX)

I mean it too. I'll vote Libertarian.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 01:26 PM (rJSDb)

88 What I'm saying is, Trump will go into the convention with something like at least 1400 delegates.

The ONLY way that doesn't happen is if he loses almost all of the remaining states, and especially the winner-take-all states.

You know, like drawing an Ace on the last card when you have a mixed suite of 10-J-Q-K.

Posted by: RoyalOil at March 15, 2016 01:26 PM (fQ/0p)

89 Trump cracked 50% in the last YouGov poll. I don't think Cruz is getting 60% of the vote going forward.

Posted by: Jake (irregular) at March 15, 2016 01:26 PM (8w+OS)

90 BC 1981 rather no offense meant Cochrane I need new batteries for the keyboard.

Posted by: sven10077 at March 15, 2016 01:26 PM (g8Hfr)

91 Bluff or Real? Marco Rubio says that even if he loses Florida, it won't alter his campaign at all, because nobody is on pace to get 1237 votes anyway.

Well, except Trump, the guy you say you'd do anything to stop, but "anything" turns out to be only "keep doing what you've been doing to get yourself a new job."

Posted by: Ace at 01:09 PM

===============

Carly said the same thing hours before she dropped out.

Bluff.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 01:26 PM (rJSDb)

92 If Trump wins Florida and Illinois tonight, Cruz should get out. Trump will then easily get to 1237. Let it burn at the convention.

Posted by: Stay out da bushes at March 15, 2016 01:26 PM (cR/4a)

93 Second look at GOP superdelegates?

Posted by: You gotta steal that bitch at March 15, 2016 01:18 PM (VndSC)
______

Im also old enough to remember when Republicans looked down on Democrats for the superdelegate shenanigans.

Today the same people drool over a brokered convention and stuff their fingers ino their ears when they you mention the word "plurality".

Posted by: The Nayden Broad at March 15, 2016 01:27 PM (P8unj)

94 I might let Cruz be AG.
Posted by: Donald Trump at March 15, 2016 01:21 PM (mcm0N)

---------------

Ah ... Mr. Trump that was going to be my position.----Chris Christie

Cruz is younger and cuter than you.

Posted by: Trump at March 15, 2016 01:27 PM (m3iiU)

95 Not that it matters anyway. This election is in the hands of the LIVs, and nothing anyone says will sway them away from Trump and Sanders.

Reverse agreed with the first half. Trump OR Cruz. Or Cruz or Trump.

This election sounds like it is in the hands of the party apparatchik if last thread is to be believed.
If they are going to monkey around with the convention/delegate voting.

Posted by: rickb223 at March 15, 2016 01:27 PM (44Kmm)

96 68: "Trump causes heartburn because the GOPe thinks he'll lose the race for the White House, not because they believe he's going to govern conservatively."

I believe if this were the case, the GOPe types wouldn't be voting for Hillary over Trump.

Posted by: Azenogoth (Freedom or Fire) at March 15, 2016 01:27 PM (z/vX9)

97 Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Bailey?

- Mario "Never Say Die" Rubio

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks at March 15, 2016 01:27 PM (Nwg0u)

98 not because they believe he's going to govern conservatively.

-----------

No one (not even Trump fans) believe he will govern conservatively. Part of his charm to many.

Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 01:27 PM (gmeXX)

99 Trump causes heartburn because the GOPe thinks he'll lose the race for the White House, not because they believe he's going to govern conservatively.
---

This.

Posted by: Y-not (@moxiemom) at March 15, 2016 01:27 PM (t5zYU)

100 Some of us actually mean it when we say we won't vote for Trump.

*fistbump*

No strategery here. Just hate him with the unbridled hatred of one who hates a lot.

Posted by: Bandersnatch at March 15, 2016 01:27 PM (1xUj/)

101 Carson's Trump support looks to be nothing more than a combination of butt-hurt and quid-pro-quo opportunism.

Hard to read this any other way. He just seems petulant and grasping at this point. Maybe he always was. The "book tour" theory of campaign was idiotic, he spent way, way more on the campaign than he could possibly get in book sales. But really, was it all just about ego and what he could gain?

Regarding Trump: I've been sitting on this a while because it would be off topic elsewhere but... if he's such an easy defeat, why did BLM and the rest pull out all the stops to silence him?

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 15, 2016 01:27 PM (39g3+)

102 Just caught Donna Brazile on CNN. The group was talking about violence at Trump rallies and Trump's comments about women from a political ad. Anyway, good old Donna stated the Republicans were disrupting Trump rallies and then went on to say the Democrats were going to the rallies. The look on her face was priceless as she realized she exposed the rally disrupting game by the Democrats. She then mumbled something about her reveal was for "honesty." Was a hoot. Will probably never been seen anywhere, but sure would make a good Trump ad.

Posted by: DJ Jazzy Mel at March 15, 2016 01:27 PM (22uju)

103 62 Is it time to start burning stuff?
Posted by: Crabby cupcake at March 15, 2016 01:22 PM (kDOcL)
---------------

Any time is a great time to burn stuff.

Posted by: Notorious Arsnonist at March 15, 2016 01:27 PM (BDZWU)

104 79 I'm impressed with Cruz's turnout operation. I've been a Republican in Illinois for twenty-five plus years and they've run it better than anyone, primary or general.
....
We've found the Man in the High Castle! Can you send me some movies? I'm in Naperville.

Posted by: ajmojo at March 15, 2016 01:28 PM (1H9ox)

105 Mario Lopez just can't quit us.

Posted by: AlaBAMA at March 15, 2016 01:28 PM (2PHKP)

106 Allahpundit speculates about the possibility of the GOP changing the rules so that Trump is denied the nomination even if he wins.
http://tinyurl.com/gnqbamy
Posted by: Anon Y. Mous

That would start something very ugly. Is the GOPe so incredibly stupid to do that? Of course they are.

Posted by: Cheri at March 15, 2016 01:28 PM (oiNtH)

107 77 Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at March 15, 2016 01:25 PM (1JAxC)

Beck went supine bugf*c* after Ogabe kept the crown...

Posted by: sven10077 at March 15, 2016 01:28 PM (g8Hfr)

108 Exit question: Who does Trump pick for a running mate? My guess he goes completely outside the box and chooses a non-politician.
Posted by: Matty

He will pick Mia Love, DESTROYING all his enemies' arguments against him, and then will win the general election running away. Sanders will be the 21st century Mondale.

Posted by: zombie at March 15, 2016 01:28 PM (jBuUi)

109 Am I a superdelegate? Where do I go to find out? I remember one time when this pretty little thing of a waitress asked me if I wanted super-salad. I'm pretty sure it had lettuce in it.

I think it's time for the Lawrence Welk Show. I like to watch Bobby and Cissy dance. Now that was one sassy Cissy--get it? That Arthur Duncan sure could dance too, and he wasn't uppity.

What?

Haley, I swear that Prescott Bush died a couple of years ago, so voting for him at the convention would be downright silly.

Posted by: Sen. Thad Cochran at March 15, 2016 01:28 PM (3GAnN)

110 Be of good cheer boys.

Either Cruz or Trump will be the nominee.

YOU HEAR THAT GOPe!!!! FUCK YOU THATS WHY!!!

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
Posted by: fixerupper at March 15, 2016 01:17 PM (8XRCm)

Soon...

Posted by: Willard, Waiting in the Wings at March 15, 2016 01:28 PM (dH97I)

111
Maybe, along with others that do not wish to see Hillary as president. Pretty much guaranteed of Trump is the nominee.
Posted by: Benji Carver at March 15, 2016 01:22 PM (OD2ni)

___

LOL. What did these spineless assholes do to prevent Obama from winning. Nothing. The RIONs embraced Obama and gave him everything he asked for while shitting on their base. But now it's Trump's fault if Hillary wins? You guys are fucking hilarious.

Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at March 15, 2016 01:28 PM (1JAxC)

112 This is probably why Jeb visited Rubio/Cruz/Kasich recently -- to convince two of them to drop out and concentrate fire on Trump.

Posted by: joncelli, gone Shakespearean at March 15, 2016 01:29 PM (RD7QR)

113 Anyone else find it incredibly ironic that the GOPe really will end up deciding this thing? If Rubio and Kasich dropped out, Cruz would have this in the bag as an actual professed conservative, and something that the GOPe at least claims to want. But they won't, and are probably going to hand the nomination to Trump in the process.

That's Gollum betraying Frodo resulting in the destruction of the One Ring - level karmic justice.

Posted by: joe, living dangerously at March 15, 2016 01:29 PM (KUaJL)

114 96 68: "Trump causes heartburn because the GOPe thinks he'll lose the race for the White House, not because they believe he's going to govern conservatively."

I believe if this were the case, the GOPe types wouldn't be voting for Hillary over Trump.
Posted by: Azenogoth (Freedom or Fire) at March 15, 2016 01:27 PM (z/vX9)

==================

I'd wager that that's bluster on their part. Trying to scare the party into going with Bush/Rubio/Kasich instead.

No one said they were convincing.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 01:29 PM (rJSDb)

115 I finally get to vote to today in MO. Everything is so fucked up this time around I won't even post here who I'm voting for.

Posted by: kahall at March 15, 2016 01:29 PM (xTgLs)

116 Bluff or Real? Marco Rubio says that even if he loses Florida, it won't alter his campaign at all, because nobody is on pace to get 1237 votes anyway.
______

Really? Losing Florida "wont alter the campaign", yes? That news to me. I actually remember that some guy assured me just last week, that the Florida primary would determine the Republican nominee (see nick link).

Posted by: The Nayden Broad at March 15, 2016 01:29 PM (P8unj)

117 Truth be told, he's only saying this because the RNC is fondling his knee, with promises of more should Trump get less than 1237.

You're our guy, Rubio. Swearsies.

Oh, that guy? That's just Paul. He's no one.

Posted by: AlaBAMA at March 15, 2016 01:30 PM (2PHKP)

118 He will pick Mia Love, DESTROYING all his enemies' arguments against him, and then will win the general election running away. Sanders will be the 21st century Mondale.
Posted by: zombie at March 15, 2016 01:28 PM (jBuUi)

---------------------

I was hoping for Allen West, but Mia Love does check more boxes. (If only she was lesbian.)

Posted by: iforgot at March 15, 2016 01:30 PM (pC96u)

119 98 not because they believe he's going to govern conservatively.

-----------

No one (not even Trump fans) believe he will govern conservatively. Part of his charm to many.
Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 01:27 PM (gmeXX)

===============

Especially those Democrats who keep voting in Republican primaries.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 01:30 PM (rJSDb)

120 If Trump turns out to be SMOD,

Will entry effect his hair?

Posted by: DaveA at March 15, 2016 01:30 PM (DL2i+)

121 Then we'd get a brokered convention and end up with Ryan or Rombley.

Posted by: Soona at March 15, 2016 01:26 PM (Fmupd)

Well, that should ease the aching hearts of the "anyone but Trump" peeps.

Posted by: kathysaysso at March 15, 2016 01:30 PM (43OZ6)

122 Then we'd get a brokered convention and end up with Ryan or Rombley.
Posted by: Soona at March 15, 2016 01:26 PM (Fmupd)

_____

Or both! Why not? Just because it was a miserable failure in 2012, doesn't mean Romney/Ryan can't work in 2016. The GOPe knows best and if they say R-squared is the ticket, who are you to question them peasant?

Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at March 15, 2016 01:30 PM (1JAxC)

123 "Ah ... Mr. Trump that was going to be my position.----Chris Christie"

Fat boy Christie is a better Reek than Theon.

Posted by: Ramsay Bolton at March 15, 2016 01:30 PM (OD2ni)

124 ...there were surprisingly few dead people voting this morning...

My understanding is that most of the dead vote is cast after the polls are closed. Acquaintances cast the dead vote when polls are open but these are fewer in number. Strangers do the casting after hours. This is also the time of casting for people registered but didn't vote.

Posted by: scorecard at March 15, 2016 01:30 PM (I0sxh)

125 76----Would've loved to have seen Cruz/Fiorina on the ticket. That would have been a winner, IMO. Oh well.

Posted by: Matty at March 15, 2016 01:25 PM (+ULpH)
---------
I agree about a Cruz/Fiorina ticket.. I think that would have had a good chance against the Hag.

Posted by: Margarita DeVille at March 15, 2016 01:30 PM (T/5A0)

126 I was hoping for Allen West, but Mia Love does check more boxes. (If only she was lesbian.)

Posted by: iforgot at March 15, 2016 01:30 PM (pC96u)

I'd settle for a little college experimentation caught on film.

Posted by: Colorado Alex at March 15, 2016 01:30 PM (LUG6K)

127 Is it time to start burning stuff?
Posted by: Crabby cupcake at March 15, 2016 01:22 PM (kDOcL)
---------------

Any time is a great time to burn stuff.
Posted by: Notorious Arsnonist at March 15, 2016 01:27 PM (BDZWU)

----

No no no no NO dammit. How many time do we ave to cover this???

Pillage
Rape
then Burn.

Always burn LAST. Otherwise there is nothing to pillage or rape.

Write.It.Down.

Posted by: fixerupper at March 15, 2016 01:31 PM (8XRCm)

128 Mia Love endorsed Rubio though.

Posted by: IC at March 15, 2016 01:31 PM (a0IVu)

129 We have met the enemy and he is Trump

Posted by: Marco Pogo at March 15, 2016 01:31 PM (Z9O76)

130 99 Trump causes heartburn because the GOPe thinks he'll lose the race for the White House, not because they believe he's going to govern conservatively.
---

This.

Posted by: Y-not (@moxiemom) at March 15, 2016 01:27 PM (t5zYU)

++++

They're more afraid he'll win the White House. That would really upset their apple cart.

Posted by: Anon Y. Mous at March 15, 2016 01:31 PM (R+30W)

131 Im also old enough to remember when Republicans looked down on Democrats for the superdelegate shenanigans.

Today the same people drool over a brokered convention and stuff their fingers ino their ears when they you mention the word "plurality".

Posted by: The Nayden Broad at March 15, 2016 01:27 PM (P8unj)

Bill Kristol is openly advocating for bound delegates to "vote their conscience" on the first ballot. Say what you will about Trump, he's unmasked a lot of people.

Posted by: Jake (irregular) at March 15, 2016 01:31 PM (8w+OS)

132 Exit question: Who does Trump pick for a running mate? My guess he goes completely outside the box and chooses a non-politician.

Posted by: Matty

He will pick Mia Love, DESTROYING all his enemies' arguments against
him, and then will win the general election running away. Sanders will
be the 21st century Mondale.
==========
That kinda talk send folks scrambling for their bunks.

Posted by: RoyalOil at March 15, 2016 01:31 PM (fQ/0p)

133 118 He will pick Mia Love, DESTROYING all his enemies' arguments against him, and then will win the general election running away. Sanders will be the 21st century Mondale.
Posted by: zombie at March 15, 2016 01:28 PM (jBuUi)

---------------------

I was hoping for Allen West, but Mia Love does check more boxes. (If only she was lesbian.)
...
I bet I can make her one.

Posted by: ajmojo at March 15, 2016 01:31 PM (1H9ox)

134 I would do anything to stop Trump

But I won't do that

No I won't do that

Posted by: MarcoLoaf at March 15, 2016 01:32 PM (zUs0s)

135 Trump causes heartburn because the GOPe thinks he'll lose the race for the White House, not because they believe he's going to govern conservatively.

I think most of their opposition is a sort of elitist blue blood horror at this gauche, crass individual coming into their club house. They're Judge Smails responding to Rodney Dangerfield's Al Czervik character.

Some of it is driven by an underlying concern that Trump's Ego and attitude + Obama's gross overpowered White House could end up with a tyrant.

But Hillary is far, far more likely to abuse that. I could easily see her putting people into camps for disagreeing with global warming, and not even blinking an eye. And the press would cheer this on as courageous and necessary, while Hollywood put out films about how that saved the world.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 15, 2016 01:32 PM (39g3+)

136
Will entry effect his hair?

Posted by: DaveA at March 15, 2016 01:30 PM (DL2i+)

Not hair. Heat shield.

Posted by: AlaBAMA at March 15, 2016 01:32 PM (2PHKP)

137 131 They're more afraid he'll win the White House. That would really upset their apple cart.

Posted by: Anon Y. Mous at March 15, 2016 01:31 PM (R+30W)

===============

Which apple cart? Is he really going to start rolling back government?

That's what people usually refer to when talking about this...but Trump is much more likely to increase the size of government leading to more phony baloney jobs for Republicans and their relatives who want to govern and manage better than Democrats.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 01:33 PM (rJSDb)

138 Trump should really get out now while he has the chance to save face.

by the way, the mention earlier that Rush said the GOPe is going to try to get the nomination for !beJ is so ridiculous that I can almost believe it's true. The bigger the turd, the prouder the a-hole. They'd really be willing to ruin Thanksgiving if they couldn't be at the head of the table.

Posted by: Satan of the GOPe at March 15, 2016 01:33 PM (qSIlh)

139 I hoping that MAGA tell us again how much billionaire Trump can relate to your average person. I'll really enjoy that as the billionaires (Trump and Clinton) battle it out for the soul of America.

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at March 15, 2016 01:33 PM (w4NZ8)

140 Keep in mind that the delegate count is just that- a number. As the Paulbots demonstrated in 2012 the delegate count as it stands now won't necessarily reflect who actually shows up to vote at the convention.

Cruz, having a much more organized campaign, is no doubt working on a plan to work the delegate selection process to his advantage.

In short, fuck Trump and his loathsome supporters. Contested convention or just.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at March 15, 2016 01:33 PM (Dq1f4)

141 Rubio has been playing spoiler for two months.

Posted by: Lauren at March 15, 2016 01:34 PM (2oFSo)

142 ~~strikeout~~ isn't working?

Posted by: Grampa Jimbo at March 15, 2016 01:34 PM (1ijHg)

143 Lot of angry people here

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 15, 2016 01:34 PM (mw8Dm)

144 STAY THE COURSE, STAY THE COURSE!!!

Posted by: Captain Marco Rubio, USS Florida at March 15, 2016 01:34 PM (Z9O76)

145 And then I saw a fifth horseman riding a racoon-Orange horse with racoon-Orange hair.

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks at March 15, 2016 01:34 PM (Nwg0u)

146 Regarding Trump: I've been sitting on this a while because it would be off topic elsewhere but... if he's such an easy defeat, why did BLM and the rest pull out all the stops to silence him?
--------------------

Isn't that their perpetual MO? They've also silenced Bernie and they tried to silence Hillary.

Posted by: iforgot at March 15, 2016 01:34 PM (pC96u)

147 114: "I'd wager that that's bluster on their part. Trying to scare the party into going with Bush/Rubio/Kasich instead."

Either way, I'm investing in aquaponics and crossbows.

Posted by: Azenogoth (Freedom or Fire) at March 15, 2016 01:34 PM (z/vX9)

148 I was hoping for Allen West, but Mia Love does check more boxes. (If only she was lesbian.)
Posted by: iforgot

[Frantically starts googling "Mia Love lesbian porn"]

Posted by: zombie at March 15, 2016 01:34 PM (jBuUi)

149 Would've loved to have seen Cruz/Fiorina on the ticket. That would have been a winner, IMO. Oh well.

-------------

Could still happen. Stranger things have happened before ... I mean Donald Trump is on the verge of winning the GOP nomination. This is the year to believe that anything is possible. Even Hillary winning the White House.

Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 01:34 PM (gmeXX)

150 At least Kasich promised to get out after today, not so for Rubiato

Posted by: Vashta Nerada at March 15, 2016 01:34 PM (Qvgg/)

151 135 Trump causes heartburn because the GOPe thinks he'll lose the race for the White House, not because they believe he's going to govern conservatively.

I think most of their opposition is a sort of elitist blue blood horror at this gauche, crass individual coming into their club house. They're Judge Smails responding to Rodney Dangerfield's Al Czervik character.

Some of it is driven by an underlying concern that Trump's Ego and attitude + Obama's gross overpowered White House could end up with a tyrant.

But Hillary is far, far more likely to abuse that. I could easily see her putting people into camps for disagreeing with global warming, and not even blinking an eye. And the press would cheer this on as courageous and necessary, while Hollywood put out films about how that saved the world.
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 15, 2016 01:32 PM (39g3+)

================

I think you're largely right, but I believe you're underselling Trump's tyrannical instincts. He's already got a history of trying to bend the government to do his will. Why would that suddenly stop once he's president?

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 01:34 PM (rJSDb)

152 I bet I can make her one.
Posted by: ajmojo at March 15, 2016 01:31 PM (1H9ox)

Oh, so you're like a negative Ellen Degenerate, who manages to drive lesbians straight?

Posted by: Iblis at March 15, 2016 01:34 PM (9221z)

153 Posted by: DJ Jazzy Mel

Good old Donna. As Judge Judy says, if you tell the truth then you don't need a good memory.

Posted by: Cheri at March 15, 2016 01:34 PM (oiNtH)

154 111
Maybe, along with others that do not wish to see ~~Hillary~~Carter as president. Pretty much guaranteed of ~~Trump~~Reagan is the nominee.
Posted by: ~~Benji Carver~~George Will at March 15, ~~2016~~1976 01:22 PM (OD2ni)

Posted by: First-Rate Political Hack at March 15, 2016 01:35 PM (dH97I)

155 if he's such an easy defeat, why did BLM and the rest pull out all the stops to silence him?

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 15, 2016 01:27 PM (39g3+)

They haven't pulled out all the stops, not nearly. I think you and many others are underestimating just how bad bad can be.

Posted by: troyriser at March 15, 2016 01:35 PM (UWlp+)

156
I know it's more of a city thing, but at my polling place in the leafy
suburbs of Chicago, there were surprisingly few dead people voting this
morning.

Here too with a lone Dim standing outside. I told her wrong team when she tried handing me leaflets. As I passed she says she may be on the same team as me. Gave me a chuckle.

Posted by: dartist at March 15, 2016 01:35 PM (Nr1E9)

157 139 I hoping that MAGA tell us again how much billionaire Trump can relate to your average person. I'll really enjoy that as the billionaires (Trump and Clinton) battle it out for the soul of America.
...
Who the hell wants the average person in the Oval Office? I meet a lot of average people. They suck and I feel no need to base anything on their whims and desires.

Posted by: ajmojo at March 15, 2016 01:35 PM (1H9ox)

158 I'm not anti-Cruz. Just think he's got nearly no chance in the general.

There have been many surprises in this cycle, with more to come, but to me the biggest so far -- one I never would have predicted -- is how an uber-NYC figure like Trump could win the South including by splitting the Evangelical vote with Cruz who banked so much on winning it.

If you don't like Trump or think he's a sure loser in the general, then start a draft Romney movement. Else we'll get Jeb!

Posted by: Ignoramus at March 15, 2016 01:35 PM (r1fLd)

159 141
Rubio has been playing spoiler for two months.

Posted by: Lauren at March 15, 2016 01:34 PM (2oFSo)

Yes, he has.

I feel sorry for the little guy. Keeping up the charade of being anti-establishment while being establishment enough that the establishment hands you the nomination at a contested convention.

Sucking two dicks at once is hard work. - Jenna Jamenson

Posted by: AlaBAMA at March 15, 2016 01:36 PM (2PHKP)

160 I took ajmojo to mean that he is so repulsive, straight women look at him and go lesbian.

Posted by: Grampa Jimbo at March 15, 2016 01:36 PM (1ijHg)

161 >>> Second look at GOP superdelegates?
****

Why not? Since we're all in on going banana republic anyhow, I demand that the the President wear epaulets.

A shoulder parrot would be nice also.

Posted by: Damiano at March 15, 2016 01:36 PM (XItbt)

162 101 Carson's Trump support looks to be nothing more than a combination of butt-hurt and quid-pro-quo opportunism.

Hard to read this any other way. He just seems petulant and grasping at this point. Maybe he always was. The "book tour" theory of campaign was idiotic, he spent way, way more on the campaign than he could possibly get in book sales. But really, was it all just about ego and what he could gain?

Regarding Trump: I've been sitting on this a while because it would be off topic elsewhere but... if he's such an easy defeat, why did BLM and the rest pull out all the stops to silence him?
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 15, 2016 01:27 PM (39g3+)

*************

Chicago---hello?

9 1/2 Fingers Rahm Emanuel worked for whom?

Bernie made a surprise upset of Hillary in Michigan , send BLM and Bernie kiddos into Trumpland is known as a twofer.

Bernie beat the polling by 27% yet everyone still believes the polls. It's cute. The Bernie milennials at Reddit --at least they have figured out it's all crap.

Posted by: Donald Trump at March 15, 2016 01:36 PM (mcm0N)

163 I live here in the MO. Voted for Cruz this morning for whatever that's worth.

Posted by: Christopher Johnson at March 15, 2016 01:36 PM (3nNcI)

164 127: "Always burn LAST. Otherwise there is nothing to pillage or rape."

Unless your goal is to deny anyone else the spoils.

Such has been the methodology of the leftists for a century or more.

Posted by: Azenogoth (Freedom or Fire) at March 15, 2016 01:36 PM (z/vX9)

165 The general rule is that Trump either performs at his poll level or underperforms a little, whereas Cruz routinely overperforms his polls (due to his top-of-the-class turnout operation).

Or vote fraud.

*conspiratorial eyebrows*

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at March 15, 2016 01:36 PM (uURQL)

166 I think you're largely right, but I believe you're underselling Trump's tyrannical instincts. He's already got a history of trying to bend the government to do his will. Why would that suddenly stop once he's president?
Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 01:34 PM (rJSDb)

Health insurance mandates are great for Massachusetts, but only for Massachusetts, not for America, no way no how!

Posted by: Willard Romney, severe bunghole at March 15, 2016 01:36 PM (dH97I)

167
We want Marco.
We need Marco.
But there aint no way we're gonna get Marco.
So dont feel bad.
Two out three aint bad.

Posted by: Gope-Loaf at March 15, 2016 01:36 PM (8XRCm)

168 43 Having already voted for Cruz, I wonder if the temporary pain of a Trump presidency will be worth the long term damage done to my enemies in the GOPe.

As much as I may come to dislike him, I am of the opinion that he will be worth it in the long run...
Posted by: Azenogoth (Freedom or Fire) at March 15, 2016 01:19 PM (z/vX9)

Disagree. If Trump wins, he will fit right in with the GOPe, remember this is the great dealmaker. Most of us didn't want a dealmaker, I thought. If anything, Trump will make deals with the Democrats and make McConnell and Ryan look like the far right.

If Trump loses, the GOPe will just say I told you so and all of the sheep on the right will get in line, because it's all about winning elections. :heavy eye roll:

Posted by: Matty at March 15, 2016 01:37 PM (+ULpH)

169 Bluff or Real? Marco Rubio says that even if he loses Florida, it won't alter his campaign at all, because nobody is on pace to get 1237 votes anyway.
---------

Bluff. He has no money.

Posted by: Y-not (@moxiemom) at March 15, 2016 01:37 PM (t5zYU)

170 137 131 They're more afraid he'll win the White House. That would really upset their apple cart.

Posted by: Anon Y. Mous at March 15, 2016 01:31 PM (R+30W)

===============

Which apple cart? Is he really going to start rolling back government?

That's what people usually refer to when talking about this...but Trump is much more likely to increase the size of government leading to more phony baloney jobs for Republicans and their relatives who want to govern and manage better than Democrats.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 01:33 PM (rJSDb)

++++

Not just immigration, but also free trade. The donor class is invested in open borders for both goods and people. Trump will upset the status quo.

Posted by: Anon Y. Mous at March 15, 2016 01:37 PM (R+30W)

171 159 Posted by: AlaBAMA at March 15, 2016 01:36 PM (2PHKP)

Not if you're into yoga and contortionism Jenna....

//R Love esq

Posted by: sven10077 at March 15, 2016 01:37 PM (g8Hfr)

172 The average person is an idiot.

They voted for Presnit 4-putt.

Posted by: Grampa Jimbo at March 15, 2016 01:37 PM (1ijHg)

173 Lot of angry people here

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 15, 2016 01:34 PM

And pretty damn amusing it is, too.

Posted by: MrScribbler at March 15, 2016 01:37 PM (8xI/8)

174 I think you're largely right, but I believe you're underselling Trump's tyrannical instincts. He's already got a history of trying to bend the government to do his will. Why would that suddenly stop once he's president?
Posted by: TheJamesMadison
________

The Democrats and the media will rediscover their professed love for civil liberties and their abhorrence of executive branch over-reach.

Posted by: Furious George at March 15, 2016 01:37 PM (3GAnN)

175 Which apple cart? Is he really going to start rolling back government?

Well there's more than one apple cart. Trump is not an outsider in the sense that he's been in the elite for years and is a player, but he is an outsider in the sense that he's not a blue blood ivy leaguer. He's not one of the boys in the club. He's not part of the machine.

In other words, him being the head of the party and being in charge of who gets the goodies if elected leaves them out. He's not one of them, you see. And that matters even more than victory.

They haven't pulled out all the stops, not nearly.

Well true, its not as bad as it can be but the point isn't the degree, but the effort. If they think Trump is a rollover in the general, they wouldn't give a damn if he spoke in Chicago.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 15, 2016 01:37 PM (39g3+)

176 but I believe you're underselling Trump's tyrannical instincts. He's already got a history of trying to bend the government to do his will. Why would that suddenly stop once he's president?
Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 01:34 PM (rJSDb)

What "Tyrannical" instincts? And don't tell me about his business practices, that is a whole other world. All the people making the claim Trump is tryrannical or Authoritarian are farting in the wind. Yeah he may be, but who the fuck knows. He has not real political record to base any of that on. All his past far past statements have to be taken with a a huge grain of salt since they were targeted to help his business interests. To be honest I have no fuckin idea what Trump stands for and mostly neither do you all. All opinions here are 99% guesses and supostions.

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 15, 2016 01:38 PM (mw8Dm)

177 158 I'm not anti-Cruz. Just think he's got nearly no chance in the general.

There have been many surprises in this cycle, with more to come, but to me the biggest so far -- one I never would have predicted -- is how an uber-NYC figure like Trump could win the South including by splitting the Evangelical vote with Cruz who banked so much on winning it.

If you don't like Trump or think he's a sure loser in the general, then start a draft Romney movement. Else we'll get Jeb!

Posted by: Ignoramus at March 15, 2016 01:35 PM (r1fLd)

=================

Individual personalities affect presidential elections at the marginal level. You have to balance the two to see where a relative advantage comes from. Cruz vs. Hillary leads to a small advantage for Cruz because he should be able to embarrass her in debates and represents a much younger/more diverse ideal.

However, elections are all mostly built on macro factors like the economy and war. I think that those macro factors support the Republican side this election.

I don't oppose Trump because I think he'll lose. I oppose him because I think he'll win.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 01:38 PM (rJSDb)

178 @ 154

Pro or Anti Trump, let's agree that Trump is NOT Reagan by any stretch of the imagination.

Posted by: Damiano at March 15, 2016 01:38 PM (XItbt)

179 Who the hell wants the average person in the Oval Office? I meet a lot of average people. They suck and I feel no need to base anything on their whims and desires.

Posted by: ajmojo at March 15, 2016 01:35 PM (1H9ox)

Kevin Williamson? Is that you? I didn't know that you posted here.

Posted by: Jake (irregular) at March 15, 2016 01:38 PM (8w+OS)

180 By all means vote for the blowhard who won't break 30% in the November general election.

Getting Trump to run as a Republican was Bill Clinton's greatest political achievement by far.

That's all been said before and ignored by the mob. Just repeating it for posterity.

Posted by: whatmeworry? at March 15, 2016 01:38 PM (dZGNV)

181 My biggest issue with Trump is that the merch on his store isn't as gaudy as I was hoping. I wanted it to look like someone threw up red, white, and blue and then blew up the puddle with a firecracker. I wanted like early 1990s Team USA Olympic uniforms.

But no. Same old golf shirts and baseball caps. Not even a windbreaker.

He really is just like any other politician.

Posted by: shillelagh at March 15, 2016 01:38 PM (L3vVL)

182 165 Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at March 15, 2016 01:36 PM (uURQL)

Then we need to hire the man...

The Walking Dead id not a cutting edge show here man...happens every two years in donkey land.

Posted by: sven10077 at March 15, 2016 01:39 PM (g8Hfr)

183 Then we'd get a brokered convention and end up with Ryan or Rombley.

Posted by: Soona at March 15, 2016 01:26 PM (Fmupd)

Well, that should ease the aching hearts of the "anyone but Trump" peeps.

Hearts or butts?

Posted by: rickb223 at March 15, 2016 01:39 PM (44Kmm)

184 I'm a Missouri resident that looks upon Marco Rubio as a national equivalent of Todd Akin at this point. I hope Cruz does well enough to shine a light on the fact that everything stated as an attempt to deny Trump 1237 is really an attempt to deny Trump, and especially Cruz, 1237.

A narrow 2nd or 3rd along with a good delegate haul for Cruz in MO and IL, paired along with Rubio staying in this thing.....that spells out the game.

The best part of Trump is shining a flashlight to see where all the roaches scatter.

Posted by: Dave S. at March 15, 2016 01:39 PM (mhkbv)

185 I would vote for a bucket of dog vomit over that vile woman.

Posted by: Duke Lowell at March 15, 2016 01:39 PM (kTF2Z)

186 Posted by: zombie at March 15, 2016 01:21 PM (jBuUi)

Sure would love to see Sanders beat Hillary. I don't know if it is gonna happen though.

Posted by: Draki at March 15, 2016 01:39 PM (laIoJ)

187 Posted by: whatmeworry? at March 15, 2016 01:38 PM (dZGNV)

I don't mind trolls, I just mind stupid trolls

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 15, 2016 01:39 PM (mw8Dm)

188 If you think the Clintons aren't above Macchiavelli *like tactics , you haven't been paying attention.

(*not sure how to spell that wap's name.)

Posted by: Donald Trump at March 15, 2016 01:39 PM (mcm0N)

189 I'm sitting here watching television & glancing at email.

I really don't want Trump, I want Cruz.

I was reading an article at RCP from Bloomberg, but that's open in Safari browser. It's about keeping people on the ground & Cruz has.

Posted by: Carol at March 15, 2016 01:40 PM (sj3Ax)

190 Trump/Clockboy 2016!!11!

Posted by: OK, Thanks, Bye at March 15, 2016 01:40 PM (ucB75)

191 This election is in Trumps hands. Incredibly.

If he wins Ohio its done, but even if he loses Ohio I think the GOPe is finished. The party may turn out to be less corrupt (temporarily) but Trump will lead the party left, regardless of what the GOPe thinks.

Posted by: MTF at March 15, 2016 01:40 PM (TxJGV)

192 Well, my wife and I did our part for Cruz in IL today.

But let it be said, if Trump does become the nominee, I won't vote for him. Nor for the Democrat.

Posted by: Hal at March 15, 2016 01:40 PM (O7cgj)

193 Not just immigration, but also free trade. The donor class is invested in open borders for both goods and people. Trump will upset the status quo.

Posted by: Anon Y. Mous at March 15, 2016 01:37 PM (R+30W)

Pssst! Trump IS the donor to the donor class. Most often on the Dem side.

He's just cutting out the middle man.

Posted by: Damiano at March 15, 2016 01:40 PM (XItbt)

194 Oh my, Trump has said crass words about women? Holy jeez, that's horrible. It's not like the Dem front runner's husband is a serial rapist or anything because - oh wait -

Posted by: Harry Reid's Hands That Are Touching Little Children in Naughty Places at March 15, 2016 01:41 PM (Z9O76)

195 My biggest issue with Trump is that the merch on his store isn't as gaudy as I was hoping. I wanted it to look like someone threw up red, white, and blue and then blew up the puddle with a firecracker. I wanted like early 1990s Team USA Olympic uniforms.

But no. Same old golf shirts and baseball caps. Not even a windbreaker.

Foam columns!

Posted by: rickb223 at March 15, 2016 01:41 PM (44Kmm)

196 I hope everyone is listening to Rush right now.

Of course, he's explaining what I've been saying here for days...

Cruz will never get the nomination.

If Trump doesn't get to 1237, the GOPe will nominate someone else - anyone else - but not Cruz.

Posted by: jwest at March 15, 2016 01:41 PM (Zs4uk)

197 Trump gets 1237 = RNC says screw you and inserts a mailman's son into the nom

Trump gets less than 1237 = RNC says screw you and inserts a bartender's son into the nom

Either of those two run out of money and drop out?

We get a lawyer's son from Wisconsin.

Posted by: AlaBAMA at March 15, 2016 01:41 PM (2PHKP)

198 Hopefully my 1 little vote counted for Cruz today in Illinois. Like I said in the early morning thread, I am probably the only person who voted for Cruz in my Lakeview neighbourhood otherwise known as Boystown. But, if my vote helps Cruz win Illinois, then I will have done my part.

Posted by: Sassy at March 15, 2016 01:41 PM (q7eWh)

199 hey, create middle class jobs and cut middle class taxes and they'll have more money for the casinos.

Posted by: Satan of the GOPe at March 15, 2016 01:41 PM (qSIlh)

200 Trump will lead the party left, regardless of what the GOPe thinks.
Posted by: MTF at March 15, 2016 01:40 PM (TxJGV)

Left form what starting point? From the RINOs in COngress now? Ya can't go much further left than that?

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 15, 2016 01:41 PM (mw8Dm)

201 Hey, don't compare me to Hillary, dammit.

Posted by: bucket of dog vomit at March 15, 2016 01:41 PM (ucB75)

202 BTW, does anybody here actually know a Kasich supporter? Not somebody voting for him strategically in Ohio to stop Trump, but an actual supporter?

I'm having a hard time picturing the demographic that thinks the big problem with W was insufficient domestic spending, not enough immigration, and not enough wars.

Posted by: Jake (irregular) at March 15, 2016 01:41 PM (8w+OS)

203 I think you're largely right, but I believe you're underselling Trump's tyrannical instincts. He's already got a history of trying to bend the government to do his will. Why would that suddenly stop once he's president?

I don't think he has that Tyrant gut. I think he's more a Gilded Era throwback, in that he has to win and be the biggest and best and richest at all costs. So for him its not about wielding power for power's sake, but for victory. It wasn't about money for Rockefeller, he had more money than he could possibly spend. It was about being the richest, the most powerful, the most unopposed.

So I don't see Trump as being this tyrant, I see him as a corrupt greedy crony that rolls out of the White House worth more than Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, and the Queen of England combined. I see him helping out all his buddies in business and punishing those who dare cross or compete with him. But not a tyrant.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 15, 2016 01:41 PM (39g3+)

204 Trump is going to lose Ohio.

Illinois and Missouri both allocate most of the delegates by winner of congressional district so a state win is good but not necessarily decisive for delegates. A narrow loss, depending where the votes come from, still might mean a decent delegate score.

The fat lady might be getting her lyrics ready but she has not sung yet.

Posted by: Bob from Ohio at March 15, 2016 01:42 PM (t3cNy)

205 Chicago were the Walking Dead vote--jeezuz.

Sure--Rahm Emanuel tiny dancer didn't pull out the stops for Hillary.

Posted by: Donald Trump at March 15, 2016 01:42 PM (mcm0N)

206 That's what people usually refer to when talking about this...but Trump is much more likely to increase the size of government leading to more phony baloney jobs for Republicans and their relatives who want to govern and manage better than Democrats.
Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 01:33 PM (rJSDb)

---------------------

But you see, the mystery of electing a U.S. President is that no one really knows how their candidate is going to perform in that office. I'm sure the world looks a lot differently when a person sits behind the Resolute Desk.

The only candidate that we knew what would happen if he got into the Oval Office is the shitweasel who's occupying it now.

Posted by: Soona at March 15, 2016 01:42 PM (Fmupd)

207 So we're going with the whole 'run the Democrat against the Socialist' thing again?

Great.

Posted by: Damiano at March 15, 2016 01:42 PM (XItbt)

208 Contested convention or bust. Stupid autocorrect.

If Trump loses- especially after getting more delegates- I may well have to see a doctor after 4 hours.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at March 15, 2016 01:42 PM (Dq1f4)

209 195 Foam columns!
Posted by: rickb223 at March 15, 2016 01:41 PM (44Kmm)

================

Don't forget the gold trim.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 01:42 PM (rJSDb)

210 Trump causes heartburn because the GOPe thinks he'll lose the race for the White House, not because they believe he's going to govern conservatively.
---

This.
Posted by: Y-not (@moxiemom)

Really? You think that the GOPe is fighting this to win? i see fights for control. I also see them fighting something they helped create.

Posted by: Blue Hen at March 15, 2016 01:42 PM (326rv)

211 *where*

damn intern.

Posted by: Donald Trump at March 15, 2016 01:42 PM (mcm0N)

212
If Trump doesn't get to 1237, the GOPe will nominate someone else - anyone else - but not Cruz.
Posted by: jwest at March 15, 2016 01:41 PM (Zs4uk)

Between that and Cruz' statement on Friday, I'm voting Trump in PA in April.

Posted by: First-Rate Political Hack at March 15, 2016 01:42 PM (dH97I)

213 It's a fireable offense to hurt reporter according to Politico. I know perfectly well that it's where GOPe go to leak things that they want leaked.

Posted by: Carol at March 15, 2016 01:42 PM (sj3Ax)

214 if cruz is the nominee......I'm sitting this one out.

Posted by: Myshiba at March 15, 2016 01:43 PM (cfHE9)

215 174: "The Democrats and the media will rediscover their professed love for civil liberties and their abhorrence of executive branch over-reach."

Only if they lose.

Posted by: Azenogoth (Freedom or Fire) at March 15, 2016 01:43 PM (z/vX9)

216 Posted by: dartist at March 15, 2016 01
That microcosm may be the story of the entire election.

Posted by: Golfman at March 15, 2016 01:43 PM (48QDY)

217 Rorschach's Journal, March 15th, 2016:

A comedian won tonight.

Posted by: BourbonChicken at March 15, 2016 01:43 PM (VdICR)

218 BTW, does anybody here actually know a Kasich supporter? Not somebody voting for him strategically in Ohio to stop Trump, but an actual supporter?

Yes. Very successful MA businessman. NE Republicans are different.

Posted by: Bandersnatch at March 15, 2016 01:43 PM (1xUj/)

219 Donald Trump = Al Czervik
Jeb Bush = Judge Smails
Ted Cruz = Ty Webb
Marco Rubio = Danny Noonan
John Kasich = Carl Spackler

GOPe = Kenny Loggins collecting royalties every time it's played on late night cable

Posted by: Oschisms at March 15, 2016 01:43 PM (ZsN9X)

220 Who the hell wants the average person in the Oval Office?

-
Yeah, sub-average has worked so well so far.

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks at March 15, 2016 01:43 PM (Nwg0u)

221 I did my part in Illinois this morning.. Cruz, baby!

At 8:30 am I was voter # 200 already.

They moved the voting from the church meeting room in past years to the church itself.. almost doubled the number of booths. Business was brisk!

And, I agree with Ace on those polls.. Trump has underperformed in most states compared to the polls.

Unfortunately, my wife is voting for Dondi.. she thinks he's "cute". Whatever.. it's a vote against Trump, and she never usually votes in primaries anyway!

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at March 15, 2016 01:43 PM (so+oy)

222 I see him helping out all his buddies in business and punishing those who dare cross or compete with him. But not a tyrant.
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 15, 2016 01:41 PM (39g3+)

===============

"punishing those who dare cross or compete with him."

Apply that to government, and you have a tyrant.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 01:44 PM (rJSDb)

223 BTW, does anybody here actually know a Kasich supporter?

Posted by: Jake (irregular) at March 15, 2016 01:41 PM (8w+OS)

His mother said that he was her first choice ... ever since Jeb! pulled out.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at March 15, 2016 01:44 PM (zc3Db)

224 If Trump doesn't get to 1237, the GOPe will nominate someone else - anyone else - but not Cruz.

---------

Rush doesn't know that. The GOPe may prefer someone else, but there is simply no way to know what will happen at a brokered convention.

Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 01:44 PM (gmeXX)

225 I HAVE MORE FAVORABLE DELEGATE STATES COMING UP!! THE MAP FAVORS ME!!! IT FAVORS ME!!!!

Posted by: Fuhrer Rubio in Bunker at March 15, 2016 01:44 PM (Z9O76)

226 So Katich is still that popular in Ohio-after after saying what he did yesterday about immigration?. There are that many RINOs in Ohio?

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at March 15, 2016 01:44 PM (w4NZ8)

227 I'll be voting for Vermin Supreme here, because I'm in Oregon and Indepedent so my vote doesn't mean a damn thing anyway. Even if the state wasn't going to go for Hillary no matter what, its all vote-by-mail and the just select who they want for critical elections no matter how we vote.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 15, 2016 01:44 PM (39g3+)

228 If he wins Ohio its done, but even if he loses Ohio I think the GOPe is finished. The party may turn out to be less corrupt (temporarily) but Trump will lead the party left, regardless of what the GOPe thinks.
Posted by: MTF at March 15, 2016 01:40 PM (TxJGV)

_____

Lead the party left. And this would be different than what Ryan, Boner, The Bitch, McCain, Romney, Rubio et al having been doing how?

Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at March 15, 2016 01:44 PM (1JAxC)

229 Rush---ambiguous to pro Trump; Trump's Lord Hee Haw
Michael Savage-Wiener---Trump's Lord Haw Haw
Drudge--pro Trump
Breitbart--Trump's Pravda
Info Wars---Trump's Izvestia
Russia Today---pro Trump
FOX--schizo

Ace of Spades HQ---America's haven for sanity.

Posted by: Junious at March 15, 2016 01:44 PM (uNpJu)

230 Party unity my ass.

Posted by: Lizard Person Trump at March 15, 2016 01:45 PM (nbGZj)

231 Not a Trump fan, but Trump's the nominee. Whether it happens today, or next week, or next month. It's like trying to hold back an avalanche.

Posted by: Mike at March 15, 2016 01:45 PM (ISxUB)

232 The time of short-sheeting will soon be over.
The season of super-atomic wedgies begins.
Followed by a quick round of nobody goes to jail, some fancy parties and...
Four years of probably nowhere near good enough.

Posted by: DaveA at March 15, 2016 01:45 PM (DL2i+)

233 I think if Cruz wins Trump will campaign for him. Trump signed the sheet. Cruz would have a chance then. Without Trump Cruz gets eaten by the media in my opinion. Trump eats the media with relish. Trump might even go for VP slot to prove he isn't a sore loser. If Trump gets Ohio and Florida today then he is close to unstoppable. If Trump gets more than that he is the winner.

Posted by: scorecard at March 15, 2016 01:45 PM (I0sxh)

234 Sorry-Autocorrect- Kasich

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at March 15, 2016 01:45 PM (w4NZ8)

235 "203
BTW, does anybody here actually know a Kasich supporter? Not somebody
voting for him strategically in Ohio to stop Trump, but an actual
supporter?"

Sure, he is governor and has quite a few backers. My wife likes him and is voting for him.

Posted by: Bob from Ohio at March 15, 2016 01:45 PM (t3cNy)

236 He really is just like any other politician.

Posted by: shillelagh at March 15, 2016 01:38 PM

Have you got your CruzKit yet? Drinking glasses? Hunting Gear?

The only things missing from Rafael's online store are maple syrup and Cuban cigars.

Posted by: MrScribbler at March 15, 2016 01:45 PM (8xI/8)

237 Yes. Very successful MA businessman. NE Republicans are different.

Posted by: Bandersnatch at March 15, 2016 01:43 PM (1xUj/)

Is it the "adult in the room" thing? How does he feel about Kasich's foreign policy?

My personal feeling is that at least once every debate Kasich has said something flat out nuts about foreign policy but everybody has politely ignored it due to the sense that he can't win.

Posted by: Jake (irregular) at March 15, 2016 01:45 PM (8w+OS)

238 But you see, the mystery of electing a U.S. President is that no one really knows how their candidate is going to perform in that office. I'm sure the world looks a lot differently when a person sits behind the Resolute Desk.

The only candidate that we knew what would happen if he got into the Oval Office is the shitweasel who's occupying it now.
Posted by: Soona at March 15, 2016 01:42 PM (Fmupd)

==============

But you see...you can tell how someone is probably going to behave based on their words before hand.

Anyone who said George W. Bush was a small government guy before he was elected was fooling themselves. He said it over and over again that he wanted big government solutions.

Trump is doing the same thing, but with far more leftist intentions and desired outcomes.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 01:45 PM (rJSDb)

239 How can anyone be sure of what will happen in the general. This has been such a wacky cycle. None of the old rules apply.

Posted by: Duke Lowell at March 15, 2016 01:46 PM (kTF2Z)

240 John Kasich = Carl Spackler

Posted by: Oschisms at March 15, 2016 01:43 PM (ZsN9X)

No, he's the Smails kid, picking his nose ... and now the crowd is waiting on the bet to see if he eats it.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at March 15, 2016 01:46 PM (zc3Db)

241 NE Republicans are different.
Posted by: Bandersnatch at March 15, 2016 01:43 PM (1xUj/)

____

Yes, they are Democrats.

Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at March 15, 2016 01:46 PM (1JAxC)

242 Which one has the best tits?

Posted by: In Vino Veritits at March 15, 2016 01:46 PM (Fc+pi)

243 Apply that to government, and you have a tyrant.

Except you're thinking individual citizens. I mean businesses and corporations. He's gonna hand out goodies to his buddies and bad stuff to his competitors. Think the Grant or Harding administration on steroids.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 15, 2016 01:46 PM (39g3+)

244 BTW, does anybody here actually know a Kasich supporter? Not somebody voting for him strategically in Ohio to stop Trump, but an actual supporter?

I'm having a hard time picturing the demographic that thinks the big problem with W was insufficient domestic spending, not enough immigration, and not enough wars.
Posted by: Jake (irregular)

The only people I've heard saying nice things about him are dems. And its posturing that costs them nothing and means nothing. It was in the context of "what rethuglickan would you consider, if you were slumming?"

In the general election, he'll be hated by these same people. And they will vote the party line or stay home.

Posted by: Blue Hen at March 15, 2016 01:46 PM (326rv)

245 Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 15, 2016 01:41 PM (39g3+)

Point of order, what you described sounds a lot like a form of tyranny to me.

Posted by: joe, living dangerously at March 15, 2016 01:46 PM (KUaJL)

246 I should gladly assist in cracking the Apple source code, but I am entirely too busy eluding the buggering ghosts of Freddie Mercury, David Bowie, Charles Nelson Riley and Paul Lynde.

Posted by: Ghost of Alan Turing at March 15, 2016 01:46 PM (NjiZL)

247 236 Posted by: Bob from Ohio at March 15, 2016 01:45 PM (t3cNy)

and Ohio understands having a president is a good thing for the state....

We have sent more sons to DC than anyone...

that said were I able to vote today I'd pull for Cruz.

Posted by: sven10077 at March 15, 2016 01:46 PM (g8Hfr)

248 I really don't want Trump, I want Cruz.

I was reading an article at RCP from Bloomberg, but that's open in Safari browser. It's about keeping people on the ground & Cruz has.

Posted by: Carol at March 15, 2016 01:40 PM (sj3Ax)
______

Well, if you really like Cruz look at it this way: even if Trump wins the nomination, he will almost assuredly lose in november. And no other candidate is as well-positioned as Cruz to run again in 2020.

Posted by: The Nayden Broad at March 15, 2016 01:46 PM (P8unj)

249 Kasich will win Ohio, though he'd stay in anyway. Rubio will hopefully be embarrassed enough to quit.

Can't find another state for Kasich to win, but hey, convention fights are good for party unity.

Posted by: Meremortal at March 15, 2016 01:46 PM (3myMJ)

250 "The Democrats and the media will rediscover their professed love for civil liberties and their abhorrence of executive branch over-reach."

Only if they lose.
Posted by: Azenogoth

#TooLate
#FUWar

Posted by: rickb223 at March 15, 2016 01:46 PM (44Kmm)

251 So where does your conscience stand?

If the GOPe goes the nuclear route and inserts an "acceptable" candidate into the nomination, how will you feel?

Will Cruz voters be happy or sad if it's him?

Will you vote at all if they subvert the will of the voters?

What if Trump gets 1237 and they do it anyway? If I were Cruz, I wouldn't accept the nomination. He'd be the most hated President within his party in ages.

I'd rather win fair and square then be handed it from a corrupt party. I hope Cruz agrees with that. He wouldn't be saving America from Trump. He'd be destroying any liberty we have left.

Cruz best hope it's Rubio or Kasich who steals the throne.

Posted by: AlaBAMA at March 15, 2016 01:47 PM (2PHKP)

252 215: "if cruz is the nominee......I'm sitting this one out."

Another example of the flaws inherent in popular franchise.

Posted by: Azenogoth (Freedom or Fire) at March 15, 2016 01:47 PM (z/vX9)

253 225 Rush doesn't know that. The GOPe may prefer someone else, but there is simply no way to know what will happen at a brokered convention.
Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 01:44 PM (gmeXX)

=================

To believe that the GOPe will deliver the nomination to Kasich/Rubio at convention implies that the GOPe has a very ticket handle on the party as a whole.

I'm pretty sure they don't have that.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 01:47 PM (rJSDb)

254 Posted by: Sassy at March 15, 2016 01:41 PM (q7eWh)

Sassy, I occasionally read the CWB (Crime in Wrigleyville and Boystown Blog). How truthful is it? Are the CPD police that undermanned and f'd up?

Posted by: rd at March 15, 2016 01:47 PM (v0YLX)

255 127 Is it time to start burning stuff?
Posted by: Crabby cupcake at March 15, 2016 01:22 PM (kDOcL)
---------------

Any time is a great time to burn stuff.
Posted by: Notorious Arsnonist at March 15, 2016 01:27 PM (BDZWU)

----

No no no no NO dammit. How many time do we ave to cover this???

Pillage
Rape
then Burn.

Always burn LAST. Otherwise there is nothing to pillage or rape.

Write.It.Down.
Posted by: fixerupper
-------------------------------

Mongo like Sheriff fixerupper. Sheriff fixerupper smart.

Posted by: K. Williamson's prole at March 15, 2016 01:47 PM (VndSC)

256 Do we have any independent confirmation of the yugeness of Donald's junk, or do we just have to take his word for it? What if it's big now, and he changes his mind and downsizes it later?

It's about trust. And the dignity of the United States.

Posted by: Semi-Literate Thug at March 15, 2016 01:47 PM (1GzIt)

257 Left form what starting point? From the RINOs in COngress now? Ya can't go much further left than that?
Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 15, 2016 01:41 PM (mw8Dm)

We haven't, as a country, declared bankruptcy yet or officially nationalized all businesses (though with all the regulatory bodies that invent law on a whim, it doesn't make much difference). At the moment, toilet paper is still in ready supply at most places.

You can ALWAYS go more left. The left's go to argument is that nothing has ever gone far enough left to fully realize their Socialist Utopia.

Posted by: Damiano at March 15, 2016 01:47 PM (XItbt)

258 I wouldn't say that Cruz needs to get out of the race yet, but he needs to start winning some states.

If this continues as a three or four man race, then Trump is at risk of Rule 40 which I can see Romney/Rive enforcing. In which case we get Romney or Jeb!

Posted by: Ignoramus at March 15, 2016 01:47 PM (r1fLd)

259 243 Posted by: In Vino Veritits at March 15, 2016 01:46 PM (Fc+pi)

I'm trying to wrap my head around President Christie or uh Fields.

Posted by: sven10077 at March 15, 2016 01:47 PM (g8Hfr)

260 I have cast my vote for Cruz in Florida.

I.e., I have done what is right.

Now let everyone in Missouri and Illinois go and do likewise.

Posted by: Captain Oblivious at March 15, 2016 01:48 PM (UwQ7q)

261 If Rubio loses Florida, it doesn't matter if he stays in or not. No one will vote for him after that. Ditto Kasich and Ohio.

Posted by: zmdavid at March 15, 2016 01:48 PM (xqRaG)

262 I love how the anti-trumpsters are so cock sure he would lose in November. I am sure they are the same people who thought he had no chance to get anywhere near the Nomination. LMAO

And I say this from a the perspective of a Cruz supporter.

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 15, 2016 01:48 PM (mw8Dm)

263 But you see, the mystery of electing a U.S. President is that no one really knows how their candidate is going to perform in that office. I'm sure the world looks a lot differently when a person sits behind the Resolute Desk.

The only candidate that we knew what would happen if he got into the Oval Office is the shitweasel who's occupying it now.
Posted by: Soona
................
I'm pretty sure the Trumpsta will have his own desk brought in..
I'm not even sure the Trumps would live in the White House.. it would be beneath them.. there's not one bit of gold filigree in the whole damned residence!

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at March 15, 2016 01:48 PM (so+oy)

264 163 I live here in the MO. Voted for Cruz this morning for whatever that's worth.
Posted by: Christopher Johnson at March 15, 2016 01:36 PM (3nNcI)

-----

My wife and I too. I think MO is going to be really close. Trump is almost certainly going to win the MO-8 district, and probably MO-4. I think Cruz will win Springfield and the north. I'm not sure which way the STL suburbs are going to swing (MO-2 and MO-3). Would have been immensely helpful to have Rubio out in those.

Posted by: Dave S. at March 15, 2016 01:48 PM (mhkbv)

265 Why wd Calif need a wall? People are leaving Calif, not movng there.

Posted by: Bruce With a Wang! at March 15, 2016 01:49 PM (iQIUe)

266 Just remember that all the so called experts and pundits who are saying Trump will lose 45 states to Hillary were also saying there's no way Trump holds on to the lead in the primaries once the voting actually starts. How'd that prediction turn out?

Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at March 15, 2016 01:49 PM (1JAxC)

267 223: "Apply that to government, and you have a tyrant."

This has been a common theme amongst our Presidents.

Nothing new. I'm just waiting for some hands to get nailed to the Senate doors.

Then we will know that it is on!

Posted by: Azenogoth (Freedom or Fire) at March 15, 2016 01:49 PM (z/vX9)

268 I say we go back to discussing boobehs.

Mmmmm Alexandra Daddario. Mmmmm

http://bit.ly/1pJvaNk

Posted by: alexthechick - Team Hardwood at March 15, 2016 01:49 PM (mf5HN)

269 Another example of the flaws inherent in popular franchise.

Posted by: Azenogoth (Freedom or Fire) at March 15, 2016 01:47 PM

And that's different from the Rafael supporters who are saying they'll vote Libertarian or for Bernie or not vote at all in exactly what way?

Posted by: MrScribbler at March 15, 2016 01:49 PM (8xI/8)

270 Top shelf analysis. Really first rate. Bravo.

Would you, perhaps, have any additional insight on Michelle Field's titties ?

Posted by: ScoggDog at March 15, 2016 01:49 PM (zfvHs)

271 Why wd Calif need a wall? People are leaving Calif, not movng there.

Asked and answered.

Why did East Germany have a wall?

Posted by: rickb223 at March 15, 2016 01:49 PM (44Kmm)

272 I think Varney (on FBN) had the best description of Kasich going to vote this morning; 'and here is Governor Kasich, looking rather haggard, with this jacket off, wandering in the parking lot'. LoL; I thought he was talking about a hobo at first.

Posted by: IC at March 15, 2016 01:50 PM (a0IVu)

273
Posted by: rickb223 at March 15, 2016

Next!!

Posted by: Golfman at March 15, 2016 01:50 PM (48QDY)

274 I'd rather win fair and square then be handed it from a corrupt party. I hope Cruz agrees with that. He wouldn't be saving America from Trump. He'd be destroying any liberty we have left.

Cruz best hope it's Rubio or Kasich who steals the throne.
Posted by: AlaBAMA

If this happenes, watch the dems suddenly care again about 'selected, not elected'. The GOPe would be handing them a line of shit on a platter.

Posted by: Blue Hen at March 15, 2016 01:50 PM (326rv)

275 Ech. I'm so tired of winning.

Posted by: Greg at March 15, 2016 01:13 PM (DBpnn)
Yeah, me too!

Posted by: Charlie Sheen at March 15, 2016 01:50 PM (2X7pN)

276 As I've said. I will gladly vote for Trump or Cruz in the general election.

Posted by: Soona at March 15, 2016 01:50 PM (Fmupd)

277 Why wd Calif need a wall? People are leaving Calif, not movng there.

Posted by: Bruce With a Wang! at March 15, 2016 01:49 PM

You answered your own question.

Posted by: MrScribbler at March 15, 2016 01:50 PM (8xI/8)

278 I think Varney (on FBN) had the best description of Kasich going to vote this morning; 'and here is Governor Kasich, looking rather haggard, with this jacket off, wandering in the parking lot'. LoL; I thought he was talking about a hobo at first.

--------------

It sounds much better in my imagination because of the accent.

Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 01:50 PM (gmeXX)

279 269 I approve of this message,

Posted by: steevy at March 15, 2016 01:51 PM (B48dK)

280 I'm curious what happens once Trump looks inevitable. I mean. I mean, at that point, it's checkmate, anyway. I'm never voting for him, done with the GOP, have fun, etc.

I guess I'll be voting Libertarian. Will there be a third-party push? A big money bomb toward Gary Johnson? I'm curious.

Gary Johnson is a really good, well qualified Libertarian. I just cringe that he's not sufficiently witty when he's off script to make a big impact. I don't expect Libertarians to win, unless maybe somehow the Bernbabies go Green Party and give us a four-party race. And even then, Libertarians would have to be absolutely freakin' brilliant and media savvy to stand a chance, which, sigh, we never are.

Posted by: Leo Spaceman at March 15, 2016 01:51 PM (tSSSX)

281 By all means vote for the blowhard who won't break 30% in the November general election.

Getting Trump to run as a Republican was Bill Clinton's greatest political achievement by far.

That's all been said before and ignored by the mob. Just repeating it for posterity.
Posted by: whatmeworry? at March 15, 2016 01:38 PM (dZGNV)

This. Say what you will about the Clinton's, they cover all their bases. Billary had it slip from their grasp in 2008, they decided to make sure that would not happen again. Trump has openly talked about how Bill got him into the race, why can't people see what's going on??

Posted by: MaureenTheTemp at March 15, 2016 01:51 PM (ePcUK)

282 54 If Trump turns out to be SMOD, then I could settle for that.
Posted by: Draki at March 15, 2016 01:21 PM (laIoJ)

He isn't, those fingers don't say meteor.

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 15, 2016 01:51 PM (voOPb)

283 The only people I've heard saying nice things about him are dems. And its posturing that costs them nothing and means nothing. It was in the context of "what rethuglickan would you consider, if you were slumming?"

In the general election, he'll be hated by these same people. And they will vote the party line or stay home.
Posted by: Blue Hen at March 15, 2016 01:46 PM (326rv)

_____

So basically the exact same thing we saw in 2008 and 2012. But you know, McCain, Romney and Kasich...all electable and stuff.

Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at March 15, 2016 01:51 PM (1JAxC)

284 California wants a wall to keep taxpayers in.

The machine guns will face inwards.

I understand Gov. Brown has some east German experts now consulting.

Posted by: Harun at March 15, 2016 01:51 PM (UBBWX)

285 249: "And no other candidate is as well-positioned as Cruz to run again in 2020."

Many of us hope that it is for President of the republic of Texas.

Posted by: Azenogoth (Freedom or Fire) at March 15, 2016 01:52 PM (z/vX9)

286 Not a Trump backer but!

All the right people are whinging, loudly!

Cruz is our best bet IMHO.

Posted by: Fewenuff at March 15, 2016 01:52 PM (T/sbU)

287 198 Hopefully my 1 little vote counted for Cruz today in Illinois. Like I said in the early morning thread, I am probably the only person who voted for Cruz in my Lakeview neighbourhood otherwise known as Boystown. But, if my vote helps Cruz win Illinois, then I will have done my part.
....
Semi serious question...and I don't fee like looking at any bullshit polling. But who do/are Log Cabin Republicans and others in the LGBT community that aren't brainwashed democrorbots vote for in this primary?
I'd ask my gay friends or even my lesbian sister in law, but they are all firmly in the lib camp. And, of course, they think I am a nazi.

Posted by: ajmojo at March 15, 2016 01:52 PM (1H9ox)

288 Mr Scribbler-I guess you didn't know that the Trump campaign seems stuff too. Maybe you thought it was only other candidates who do that.

http://shop.donaldjtrump.com

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at March 15, 2016 01:52 PM (w4NZ8)

289 Posted by: Leo Spaceman at March 15, 2016 01:51 PM (tSSSX)

Then go to some democratic blog. I am so sick of people helping to put hillary in the White House.

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 15, 2016 01:52 PM (mw8Dm)

290 So erik fucking erickson is looking to plot a third party challenge with a true conservative???

What...Cruz not good enough for that little shit?

Posted by: Skeezix at March 15, 2016 01:52 PM (WnCSK)

291 269 I say we go back to discussing boobehs.

Mmmmm Alexandra Daddario. Mmmmm

http://bit.ly/1pJvaNk
Posted by: alexthechick - Team Hardwood at March 15, 2016 01:49 PM (mf5HN)

Yeah, because the eyes say, bug ass crazy

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 15, 2016 01:52 PM (voOPb)

292 283 TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP
Posted by: Trumpbot #298738975 at March 15, 2016 01:51 PM (D4ynZ)

==============

Your wit and intelligently reasoned arguments have won me over!

TRUMP! TRUMP! TRUMP!

Thank you Trumpbot #298738975 for showing me the light!

TRUMP! TRUMP! TRUMP!

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 01:52 PM (rJSDb)

293 OK, philosophical question regarding Let It Burn.

If not nominating Trump lets it burn, is that a good thing?

If nominating Trump and we get Hillary, is that a good thing?

Bonus question: does anyone think he'd be an actual good President?

Posted by: Bandersnatch at March 15, 2016 01:53 PM (1xUj/)

294 seems=sells

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at March 15, 2016 01:53 PM (w4NZ8)

295 Can we have votes at the respective conventions to officially re-label the parties accurately?

Democrats aren't even doing the token denials anymore at being full on Socialists. Republicans are consistently to the left of what Democrats used to be 15 or 20 years ago, but hey, go ahead and call them Democrats so we can keep up the facade of having opposing parties.

Posted by: Damiano at March 15, 2016 01:53 PM (XItbt)

296 There are bigger things in play here than pocketbook issues. If the Republican Party--which was founded in opposition to human slavery--cannot take a stand against the murder of innocent little babies, then what is it good for? What is its purpose? Why does it exist?
This isn't just a social issue. This is a philosophical issue at least as important as the slavery issue was 150 years ago. If 'personhood' is a determination made by the State--which the heart of the abortion debate--then you can easily imagine where that might lead, where it is leading in Europe.
And if it is determined that our rights are not granted by our Creator but by the State, by other men, what then?
Those are not 'social issues'. Those are THE issues. All else is ancillary and incidental.
Posted by: Dr. Ben Carson, Not An Opportunist at March 15, 2016 11:56 AM (UWlp+)

troyriser I wanted to address what you wrote above in the thread you posted it in, but the thread got willowed and then I got sidetracked.

This is a great piece of writing and you're 100% correct, and to disagree with you is moral cowardice. Abortion is murder, AND you correctly diagnose the even more important point (I mean what's 40 million butchered babies when there's philosophical musing to do) that capitulating on this issue means permitting the state to decide what is and what is not life, means handing over a basic constitutional protection.

Please understand that I don't disagree with any of what you wrote. I have a different idea about the best way to change things, not about whether or to what extent things needs to be changed.

My concern is that by mounting a philosophical assault on something that has been enshrined as a "women's health issue" we play into the left's hands. The conservative brand lacks cultural credibility. It's totally unfair and absurd and infuriating, but it's still true. So let's use the budget, the economy, the military, as OUR Trojan horses for the ethical arguments we have been gagged on. If the unquestioning faith of the average LIV leftist in """science""" and bullshit massaged statistics can be shaken, the very good work of those who have never given up the fight against PP, the clear argument against the idea that life doesn't begin at or around conception, will begin to come apart all on its own. And THAT is when we press the attack. On the economy, on government corruption, the leftists haven't a leg to stand on. It's why they alter and invent statistics (jobs saved or created, blow me). They need to have their noses rubbed in it.

I fear very much that we have been consigned by our failure to push back on abortion since Roe v Wade to the same karmic bloodletting that Lincoln accepted in his second inaugural address as a punishment from God for tolerating slavery. That's why I propose that we be cold and calculated in our approach to the moral battleground, that we not let the obvious truth that our position is both right and just blind us to how thoroughly stacked against us is the cultural battlefield. Not because I don't agree with you that "All else is ancillary and incidental" but precisely because I do.

Posted by: Ghost of kari - certified inane at March 15, 2016 01:53 PM (xuouz)

297 If Trump wins, I may be willing to support him.

But I suspect the NYT will release those tapes, and the Dems will release the oppo, and donald will be toast.

Maybe he surprises. Who knows.

If I were him, I'd agree to zero debates.

Posted by: Harun at March 15, 2016 01:53 PM (UBBWX)

298 287!!!!11!!!

Posted by: Fewenuff at March 15, 2016 01:53 PM (T/sbU)

299 I say we go back to discussing boobehs.

Mmmmm Alexandra Daddario. Mmmmm

http://bit.ly/1pJvaNk

Posted by: alexthechick - Team Hardwood at March 15, 2016 01:49 PM (mf5HN)

Seconded!

Posted by: Count de Motorboat at March 15, 2016 01:54 PM (JO9+V)

300 Even among Republicans Cruz was never very popular

Posted by: Bubba at March 15, 2016 01:54 PM (jXM9O)

301 Bonus question: does anyone think he'd be an actual good President?
Posted by: Bandersnatch at March 15, 2016 01:53 PM (1xUj/)

_________

I do. If nothing else he'd tell the MSM to fuck off for 4 years. I'm sure he'd disappoint me 40% of the time. But compared to Obama that's 59.9999% better.

Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at March 15, 2016 01:54 PM (1JAxC)

302 RD, I don't really know...We do have crime here, it's not as bad as other neighbourhoods to be sure. We get the ocassional shooting at night, but no comparison to the South Side or West side. Probably the worst crimes happen here during Pride week, like some guys who walk down the street in nothing but thong underwear and a rainbow flag sticking out their backside. KInd of makes it difficult to bring the kids out that week.

Posted by: Sassy at March 15, 2016 01:54 PM (q7eWh)

303 President Trump will make this place luxurious and classy, right before he's impeached for something.

Maybe it'll be valid, maybe not, and maybe he's acquitted, who knows. But I bet the Senate will have it in for him.

Posted by: Lance McCormick at March 15, 2016 01:54 PM (u0s1P)

304 So where does your conscience stand?

If the GOPe goes the nuclear route and inserts an "acceptable" candidate into the nomination, how will you feel?

I just voted for Trump today in Ohio. Here's my thinking.

If they give the nomination to the delegate leader, I'll vote for that person.

If Trump has a narrow plurality lead over Cruz and they give it to Cruz, I'll vote for Cruz.

If Trump has a substantial plurality lead and they give it to Cruz, I might vote for Cruz and might stay home.

If they give it to anybody but Cruz or Trump, or if they steal it from Trump despite Trump having an absolute majority, then I will vote straight ticket Dem.

Posted by: Jake (irregular) at March 15, 2016 01:54 PM (8w+OS)

305 If Trump wins and they take it from him and nominate someone else, will anyone here vote?

Posted by: AlaBAMA at March 15, 2016 01:54 PM (2PHKP)

306 This is not boobeh related *hangs head in shame* but it is funny as all get out.

http://onion.com/21tKLfH

Posted by: alexthechick - Team Hardwood at March 15, 2016 01:55 PM (mf5HN)

307 I don't expect Libertarians to win, unless maybe somehow the Bernbabies go Green Party and give us a four-party race. And even then, Libertarians would have to be absolutely freakin' brilliant and media savvy to stand a chance, which, sigh, we never are.
Posted by: Leo Spaceman

What country are you talking about?

Only one third party came in second, and that was in 1912 (Bull moose party). Third parties have no chance of coming in first.

Posted by: Blue Hen at March 15, 2016 01:55 PM (326rv)

308 296 Posted by: Bandersnatch at March 15, 2016 01:53 PM (1xUj/)

It makes no difference.

I truly think 2012 was *it* and we had "Obamacare's Grampy the nice guy" running against Ogabe.

We're going over Niagara Falls baby Trump means you have a barrel and Hillary! means we go freestyle.

Posted by: sven10077 at March 15, 2016 01:55 PM (g8Hfr)

309 At least Mario's sign waver can go home after today.

Posted by: jsg at March 15, 2016 01:55 PM (gs8be)

310 Yeah, because the eyes say, bug ass crazy
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 15, 2016 01:52 PM (voOPb)

I'm getting a definite "The Exorcist" vibe.

Posted by: joe, living dangerously at March 15, 2016 01:55 PM (KUaJL)

311 Fuck, all that and troyriser isn't in this thread.

>298 paging troyriser.

Troyriser to the overblown self-indulgent tirade in >298 please.

Posted by: Ghost of kari - certified inane at March 15, 2016 01:55 PM (xuouz)

312 241 John Kasich = Carl Spackler

Posted by: Oschisms at March 15, 2016 01:43 PM (ZsN9X)

No, he's the Smails kid, picking his nose ... and now the crowd is waiting on the bet to see if he eats it.
Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at March 15, 2016 01:46 PM (zc3Db)

Yeah, you're right. Initially I had Ted Cruz as Carl Spackler, because he destroys the golf course.

Ty Webb is probably Scott Walker. It doesn't really matter who wins, he's always going to be the ball.

Posted by: Oschisms at March 15, 2016 01:55 PM (ZsN9X)

313 But I suspect the NYT will release those tapes,

----------

I don't think those tapes will have anything that could cause his fans to back off him, and they may even assuage people who really fear Trump. Now I'm sure other stuff will come out beyond those tapes. I just don't know what could be more damaging than what is already out there.

Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 01:56 PM (gmeXX)

314 President Barack Obama is thirsty... for a taste of Donald Trump's wine.

'Has anybody bought that wine? I want to know what that wine tastes like,' a laughing Obama said at a Democratic Party fundraiser Saturday. 'I mean, come on. You know that's like some $5 wine. They slap a label on it. They charge you $50 and say it's the greatest wine ever.'

'Come on,' Obama said, still laughing. 'Oh, boy. Selling wine. That's not what we're for. Couldn't make it up.'
----

Hilarious!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Starflower at March 15, 2016 01:56 PM (mEZce)

315 Bluff or Real? Marco Rubio says that even if he loses Florida, it won't alter his campaign at all, because nobody is on pace to get 1237 votes anyway.

Well, except Trump, the guy you say you'd do anything to stop, but "anything" turns out to be only "keep doing what you've been doing to get yourself a new job."
****

I tend to believe that if he loses, Rubio bows out tonight, but you're bright enough, Ace, to understand that on the day of the primary, you don't signal to your voters (or late deciders) that you're going to pack it in if you lose tonight. You have to give them at least the appearance of optimism and hope.

Anyway, you'd have been better off hoping Rubio won Florida (and also, Kasich wins Ohio), to deny Trump the delegates, because it's a hail mary pass at this point for Cruz to get the nomination even with both of them out of it (and even then, he'd have to thread a LOT of needles with the remaining primaries).

It's looking considerably like Cruz's best chance at getting the nomination IS through a brokered convention, but Trump may remove that possibility if he does well tonight.

Posted by: Vyce at March 15, 2016 01:56 PM (25KoR)

316 So for everyone saying they will never vote for Trump you are all OK with Hillary getting to pick 1 and most likely two SCOTUS Judges? If she gets in Ginsberg will "retire".

Posted by: The Great White Scotsman at March 15, 2016 01:56 PM (iONHu)

317 310 Posted by: Blue Hen at March 15, 2016 01:55 PM (326rv)

Teddy Roosevelt elected Woodrow Wilson....

*fact*

and people today usually have NO idea how personally popular TR was.

Posted by: sven10077 at March 15, 2016 01:56 PM (g8Hfr)

318 Trump causes heartburn because the GOPe thinks he'll lose the race for the White House, not because they believe he's going to govern conservatively.
---

This.
Posted by: Y-not (@moxiemom)

Is this why the GOPe is desperately trying to portray Trump as a racist KKK supporter and sexist xenophobe? Because they want to help him be better situated for the general election?

The GOP is dead to me, they took their poll leader and pushed liberal attacks on him themselves.... They insist Trump caused the protests, they insist Trump never condemned the KKK and ran with the lie supporting the leftist media talking points....they are making their own general election commercials as we speak to support Hillary in the general election.

They are actively trying to make him lose the general election already because if they don't they are afraid he would win it.

Teddy Roosevelt all over again.

Posted by: doug at March 15, 2016 01:56 PM (Huq8w)

319 >>Trump causes heartburn because the GOPe thinks he'll lose the race for the White House

I don't think so. I think he gives heartburn because every day he isn't extinguished, the "non-Hobbesian right" (for lack of a better unwieldy moniker--"non-establishment" has lost meaning, I think) gains oxygen and a realization that the vast GOP patronage edifice is glutted, corrupt, extraneous and/or obsolete. The GOPe loses blood as long as Trump is bulling through the china shop.

I think this is why most Trump people I know seem almost to be speaking a different language, a kind of "ecritur guerre" that seems completely dissonant. They're (we're) not trying to represent policy prescription; we're claiming that the promulgation edifice has to be eliminated first, at any cost, to be replaced after a painful interregnum with something more valid and responsive--policy imperatives will come after the patronage system is altered and the figurative (or not) moneychangers cast out. I hope he does something like that, or at least facilitates (directly or indirectly) the growth of a movement that will. Grim times, at any rate.

Posted by: General Zod at March 15, 2016 01:56 PM (Bdeb0)

320 It's' going to be really hard to resist the temptation to vote against The Wicked Witch of Westchester (and thus, vote for Trump), but given the absolute sh*tstorm coming globally for the next President (http://bit.ly/1UwNZP1) I'm wondering if it be better for it to all fall apart on her watch, let Trumpmageddon come to the GOPe, and then take our chances with the fallout in 2020.

Then again, given that global economic collapse will likely lead to a currency war the likes of which we've never seen, which will almost certainly lead to a war whereby we're shooting a lot more than cheap fiat currency at each other, that options isn't particularly great either.

So, SMOD.

Posted by: DocJ at March 15, 2016 01:56 PM (zrsn3)

321 I mean, we've seen the GOPe grow a spine, opposing Trump a million times more than they've opposed Obama.

Like Insty says, you only get accountability when there's a Republican in office. With Trump he gets it from both sides.

Posted by: Lance McCormick at March 15, 2016 01:56 PM (u0s1P)

322 Posted by: Jake (irregular) at March 15, 2016 01:54 PM (8w+OS)

Thanks for responding, Jake. I am quite curious about the scenario, since it looks like it's going to happen.

I do think if they take it from Trump without some excuse (Trump killed someone or something), then Cruz should steer far clear of that offer. The party fracture is coming. A side must be chosen.

Posted by: AlaBAMA at March 15, 2016 01:57 PM (2PHKP)

323 the Clinton's, they cover all their bases.

And how would they enforce this plan?
Even if it's true why wouldn't the Donald look at the Winning and decide to go for it.

Posted by: DaveA at March 15, 2016 01:57 PM (DL2i+)

324 Mmmmm Alexandra Daddario. Mmmmm

Posted by: alexthechick - Team Hardwood at March 15, 2016 01:49 PM (mf5HN)

I agree with alex!

http://bit.ly/1M5wd40

Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at March 15, 2016 01:57 PM (bLnSU)

325 Posted by: FenelonSpoke at March 15, 2016 01:52 PM

I did in fact know that, FS. I suspect virtually all big-time candidates do.

But if people are going to whinge about Trump's gear, they should realize that Rafael does likewise.

For me, I still have my Vermin Supreme t-shirts from '12, and will continue to wear them.

Posted by: MrScribbler at March 15, 2016 01:57 PM (8xI/8)

326 Why wd Calif need a wall? People are leaving Calif, not movng there.

To keep them from leaving and infecting other parts of the country?

Posted by: dartist at March 15, 2016 01:57 PM (Nr1E9)

327 It is rapey Tuesday......so there is that....

Posted by: MrKnowItAll at March 15, 2016 01:57 PM (egzLR)

328 Rubio gives me the sads.

Posted by: Dr Spank at March 15, 2016 01:57 PM (7+uJ1)

329 Cue to O'Jays and their hit, "Trump Train"

Time to get on board.

Posted by: Count de Monet at March 15, 2016 01:57 PM (JO9+V)

330 For me, I still have my Vermin Supreme t-shirts from '12, and will continue to wear them.

LOL.

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at March 15, 2016 01:58 PM (w4NZ8)

331 270: "And that's different from the Rafael supporters who are saying they'll vote Libertarian or for Bernie or not vote at all in exactly what way?"

Their goals. Their "reasoning".

Posted by: Azenogoth (Freedom or Fire) at March 15, 2016 01:58 PM (z/vX9)

332 So for everyone saying they will never vote for Trump you are all OK with Hillary getting to pick 1 and most likely two SCOTUS Judges? If she gets in Ginsberg will "retire".

-------------

No, but why should I assume that Trump will pick any differently?

Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 01:58 PM (gmeXX)

333 301 I say we go back to discussing boobehs.

Mmmmm Alexandra Daddario. Mmmmm

http://bit.ly/1pJvaNk

Posted by: alexthechick - Team Hardwood at March 15, 2016 01:49 PM (mf5HN)

------------------

OMG! It's Mrs. Sardonicus.

Posted by: Soona at March 15, 2016 01:58 PM (Fmupd)

334 38 Juan Valdez will run as a Coffee Party candidate.

Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at March 15, 2016 01:19 PM (FkBIv)

That makes sense; isn't he here illegally?

Posted by: jim at March 15, 2016 01:58 PM (VwhRo)

335 If Trump has a narrow plurality lead over Cruz and they give it to Cruz, I'll vote for Cruz.

If Trump has a substantial plurality lead and they give it to Cruz, I might vote for Cruz and might stay home.

Posted by: Jake (irregular) at March 15, 2016 01:54 PM (8w+OS)
_______

As a Cruz supporter, I hope he doesnt play this kind of shitty game. If Trump has the plurality, let Trump run. Cruz is young enough to run again. Unlike the golden boy, Cruz has actually proven that he can run a good, competent campaign.

Posted by: The Nayden Broad at March 15, 2016 01:58 PM (P8unj)

336 With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, ....

Posted by: Ignoramus at March 15, 2016 01:58 PM (r1fLd)

337 If Kasich wins in Ohio today, he will take this as proof that the entire country is crying out for his special brand of moderate leadership that only he can provide. It will take a month of getting curb-stomped in every primary to convince him otherwise.

And in a month, it will all be over.

Posted by: Haiku Guy at March 15, 2016 01:58 PM (hmj8n)

338 No, but why should I assume that Trump will pick any differently?
----------------

He'll pick someone like John Roberts

Posted by: Roy at March 15, 2016 01:59 PM (VndSC)

339 Idiot friend of mine says he'll vote for Hillary because she is the most benign (millennial bs).
I told him that if the GOPe messes with the delegatesConvention id vote for her too but for the opposite reason. If we're that fdup it's time to burn it down and she's our best bet. LIB

Posted by: Fewenuff at March 15, 2016 01:59 PM (T/sbU)

340 Bonus question: does anyone think he'd be an actual good President?
Posted by: Bandersnatch at March 15, 2016 01:53 PM (1xUj/)

I think he'd be a fantastic president. I think he'd fire the fuck out of the bureaucracy and do some novel, twisted shit when the globalists detonate the debt bomb on us in the fall. I think he really loves America and doesn't believe in socialism and that's as much as I had ever even thought to ask for out of any 2016 candidate.

Not Of The Body.

Posted by: Ghost of kari - certified inane at March 15, 2016 01:59 PM (xuouz)

341 289 - you're asking me? My area is all democrat. No one is voting republican here in the primary today. I would venture that most of the LGBT in my area are voting for Sanders.

Posted by: Sassy at March 15, 2016 01:59 PM (q7eWh)

342
Third parties have no chance of coming in first.
Posted by: Blue Hen

Or second.

Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at March 15, 2016 01:59 PM (FkBIv)

343 Wise Man say ... He who don't stick dick in crazy, whack off alot.

Posted by: Wise Man at March 15, 2016 01:59 PM (zfvHs)

344 Donald Trump = Al Czervik
Jeb Bush = Judge Smails
Ted Cruz = Ty Webb
Marco Rubio = Danny Noonan
John Kasich = Carl Spackler

______________________________

Bernie Sanders = The Groundhog
Hillary Clinton = The Candy Bar in the Pool

Posted by: Adirondack Patriot at March 15, 2016 01:59 PM (NjiZL)

345 310 Only one third party came in second, and that was in 1912 (Bull moose party). Third parties have no chance of coming in first.
Posted by: Blue Hen at March 15, 2016 01:55 PM (326rv)

===============

And they had a former president at the top of the ticket.

We bringing George HW Bush out for a third party run?

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 01:59 PM (rJSDb)

346 OK, philosophical question regarding Let It Burn.

If not nominating Trump lets it burn, is that a good thing?

If nominating Trump and we get Hillary, is that a good thing?

Bonus question: does anyone think he'd be an actual good President?
Posted by: Bandersnatch at March 15, 2016 01:53 PM (1xUj/)

1. Let It Burn is acknowledgement of the inevitable, regardless of who wins.

2. At this point, what difference does it make? (See answer #1)

Bonus: Some people think so. Those people also seem to think that "Good President" means getting back at the "others", even to the degree of sanctioning violence, POTUS should have unlimited dictatorial powers, and things like 'free' healthcare, federal funding of Planned Parenthood, and ordering the military to kill wives and children are generally good ideas.

Posted by: Damiano at March 15, 2016 01:59 PM (XItbt)

347 The only way to stop Trump is a brokered convention. If the only way to do that is for Kasich and Cruz to stay in, then that is what we will see. The actual convention starts on July 18 -- about three months away. Can we keep yelling at each other for 3 months?*

*Stupid question. Don't answer that.

Posted by: joncelli, gone Shakespearean at March 15, 2016 01:59 PM (RD7QR)

348 Lots of Trump supporters here have or had expressed opinion that they would vote for Cruz but would stay home if it were ( place name here) as the nominee.

Kind of inconsistent to bash people who say they will stay home if Trump is the nominee.

Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at March 15, 2016 02:00 PM (PkIg+)

349 Rubio is staying in in the hope he'll get picked to be someone's VP or become the VP at a brokered convention..

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at March 15, 2016 02:00 PM (w4NZ8)

350 Third parties have no chance of coming in first.
Posted by: Blue Hen

Or second.
Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at March 15, 2016 01:59 PM (FkBIv)

Now you tell us!

Posted by: Whigs at March 15, 2016 02:00 PM (XItbt)

351 329 Why wd Calif need a wall? People are leaving Calif, not movng there.

To keep them from leaving and infecting other parts of the country?
Posted by: dartist at March 15, 2016 01:57 PM (Nr1E9)

-------------------

I would refer to such a wall as a "quarantine boundary".

Posted by: Soona at March 15, 2016 02:00 PM (Fmupd)

352 As a Cruz supporter, I hope he doesnt play this kind of shitty game. If Trump has the plurality, let Trump run.

---------

Why should either win if no one has a majority? Why shouldn't either try to negotiate their way to the ticket if no one has a majority? It seems quite simple to me, you get a majority, you are the nominee. You have a plurality, then we go to the convention.

Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 02:00 PM (gmeXX)

353 It's the end times! Spielberg and Ford are doing a fifth Indiana Jones. Indiana Jones and the Doddering Has Been.

See Drudge.

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks at March 15, 2016 02:00 PM (Nwg0u)

354 GUESSES/SUPPOSITIONS 2016!!!

Posted by: Weasel at March 15, 2016 02:01 PM (6xtq3)

355 To make up for the lack of boobehs in my prior comment, I give you this in humble supplication.

https://youtu.be/ADTw-EmfjoE

Posted by: alexthechick - Team Hardwood at March 15, 2016 02:01 PM (mf5HN)

356 President Trump will make this place luxurious and classy, right before he's impeached for something.
Maybe it'll be valid, maybe not, and maybe he's acquitted, who knows. But I bet the Senate will have it in for him.
Posted by: Lance McCormick at March 15, 2016 01:54 PM (u0s1P)

If he's the jackbooted thug mob boss the denizens of the HQ have made him out to be, insurance against this eventuality was the first thing he took care of.

Posted by: Ghost of kari - certified inane at March 15, 2016 02:01 PM (xuouz)

357 324 I mean, we've seen the GOPe grow a spine, opposing Trump a million times more than they've opposed Obama.

Like Insty says, you only get accountability when there's a Republican in office. With Trump he gets it from both sides.
Posted by: Lance McCormick at March 15, 2016 01:56 PM (u0s1P)

================

Hmmm....maybe a side effect of a Trump presidency will be a strengthening of the separation of powers.

I'm dead serious: That may be enough for me to support him in November.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 02:01 PM (rJSDb)

358 Posted by: Trumpbot #298738975 at March 15, 2016 01:54 PM (D4ynZ)

I like the cut of this "Trumpbot" fellow's jib.

He's certainly persuasive, good looking and he smells great.

Posted by: jwest at March 15, 2016 02:01 PM (Zs4uk)

359 The GOP is dead to me, they took their poll leader and pushed liberal attacks on him themselves....

For me, they died when we gave them the majority they wanted/needed in 2014, AND BEFORE THEY WERE SWORN INTO OFFICE, impeachment was OFF the table.

Posted by: rickb223 at March 15, 2016 02:01 PM (44Kmm)

360 GUESSES/SUPPOSITIONS 2016!!!
Posted by: Weasel at March 15, 2016 02:01 PM (6xtq3)

Yes!

Posted by: Ghost of kari - certified inane at March 15, 2016 02:01 PM (xuouz)

361 No, but why should I assume that Trump will pick any differently?

Fair enough...but you already know how far left hillary would pick, SO there is ONLY an up side

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 15, 2016 02:01 PM (mw8Dm)

362 No, but why should I assume that Trump will pick any differently?
----------------

He'll pick someone like John Roberts

---------

I know Roberts is persona non grata round these parts, but I would be very pleased if he picked someone like Roberts. There is a big difference between Roberts and Ginsberg.

Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 02:01 PM (gmeXX)

363 LOL.
Posted by: FenelonSpoke at March 15, 2016 01:58 PM

No other candidate has offered a shirt that proudly proclaims: "Ride Our Ponies Into the Future!"

And I'll be no other candidate ever will.

Posted by: MrScribbler at March 15, 2016 02:02 PM (8xI/8)

364 I think this is why most Trump people I know seem almost to be speaking a different language, a kind of "ecritur guerre" that seems completely dissonant. They're (we're) not trying to represent policy prescription; we're claiming that the promulgation edifice has to be eliminated first, at any cost, to be replaced after a painful interregnum with something more valid and responsive--policy imperatives will come after the patronage system is altered and the figurative (or not) moneychangers cast out. I hope he does something like that, or at least facilitates (directly or indirectly) the growth of a movement that will. Grim times, at any rate.
Posted by: General Zod at March 15, 2016 01:56 PM (Bdeb0)

Well, this is what I have been saying. If Trump destroys the party -- and he's just the man to do it -- then that's 10 years, at least, of untrammeled socialism in all but name. Can we recover from that?

Posted by: joncelli, gone Shakespearean at March 15, 2016 02:02 PM (RD7QR)

365 Kind of inconsistent to bash people who say they will stay home if Trump is the nominee.

Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at March 15, 2016 02:00 PM (PkIg+)

I'm not sure you have been following....the reason they won't vote for anyone else is because they will have been handpicked by the GOPe at the convention, given the nomination over the two people who had the highest support in the primaries.

Posted by: doug at March 15, 2016 02:02 PM (Huq8w)

366 310: "Third parties have no chance of coming in first."

The Republican party did a while back when they were the third party.

Posted by: Azenogoth (Freedom or Fire) at March 15, 2016 02:02 PM (z/vX9)

367 I do think if they take it from Trump without some excuse (Trump killed someone or something), then Cruz should steer far clear of that offer. The party fracture is coming. A side must be chosen.

Posted by: AlaBAMA at March 15, 2016 01:57 PM (2PHKP)

The GOPe/punditry group seem to be suffering from a severe no limits fallacy. The voters tolerate a certain level of being fucked over. That's inherent to politics. That doesn't mean that you can keep fucking them over a little bit more every election cycle. Eventually there's pushback.

Pigs get fat, hogs get slaughtered.

Posted by: Jake (irregular) at March 15, 2016 02:02 PM (8w+OS)

368 Why should either win if no one has a majority? Why shouldn't either try to negotiate their way to the ticket if no one has a majority? It seems quite simple to me, you get a majority, you are the nominee. You have a plurality, then we go to the convention.

Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 02:00 PM (gmeXX)
________

Because we re not Democrats and we actually give a shit about voters?

Posted by: The Nayden Broad at March 15, 2016 02:02 PM (P8unj)

369 338 As a Cruz supporter, I hope he doesnt play this kind of shitty game. If Trump has the plurality, let Trump run. Cruz is young enough to run again. Unlike the golden boy, Cruz has actually proven that he can run a good, competent campaign.
Posted by: The Nayden Broad at March 15, 2016 01:58 PM (P8unj)

===============

Except a majority voted against Trump in that scenario. A majority of voters and delegates.

Who do you play more fair to? The 40% that voted for him or the 60% that voted against?

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 02:02 PM (rJSDb)

370 Rush said today that the Establishment is pulling out all the stops for a brokered convention, and that their nominee will almost certainly be Jeb Bush.

Posted by: Nancy at March 15, 2016 02:03 PM (uRWfu)

371 Does Vermin Supreme offers boots for sale to wear on the head?

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at March 15, 2016 02:03 PM (w4NZ8)

372 263 I love how the anti-trumpsters are so cock sure he would lose in November. I am sure they are the same people who thought he had no chance to get anywhere near the Nomination. LMAO

And I say this from a the perspective of a Cruz supporter.
....
I second that. I remember openly laughing and mocking my conservative friends who were aboard the Trump train early and who were amazingly convinced he would win the nom. I openly laughed at them and told them they were crazy and it would never happen. I mean....listen to the guy!
And yet, here we are. And quite honestly, the longer this froth mouthed hatred toward him goes on the more I find myself willing to go there.
In fact, Cruz's willingness to blame Trump for the bullshit that occurred in Chicago rather than use it as a vehicle to extol what is wrong with the other side left me with a little bit of a bad taste in my mouth. Kind of like that time I earned a snickers bar from the local preacher.

Posted by: ajmojo at March 15, 2016 02:03 PM (1H9ox)

373 It's the end times! Spielberg and Ford are doing a fifth Indiana Jones. Indiana Jones and the Doddering Has Been.

Indiana Jones and the Search for

Depends
Geritol
His Social Security Check
Medicare
His Dentures

Posted by: rickb223 at March 15, 2016 02:03 PM (44Kmm)

374 This is a great piece of writing and you're 100% correct, and to disagree with you is moral cowardice. Abortion is murder, AND you correctly diagnose the even more important point (I mean what's 40 million butchered babies when there's philosophical musing to do) that capitulating on this issue means permitting the state to decide what is and what is not life, means handing over a basic constitutional protection.

Taking a religious stab at this question - abortion is modern infant sacrifice. Because America is morally bankrupt to that degree, we are invaded by our aliens and have empty prosperity and lawlessness.

Kicking out the GOPe is fair reward for their spineless ineffectiveness on abortion.

I'm for giving Trump a chance at power because the GOPe doesn't deserve it ... but he does need to act on abortion, or America cannot be great. America must stop its practice of infant sacrifice - that is not a matter of a single politician, but of the entire nation repenting.

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at March 15, 2016 02:03 PM (uURQL)

375 Hmmm....maybe a side effect of a Trump presidency will be a strengthening of the separation of powers.

I'm dead serious: That may be enough for me to support him in November.

-----------

I've said that before, that may be the only bright side to a Trump presidency.

Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 02:03 PM (gmeXX)

376 See Drudge.

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks at March 15, 2016 02:00 PM

Were they inspired by the sudden and unforeseen reanimation of Mutt Rombley?

Posted by: MrScribbler at March 15, 2016 02:03 PM (8xI/8)

377 347 Donald Trump = Al Czervik
Jeb Bush = Judge Smails
Ted Cruz = Ty Webb
Marco Rubio = Danny Noonan
John Kasich = Carl Spackler

______________________________

Bernie Sanders = The Groundhog
Hillary Clinton = The Candy Bar in the Pool
Posted by: Adirondack Patriot at March 15, 2016 01:59 PM (NjiZL)

^^^

This right here; this is why sketch is always written in groups. I could have never come up with that on my own. Thank you!

Posted by: Oschisms at March 15, 2016 02:03 PM (ZsN9X)

378 I HAVE MORE FAVORABLE DELEGATE STATES COMING UP!! THE MAP FAVORS ME!!! IT FAVORS ME!!!!

Posted by: Fuhrer Rubio in Bunker at March 15, 2016 01:44 PM

Dude....let it go.

Posted by: Steiner at March 15, 2016 02:03 PM (bzd8I)

379 It's rare to have such a perfect combination of director, producers, actor and role
----

I guess storyline ain't that big a deal

Posted by: RWC - Team TTBTFW at March 15, 2016 02:04 PM (mEZce)

380 There is no possible scenario by which the GOP picks Cruz in a brokered convention or any other manner of trickery. Not even if it was a choice between nominating him and having their balls crushed in a vice. Such as they are.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 15, 2016 02:04 PM (39g3+)

381 Fair enough...but you already know how far left hillary would pick, SO there is ONLY an up side
Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 15, 2016 02:01 PM (mw8Dm)

Huh, the old "so, we've established what you are, now we're just haggling over price" concept comes to mind.

The is the left side of zero and the right side of zero. The left side is always negative.

Posted by: Damiano at March 15, 2016 02:04 PM (XItbt)

382 Cruz or Trump. Just waiting on y'all to pick.

After those two it doesn't matter. Even with one of those two it probably doesn't matter.

I have a cousin who was a Washington bureaucrat his entire career. I asked him what he thought about Reagan getting elected in 1980.

He laughed. "Presidents come and go, but WE are always here.

Posted by: Meremortal at March 15, 2016 02:04 PM (3myMJ)

383 373
Rush said today that the Establishment is pulling out all the stops for a
brokered convention, and that their nominee will almost certainly be
Jeb Bush.

Posted by: Nancy at March 15, 2016 02:03 PM (uRWfu)
I really hope it does not come to this.

Posted by: IC at March 15, 2016 02:05 PM (a0IVu)

384 I suspect Marco Rubio is making statements like that to keep his potential voters in FL engaged enough to get to the ballot booth today. Look at his recent public appearances and interviews. He knows he's done. There is a reason Cruz pulled his ads from FL.

It will be fairly easy for Rubio to say tomorrow that win/lose FL, his results in the other 4 states were poor enough that he's decided not to go forward. Kasich worries me. He's our best chance to keep Trump from winning OH tonight, but he's clearly willing to hang in as a spoiler. Some recent anti-Trump statements after Trump started dumping on him give me some hope. However, Kasich is just selfish enough to demand the VP spot from Cruz as the price of getting out.

Posted by: Jill v2 at March 15, 2016 02:05 PM (1+uyO)

385 To make up for the lack of boobehs in my prior comment, I give you this in humble supplication.

https://youtu.be/ADTw-EmfjoE
Posted by: alexthechick - Team Hardwood

Heh. Motorboat!

*bites tongue*

Posted by: Bandersnatch at March 15, 2016 02:05 PM (1xUj/)

386 Posted by: Adirondack Patriot at March 15, 2016 01:59 PM (NjiZL)

If we are going by real life, Trump would be Judge Smails. He prides himself on his exclusive golf courses and strict codes. He also has stated that he is totally against attempting to open up golf more to the lower classes.

Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at March 15, 2016 02:05 PM (PkIg+)

387 Does Vermin Supreme offers boots for sale to wear on the head?

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at March 15, 2016 02:03 PM

No, doggone it.

A neighbor is friends with ol' Verm, and I asked him to suggest it to Teh Candidate. Haven't heard back yet....

Posted by: MrScribbler at March 15, 2016 02:05 PM (8xI/8)

388 Mr. Anti Illegal Immigration gave $$ to Queen of Sanctuary Cities:

http://tinyurl.com/gmtbwzd

In 2014, not many years ago.

Posted by: Carol at March 15, 2016 02:05 PM (sj3Ax)

389 Why should either win if no one has a majority? Why shouldn't either try to negotiate their way to the ticket if no one has a majority? It seems quite simple to me, you get a majority, you are the nominee. You have a plurality, then we go to the convention.

Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 02:00 PM (gmeXX)
________

Because we re not Democrats and we actually give a shit about voters?

----------

The rules don't say a plurality wins. And why would the rules say that. If Trump is as a good a negotiator as he says he is, I'd think he should be able to negotiate enough delegates to get over 50%. Barring that he does not deserve to be the nominee. I really don't know why people find this so infuriating.

Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 02:06 PM (gmeXX)

390 It seems quite simple to me, you get a majority, you are the nominee. You have a plurality, then we go to the convention.

I think whoever gets the most, regardless of the "majority vs plurality" definition, is the winner. Because otherwise it just ends up with the GOP flooding the primary with enough people to make sure nobody gets a clear majority, then picking their guy.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 15, 2016 02:06 PM (39g3+)

391 378 Hmmm....maybe a side effect of a Trump presidency will be a strengthening of the separation of powers.

I'm dead serious: That may be enough for me to support him in November.

-----------

I've said that before, that may be the only bright side to a Trump presidency.
Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 02:03 PM (gmeXX)

=================

The other side of the coin is that separation of powers will go out the window because he actually shares a lot of views with Democrats and the GOPe.

We could see a complete dissolution of separation of powers under his watch (even further than under Obama's).

Eh...I'll probably still vote third party.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 02:06 PM (rJSDb)

392 >>>>>So for everyone saying they will never vote for Trump you are all OK
with Hillary getting to pick 1 and most likely two SCOTUS Judges? If she
gets in Ginsberg will "retire".

-------------

No, but why should I assume that Trump will pick any differently?
.
.
.
.We know what Hilary's picks will be like, but we don't know what Trump would pick. I never like to "assume" anything. He might surprise us or disappoint us, but with Hillary we know with 100% absolute certainty what we would be getting.

I am going to hold my nose and vote Trump if it comes to that. I would rather have Cruz as my pick and I hope that happens, but I am prepared to vote against Hillary.

Posted by: The Great White Scotsman at March 15, 2016 02:07 PM (iONHu)

393 >>Can we recover from that?

I don't know. I really hope so. The growing preponderance of Obamaphone mutants makes me skeptical, and scares the hell out of me as much as the next person. History shows examples of political cycles, though, so there may be hope--the "wash" cycle could be bad enough that the "rinse" takes much longer than we'd like...

Posted by: General Zod at March 15, 2016 02:07 PM (Bdeb0)

394 Sassy, thanks.

I may need to relocate to Chicago, and I am coming from a relatively crime free exurb. We have more people killed walking across the road to their mailboxes than are murdered. Not much burglary either, probably because we live the Second Amendment.

Posted by: rd at March 15, 2016 02:07 PM (v0YLX)

395 111
Maybe, along with others that do not wish to see Hillary as president. Pretty much guaranteed of Trump is the nominee.
Posted by: Benji Carver at March 15, 2016 01:22 PM (OD2ni)

___

LOL. What did these spineless assholes do to prevent Obama from winning. Nothing. The RIONs embraced Obama and gave him everything he asked for while shitting on their base. But now it's Trump's fault if Hillary wins? You guys are fucking hilarious.
Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at March 15, 2016 01:28 PM (1JAxC)

===

Monsieur's comments are similar to others here, and lots on twitter. I see this sentiment a lot. I cock my head to the side and wonder why they are so sure.

I understand the anger toward Obama. I just don't get the idea that Trump is a better machine toward this end than Cruz, or even Marco, or, heavens to Betsy, Romney was.

I voted in full faculty against Obama twice, and in Illinois. I followed every news story, grew aghast and punched the air at every atrocity he committed against the country. Now, people like Monsieur take particular glee in hating people like myself who merely voted against Obama at every opportunity.

And you think you're taking on the GOPe. Nuh uh. The people you are talking about are either a .1% who are big donors, completely cut off from you, anyway. Or the VA-DC lawyers, lobbyists, and lick-spittles who will win feast well with a Trump nomination, no matter what.

You want to think that there is some unnamed villain out there -- a cabal of bad faith, cashing checks from Soros. No, it's just us poor ol' luckless fools standing on principle who have shook our heads in the Obama era.

I don't find Trump refreshing. I find him vile, and going to a really nasty place. He doesn't impress me in believing anything he says, even if I "agree" with many of his positions, while being diametrically opposed to others.

You guys have broke the GOP. You own it. Congratulations, I guess. But you're not getting me to vote for Trump because my vote was never based on bandwagoning. In fact, I resisted and called out the bandwagoning in 2008 and beyond, and refused to have anything to do with it. The nastiness coming from Trumpers is just icing on the cake.

Posted by: Leo Spaceman at March 15, 2016 02:07 PM (tSSSX)

396 I really don't know why people find this so infuriating.

Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 02:06 PM (gmeXX)

Unfortunately, you may find out.

Posted by: Meremortal at March 15, 2016 02:07 PM (3myMJ)

397 "Third parties have no chance of coming in first."

The Republican party did a while back when they were the third party.
Posted by: Azenogoth

1860? 'a while back'? The whigs were dying. If the tea party(ies) still existed and ad some structure, I might think that the situations were similar.

But there was no weaponized IRS in 1860.

Posted by: Blue Hen at March 15, 2016 02:08 PM (326rv)

398 Rush said today that the Establishment is pulling out all the stops for a brokered convention, and that their nominee will almost certainly be Jeb Bush.

So, instead of giving it to the guy with a plurality, let's give it to the guy who quit!

Sounds like a fvckin' plan!

Posted by: rickb223 at March 15, 2016 02:08 PM (44Kmm)

399 Lots of Trump supporters here have or had expressed opinion that they would vote for Cruz but would stay home if it were ( place name here) as the nominee.

Kind of inconsistent to bash people who say they will stay home if Trump is the nominee.

Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at March 15, 2016 02:00 PM (PkIg+)

My position is that there is a certain level of procedural fuckery that is ok. If the party exceeds that level, they will lose my vote. If they really go nuts then they'll push me to vote for the other side.

If Trump wins it won't be as a result of procedural fuckery at all. Abandoning the team because you don't like the leader is IMO very different from abandoning the team because you got fucked over.

Posted by: Jake (irregular) at March 15, 2016 02:08 PM (8w+OS)

400 >>>If Trump wins and they take it from him and nominate someone else, will anyone here vote?

It depends on what you mean. If you mean, if Trump wins sufficient state primaries that he by delegate count *should* win the nomination by simple majority of delegates on the first vote at the convention and he doesn't win the nomination at the convention, will anyone here vote for the Republican nominee?

The answer for me is it depends on who the nominee is. But a high bar would be in place due to the usurpation of the will of the popular vote.

If the question is, if Trump only wins a plurality of delegates and goes on to lose the convention would I still vote on ticket. Dude that's politics. And Mr. Perfect Negotiator is always supposed to ***WIN WIN WIN***. If he can't outright win the majority, and can't win at the convention then, ***HE LOST.***

So I would most likely vote for the Republican Candidate no matter who it was.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose at March 15, 2016 02:08 PM (0q2P7)

401 Hmmm....maybe a side effect of a Trump presidency will be a strengthening of the separation of powers.

I'm dead serious: That may be enough for me to support him in November.
Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 02:01 PM (rJSDb)

There's game theory reasons to vote for Trump along those lines.

Posted by: alexthechick - Team Hardwood at March 15, 2016 02:08 PM (mf5HN)

402 Is today Super Tuesday 2.0, or Super-Duper Tuesday?

Posted by: logprof at March 15, 2016 02:08 PM (L3TX7)

403 344 289 - you're asking me? My area is all democrat. No one is voting republican here in the primary today. I would venture that most of the LGBT in my area are voting for Sanders.
...
Not directed specifically at you, more of a general question I was curious about.

Posted by: ajmojo at March 15, 2016 02:08 PM (1H9ox)

404 Read the HA piece about Rubio. Is nationalist a pejorative now? I guess the GOPe isn't a national party.

Posted by: WOPR at March 15, 2016 02:09 PM (LTDSy)

405 I have a cousin who was a Washington bureaucrat his entire career. I asked him what he thought about Reagan getting elected in 1980.

He laughed. "Presidents come and go, but WE are always here.

Exactly. Who's in that seat only matters insofar as the bureaucracy goes along with or fights them. Look at the difference between our last two presidents.

Bush was fought every inch of the way and had constant leaks and backstabbing by the drones. He could barely get anything done.

Obama is beloved by the drones and can just sail through every single thing without the slightest opposition. They're falling all over themselves to anticipate his wishes and carry them out before being stated.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 15, 2016 02:09 PM (39g3+)

406 "My position is that there is a certain level of procedural fuckery that is ok. If the party exceeds that level, they will lose my vote. "

What he said...

Posted by: Skeezix at March 15, 2016 02:09 PM (WnCSK)

407 358 To make up for the lack of boobehs in my prior comment, I give you this in humble supplication.

https://youtu.be/ADTw-EmfjoE
Posted by: alexthechick - Team Hardwood at March 15, 2016 02:01 PM (mf5HN)

Wait -- her majesty supplicates?

Posted by: joncelli, gone Shakespearean at March 15, 2016 02:09 PM (RD7QR)

408 >>To make up for the lack of boobehs in my prior comment, I give you this in humble supplication.

Heh. For the 'ettes, how about this?

http://preview.tinyurl.com/zrutzf4

Posted by: Joey at March 15, 2016 02:09 PM (NOIQH)

409 You have a plurality, then we go to the convention.
Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 02:00 PM (gmeXX)

Depends on the margin. People have a fuzzy sense of fairness.

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at March 15, 2016 02:09 PM (uURQL)

410 "Rubio is staying in in the hope he'll get picked to be someone's VP or become the VP at a brokered convention."

When this is over Rubio will be lucky to be a bartender at Trump's Mar-A-Lago.

Posted by: Ignoramus at March 15, 2016 02:10 PM (r1fLd)

411 > If Trump loses- especially after getting more delegates- I may well have to see a doctor after 4 hours.

Serious question. I can't vote, and, good thing as the process confuses me.

What exactly does the primary accomplish if rules can be changed and/or applied whenever the delegates don't vote according to party or minority preference?

Why have delegates at all, why not just count votes and only votes cast on Nov 8, 2016?

Posted by: cind at March 15, 2016 02:10 PM (nRbbW)

412 RD, why on earth would you want to come to Chicago? Unless your job is transferring you here. I mean, yes, in summer, it's pretty, it's a very beautiful city in many ways, but it's residents can only really enjoy it for 3 months out of the year. Prepare yourself for the winds which can be brutal most days. I live off the lakefront so it's worse here.

Posted by: Sassy at March 15, 2016 02:10 PM (q7eWh)

413 Posted by: doug at March 15, 2016 02:02 PM (Huq8w)

No they have been saying this before the first primary and shortly thereafter. They said it about Bush before he even declared.

Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at March 15, 2016 02:10 PM (PkIg+)

414 139 I hoping that MAGA tell us again how much billionaire Trump can relate to your average person. I'll really enjoy that as the billionaires (Trump and Clinton) battle it out for the soul of America.
Posted by: FenelonSpoke at March 15, 2016 01:33 PM (w4NZ

------------------------

Ask and you shall receive.

I didn't say Trump can "relate" to the average person. I said he can "connect" to actual working Americans.

It's obvious to anyone giving a moments thought about it that Trump has tailored his message to the meat of the American electorate:

The government hasn't been enforcing the law on immigration, negotiating good trade deals, or properly taking care of our veterans. The government gets itself involved in too many things (healthcare, education) and screws them up. To sum up the government hasn't been working in the best interest of its citizens, the very thing it should be doing.

Posted by: Make America Great Again at March 15, 2016 02:10 PM (LXJ1e)

415 I think whoever gets the most, regardless of the "majority vs plurality" definition, is the winner.

------------

They may be the winner in that they got the most delegates, but not the winner of the nomination. Look the winner - whoever that is - will either win outright or have a good shot at the convention.

If Trump cannot negotiate 10-15% of the delegates away, then he's not nearly as a good a negotiator as he claims to be. And if 60-65% of the party doesn't want him, I don't see why he should be the nominee.

There are going to be repercussions either way, but I'm not sure why Trump should just win.

Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 02:11 PM (gmeXX)

416 394 It seems quite simple to me, you get a majority, you are the nominee. You have a plurality, then we go to the convention.

I think whoever gets the most, regardless of the "majority vs plurality" definition, is the winner. Because otherwise it just ends up with the GOP flooding the primary with enough people to make sure nobody gets a clear majority, then picking their guy.

Welcome to GOPe 2016. Without Trump, we probably would have seen this.

Posted by: rd at March 15, 2016 02:11 PM (v0YLX)

417 We know what Hilary's picks will be like, but we don't know what Trump would pick. I never like to "assume" anything. He might surprise us or disappoint us, but with Hillary we know with 100% absolute certainty what we would be getting.

We didn't know what we were getting with a Bush '43 pick either.
Seems like it's always a crapshoot with RINO picks.

Posted by: rickb223 at March 15, 2016 02:11 PM (44Kmm)

418 Kasich is just selfish enough to demand the VP spot from Cruz as the price of getting out.
Posted by: Jill v2

He went all in for amnesty. he'd be no use to Cruz. He's going to get a payoff, one way or another, from the GOPe. Or he's doing it for our own good, ala Huntsman.

Posted by: Blue Hen at March 15, 2016 02:11 PM (326rv)

419 No, but why should I assume that Trump will pick any differently?
Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 01:58 PM (gmeXX)

If he were a democrat he would have run as a democrat. Can you imagine the mayhem, the sheer carnage, if the dem debates were Trump, O'Malley, Sanders, and Clinton?

Why the hell would he "fake" all of the positions he's taken, in the teeth of the media, entertainment, and cultural elite, if he's just a sicko looking to take the White House by any means necessary? If it's just "easiest path to the white house" then why the hell would he open himself up to the 100% inevitable "racism" accusations that have been pouring over him since June? If he's nothing but an opportunistic plutocrat with a flair for the dramatic why wouldn't he want to be on the side of the MoveOn protesters?

No. No hold the fuck up. This is the stupidest argument I've ever heard, seriously, and smart people keep repeating it on this smart military blog. It's is ludicrous, asinine, to argue that he's a democrat plant, because he has created a groundswell of support for the exact opposite policies on immigration from the democrat party, even within the democrat party.

Even if he IS a stalking horse candidate, he's failed, not for anything to do with him but for making strides in normalizing, mainstreaming, opposition to socialist open-border policies that they have been working to make socially unacceptable since the fucking 60s.

And if you can't see that, I'm not talking to you any more, because your nose is so far up your ass you really should just keep pushing. Honestly it's impressive.

Posted by: Ghost of kari - certified inane at March 15, 2016 02:11 PM (xuouz)

420 Except a majority voted against Trump in that scenario. A majority of voters and delegates.

Who do you play more fair to? The 40% that voted for him or the 60% that voted against?

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 02:02 PM (rJSDb)
______

There is noone named "against" on the ballot. "Against" is John Kasich. "Against" is also Marco Rubio. And I wouldnt wanna vote anymore for these people than I would vote for Trump. If the "against" crowd is supposed to be some kind of coalition, they should have rallied around a single candidate during the actual primary process.

People are getting awfully lawyerly about this, when its quite clear that being the candidate with a plurality lends legitimacy to your claim.

I still hope for a miracle and that it will be Cruz. And should that happen, I dont wanna see any kind of trickery from the GOPe like this against Cruz either. Always consider that you might end up on the receiving end of such schemes.

Posted by: The Nayden Broad at March 15, 2016 02:11 PM (P8unj)

421 If Trump wins Ohio, Kasich is gone and Cruz can beat Trump in a 1-on-1 basis. If Kasich wins Ohio, Trump won't have enough delegates to reach 1237. Either way, good for America.

Posted by: Kevin DuBrow at March 15, 2016 02:11 PM (bMcUX)

422 Beware the Ides of March!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxJFjO4Skgo

Vehicle. Love this song from 1970.

These guys were just out of high school, amazingly.

Inspired by the lead singer's getting used by a hot chick from high school who had him drive her around to her Chicago-area modelling gigs.

Posted by: Ignoramus at March 15, 2016 02:11 PM (r1fLd)

423 409 I have a cousin who was a Washington bureaucrat his entire career. I asked him what he thought about Reagan getting elected in 1980.

He laughed. "Presidents come and go, but WE are always here.

Like...groundhogs?

Posted by: Carl Spackler at March 15, 2016 02:11 PM (ZsN9X)

424 And that's the message that the meat of the electorate wants to deliver to DC.

Posted by: Make America Great Again at March 15, 2016 02:12 PM (LXJ1e)

425 >>If Trump wins and they take it from him and nominate someone else, will anyone here vote?

What's scary is that might be a feature, not a bug.
Being #NeverTrump means burning the party to save it from Trump (and teach those uppity Trump voters a lesson).

Posted by: Joey at March 15, 2016 02:12 PM (NOIQH)

426 OT: What do HRC, Lois Lerner, Pelosi, and the picture of the former head of the EPA mid-west division all have in common?

Leftist beliefs rots you to the point where you look like just another angry, bitter, hater.

http://tinyurl.com/h5vhv9v

Posted by: Cheri at March 15, 2016 02:12 PM (oiNtH)

427 I will build a wall on the state line, and I'll get California to pay for it.

Posted by: Boogeyman with a Hair Flip at March 15, 2016 02:12 PM (SEFXb)

428 Mind just wandered thinking 'isn't it fucking amazing/Twilight Zoney that Trump is the front runner. Who the hell would have predicted this.'

I mean, besides the Simpsons escalator scene. That is one helluva coincidence.

Posted by: RWC - Team TTBTFW at March 15, 2016 02:12 PM (LdVxD)

429 Hmmm....maybe a side effect of a Trump presidency will be a strengthening of the separation of powers.

Purely situational. The rules seem to have been bastardized into "whatever benefits me/my team". They go back out again when it no longer suits them.

A full housecleaning is required, in all positions, elected, appointed, or hired. No other solution is sufficient to the task.

Posted by: Brother Cavil, Restorationist at March 15, 2016 02:12 PM (9krrF)

430 even then, he'd have to thread a LOT of needles with the remaining primaries

Sometimes you walk away from the TV in the fourth quarter because it seems that all is lost. Then you come back in the last minute and the team that is behind is in a position to fire passes into the end zone from the 25 yard line.

Cruz can win this thing.

Posted by: Captain Oblivious at March 15, 2016 02:12 PM (UwQ7q)

431 " If Kasich wins Ohio, Trump won't have enough delegates to reach 1237."

Not mathematically correct.

Posted by: Skeezix at March 15, 2016 02:13 PM (WnCSK)

432 I've been here longer than you have Nevergiveup so byte me.

Posted by: whatmeworry? at March 15, 2016 02:13 PM (dZGNV)

433 you're asking me? My area is all democrat. No one is voting republican here in the primary today. I would venture that most of the LGBT in my area are voting for Sanders.

Posted by: Sassy at March 15, 2016 01:59 PM (q7eWh)

I'm hoping that Comrade Bernie wins Illinois. The more he can win the more Hillary will have to steal to get it. Let's see the other side have civil war for a change.

Posted by: TheQuietMan at March 15, 2016 02:13 PM (493sH)

434 Read the HA piece about Rubio.
Posted by: WOPR at March 15, 2016 02:09 PM (LTDSy)

No thank you.

Posted by: IP at March 15, 2016 02:13 PM (aQQbl)

435 RickB 223,
I only listened to one hour of Rush & had three phone calls during that hour.

Posted by: Carol at March 15, 2016 02:13 PM (sj3Ax)

436 Rush said today that the Establishment is pulling out all the stops for a brokered convention, and that their nominee will almost certainly be Jeb Bush.

Posted by: Nancy at March 15, 2016 02:03 PM (uRWfu)

IfEstablishment leadership tries to foistJeb! or any of their otherloser choices on an unwilling primary electorate, then the GOP shatters into a hundred little hostile pieces right there.

It took the Whigs about four years (1852-1856) to dissolve into an irrelevant non-entity. The GOP would go down in a single night. As dense as they are, even Establishment bigshots must see that, and I'm pretty sure they want to keep their phony baloney jobs, so I stronglydoubt a brokered convention playing out. My guess is either Trump or Cruz wins the requisite number of delegates or a strong plurality too great to overcome and takes the nomination in the conventional way.

Posted by: troyriser at March 15, 2016 02:13 PM (UWlp+)

437 If we are going by real life, Trump would be Judge Smails. He prides himself on his exclusive golf courses and strict codes. He also has stated that he is totally against attempting to open up golf more to the lower classes.

Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at March 15, 2016 02:05 PM (PkIg+)

But the fact is that Smails was correct about most of it. Al Czervik, as much as we all liked him, is not the person you want playing on a golf course, certainly not anywhere around me. And, yeah, farting at the table is funny ... at someone else's table.

They made Smails out to be a total dick in the movie but a lot of the things he was saying were correct. It isn't wrong for people to want their clubs to be they want. That's the whole point of joining an exclusive club.

And you know what clubs are even more exclusive than Bushwood was? New York co-ops. The last places where you can deny real estate transfers (because it isn't "really" real estate) for any reason the board thinks up. I have no problem with that but it's funny that so many people who want to force neighborhoods to take section 8 housing and who want to sue everyone who makes sane decisions regarding such issues sued.

Trump's buildings, BTW, are condos, not co-ops so they are not nearly as "exclusive" in the sense of a board determining if you are the right sort of person to buy an apartment.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at March 15, 2016 02:14 PM (zc3Db)

438 I don't get this SCOTUS pick concern. Trump has already named two he'd consider.

Cruz would have more trouble getting anyone through the Senate. Half the Republican delegation would vote against Ted's pick just to see the look on his face.

Posted by: Ignoramus at March 15, 2016 02:14 PM (r1fLd)

439 Kasich and Rubio have already said they are staying in through the convention. They don't seem to care what the primary results would be, they are banking on being players during the brokered convention.

Posted by: IC at March 15, 2016 02:14 PM (a0IVu)

440 'Come on,' Obama said, still laughing. 'Oh, boy. Selling wine. That's not what we're for. Couldn't make it up.'

Barry couldn't even sell icecream in Hawaii.

Posted by: Grump928(c) says Free Soothie! at March 15, 2016 02:14 PM (evdj2)

441 Let's assume Trump wins....who is his veep?

Posted by: billygoat at March 15, 2016 02:14 PM (INxoa)

442 "Kasich and Rubio have already said they are staying in through the convention."

I thought katshit just said he would get out if he loses Ohio?

Posted by: Skeezix at March 15, 2016 02:15 PM (WnCSK)

443 And if you can't see that, I'm not talking to you any more, because your nose is so far up your ass you really should just keep pushing. Honestly it's impressive.
Posted by: Ghost of kari - certified inane at March 15, 2016 02:11 PM (xuouz)

-------------------------

They have an argument they started using in June 2015 and they are sticking with it.

Posted by: Make America Great Again at March 15, 2016 02:15 PM (LXJ1e)

444 Is Ohio a winner take all state?

Posted by: Blue Hen at March 15, 2016 02:15 PM (326rv)

445 QuietMan, you're in the Gold Coast, correct?

Posted by: Sassy at March 15, 2016 02:15 PM (q7eWh)

446 "My position is that there is a certain level of procedural fuckery that is ok. If the party exceeds that level, they will lose my vote. "

Depends on the margin. People have a fuzzy sense of fairness.

--------

All true. If we get to a contested convention, there are a lot of different results that could happen all dependent on how many votes Trump, Cruz, etc. come in with. If Trump is above 45%, it will be extremely tough to deny him the nomination, though I don't think he should just get it automatically. I would expect the other candidates to extract certain concessions from him. If he comes in at 35% with Cruz at 30%, then it would be difficult for the GOP to nominate Rubio - antagonizing both bases.

Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 02:15 PM (gmeXX)

447 269 I say we go back to discussing boobehs.

Mmmmm Alexandra Daddario. Mmmmm

http://bit.ly/1pJvaNk
Posted by: alexthechick - Team Hardwood at March 15, 2016 01:49 PM (mf5HN)

Looks like her name should be Alexandra Mammario.

Posted by: rickl at March 15, 2016 02:15 PM (zoehZ)

448 Just a reminder: Trump is polling 53% in the latest YouGov poll. In the last few polls that have done head to heads, he is beating Cruz.

If Trump takes two of the Ohio, Florida, Missouri group then he only needs to stay at ~45% on average to get to 1237.

Posted by: Jake (irregular) at March 15, 2016 02:15 PM (8w+OS)

449 419 Accio phallus gigantus!
Posted by: MIRROR UNIVERSE MARCO RUBIO at March 15, 2016 02:10 PM (XzRw1)

--Wow, a comment by MUMR (2.0) that isn't ALL CAPS.

Posted by: logprof at March 15, 2016 02:15 PM (L3TX7)

450 Some R voters will stay home if a status-quo career politician is nominated.

The feeling will be, "Why bother?" and/or "Time to punish."

The little rebellion against Romney was just the beginning.

Posted by: Meremortal at March 15, 2016 02:15 PM (3myMJ)

451 The "hot button" issues don't matter too much to me. Who I support comes down to one fairly simple thing:

Does this person tend to side with greater or lesser personal accountability on the part of all citizens for their lot in life?

Every other issue can be summed up there. We, as a society (a term which is becoming increasingly inaccurate to describe our country or world) have gone radically left in all areas by that measure. To earn my support, someone needs to credibly show how that swing can be moved substantially right on all issues.

If their answer to any question can be restated in the terms of "The government will take care of it" or "We should pass a law", they've lost my support.

Posted by: Damiano at March 15, 2016 02:15 PM (XItbt)

452 I've been here longer than you have Nevergiveup so byte me.

Posted by: whatmeworry?

Who were you before?

Posted by: Grump928(c) says Free Soothie! at March 15, 2016 02:15 PM (evdj2)

453 "Kasich and Rubio have already said they are staying in through the convention."

Kasich said the opposite not long ago. So he's getting paid. We already knew that Rubio is a Romney/Rove rent boy.

Posted by: Ignoramus at March 15, 2016 02:16 PM (r1fLd)

454 Serious question. I can't vote, and, good thing as the process confuses me.

What exactly does the primary accomplish if rules can be changed and/or applied whenever the delegates don't vote according to party or minority preference?

Why have delegates at all, why not just count votes and only votes cast on Nov 8, 2016?

Posted by: cind at March 15, 2016 02:10 PM (nRbbW)

The GOP does need to pick a person as their presidential candidate before people can vote for him on Nov 8. The primary system we're watching right now is how the candidates are supposed to be picked. It'd be pretty unusual for them not to pick a candidate since they're on of the two major political parties of the US.

The GOP did structure the rules so they have the ability to pull some shenanigans on who actually gets picked ... but they do so at the risk of Unforseen Consequences.

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at March 15, 2016 02:16 PM (uURQL)

455 441 It took the Whigs about four years (1852-1856) to dissolve into an irrelevant non-entity.
Posted by: troyriser at March 15, 2016 02:13 PM (UWlp+)

==============

The Whig party barely functioned at its height. The only reason it ever achieved the presidency was two fold:

1) It nominated blank slate military men (Harrison and Taylor) who could get away with saying very little.

and

2) The Democratic Party was actually in the process of fracturing itself. There were already three major factions (North, South, and West) and as the century proceeded, the party began to crack more and more.

The Republican Party wasn't born purely of Whigs, but also disaffected Northern Democrats who rejected slavery.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 02:16 PM (rJSDb)

456 Barry couldn't even sell icecream in Hawaii.

Posted by: Grump928(c) says Free Soothie! at March 15, 2016 02:14 PM (evdj2)

Hush it mister!

Sincerely,

-Colt, Smith & Wesson, Springfield, Kimber, Glock, etc...

Posted by: RWC - Team TTBTFW at March 15, 2016 02:17 PM (mEZce)

457 Guys, we might have to gin up some more "superdelegates"...

Posted by: Hillary! at March 15, 2016 02:17 PM (3U4+k)

458 447, I thought katshit just said he would get out if he loses Ohio?

Posted by: Skeezix at March 15, 2016 02:15 PM (WnCSK)
That's what he said initially; then he walked that back yesterday (from the snippets I heard on the radio) and today's Fox News headlines (online) seem to indicate they are staying on. The snippet I heard of Kasich was him saying he will stay on until the convention and see what happens there.

Posted by: IC at March 15, 2016 02:17 PM (a0IVu)

459 >>>>"Kasich and Rubio have already said they are staying in through the convention."

I thought katshit just said he would get out if he loses Ohio?
.
.
.
.He did but he flip-flopped, just like every other person in this race.

Posted by: The Great White Scotsman at March 15, 2016 02:17 PM (iONHu)

460 Politico has article thatConservatives have planned meeting Thursday on how to take out trump.

Posted by: Carol at March 15, 2016 02:17 PM (sj3Ax)

461 433 Mind just wandered thinking 'isn't it fucking amazing/Twilight Zoney that Trump is the front runner. Who the hell would have predicted this.'

I mean, besides the Simpsons escalator scene. That is one helluva coincidence.
Posted by: RWC - Team TTBTFW at March 15, 2016 02:12 PM (LdVxD)
-----------------

That clip is actually from 2015, not 2000 like youtube would have you believe. Apparently The Simpsons puts up little shorts on youtube that are not related to any episodes.

Posted by: Serenity Now! at March 15, 2016 02:17 PM (BDZWU)

462 Heh. For the 'ettes, how about this?

http://preview.tinyurl.com/zrutzf4
Posted by: Joey at March 15, 2016 02:09 PM (NOIQH)

I'll allow it.

Posted by: alexthechick - Team Hardwood at March 15, 2016 02:17 PM (mf5HN)

463 It took the Whigs about four years (1852-1856) to dissolve into an irrelevant non-entity. The GOP would go down in a single night. As dense as they are, even Establishment bigshots must see that, and I'm pretty sure they want to keep their phony baloney jobs, so I stronglydoubt a brokered convention playing out. My guess is either Trump or Cruz wins the requisite number of delegates or a strong plurality too great to overcome and takes the nomination in the conventional way.

There a shit ton more lawyers now than in 1860. Any third party has to get on the ballot in all fifty states. And stay there. Both the dems and the shattered GOP would have a common interest in any third party/start up becoming a lasting thing. EX: Tea parties.

Posted by: Blue Hen at March 15, 2016 02:18 PM (326rv)

464 >>>Read the HA piece about Rubio. Is nationalist a pejorative now? I guess the GOPe isn't a national party.

They are using "Nationalist" to replace an intended usage of "Fascist" in order to steer clear of Godwin's law and it's tendency to discredit.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose at March 15, 2016 02:18 PM (0q2P7)

465 269 I say we go back to discussing boobehs.

Mmmmm Alexandra Daddario. Mmmmm

http://bit.ly/1pJvaNk
Posted by: alexthechick - Team Hardwood at March 15, 2016 01:49 PM (mf5HN)

She took over the #1 spot on 'bunk chicks' after True Detective, leaving a distant gap between first and second place.

Posted by: Damiano at March 15, 2016 02:18 PM (XItbt)

466 "Politico has article thatConservatives have planned meeting Thursday on how to take out trump. "

Meeting #49....the previous 48 didn't result in shit.

Posted by: Skeezix at March 15, 2016 02:19 PM (WnCSK)

467 >>What exactly does the primary accomplish if rules can be changed
and/or applied whenever the delegates don't vote according to party or
minority preference?

Democracy theater?
It gives GOP voters the feeling that they have a say in selecting the GOP candidate while proving the party a way to make sure they pick the right one.

Same goes for the Democrats and their super-delegates. Hillary had already secured a majority of them before the first primary.

Posted by: Joey at March 15, 2016 02:19 PM (NOIQH)

468 Just because it made me laugh earlier and it still does. :^). I guess I should wait for the most contentious Trump/Cruz thread and post it there as comic relief. For those that didn't see it earler-Old rockers doing their versions of the National Anthem:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Pb80dbVUKM

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at March 15, 2016 02:19 PM (w4NZ8)

469 I thought katshit just said he would get out if he loses Ohio?
.
.
.
.He did but he flip-flopped, just like every other person in this race.
Posted by: The Great White Scotsman

"It was an act of love. For $20, you too can receive an act of love"....

Posted by: The Honorable John Katshit at March 15, 2016 02:19 PM (326rv)

470 Like...groundhogs?

Posted by: Carl Spackler at March 15, 2016 02:11 PM (ZsN9X)

I get that one, but this one was a criminal. Filed false paperwork to boost his pension and steal a year and bragged about it.

Posted by: Meremortal at March 15, 2016 02:20 PM (3myMJ)

471 Politico: the low rent version of Buzzfeed.

Posted by: Grump928(c) says Free Soothie! at March 15, 2016 02:20 PM (evdj2)

472 Posted by: Ghost of kari - certified inane at March 15, 2016 02:11 PM (xuouz)

-------------

I've never argued he was a democrat plant, and do not believe it. Now I do believe he is a pro-government liberal, and don't really care whether that means he is a democrat or not. With regard to Court nomination, let's assume he does nominate someone good - at first - that the Dems defeat (either because they have a majority or marshall a filibuster). Then what? Will Trump use his political capital on a Court nomination - something that he doesn't seem to care one iota about? I just don't see it. So no I don't see a difference between a Trump nomination and a Hillary nomination - despite what little Trump has said on the matter.

Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 02:20 PM (gmeXX)

473 Get funny error on top thread

Posted by: Baldy at March 15, 2016 02:20 PM (1SCTq)

474 ...would have predicted this...

Scott Adams (dilbert.com) made a lot of early predictions about Trump that have come true.
Adams doth trumpet his own horn.

Posted by: scorecard at March 15, 2016 02:21 PM (I0sxh)

475 QuietMan, you're in the Gold Coast, correct?

Posted by: Sassy at March 15, 2016 02:15 PM (q7eWh)

Yes. Very quiet polling place. Just two other people there this morning.

Posted by: TheQuietMan at March 15, 2016 02:21 PM (493sH)

476 Politico has article thatConservatives have planned meeting Thursday on how to take out trump.
Posted by: Carol at March 15, 2016 02:17 PM

If they had done this, say, a year or two ago, it wouldn't seem like the pathetic butthurt-flaunting it does today. If anything is going to turn the General Public away from the "Republican Brand," it is the maneuvering and backroom-dealing of a bunch of malcontents.

Even if it chooses to vilify and marginalize them, the remains of the GOP need Trump voters far more than Trump voters need the GOP.

Posted by: MrScribbler at March 15, 2016 02:21 PM (8xI/8)

477 People are getting awfully lawyerly about this, when its quite clear that being the candidate with a plurality lends legitimacy to your claim.

------------

It lends legitimacy, but it doesn't entitle you to the nomination.

Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 02:21 PM (gmeXX)

478 What exactly does the primary accomplish if rules can be changed and/or applied whenever the delegates don't vote according to party or minority preference?

Exactly: why even have an election at all, or pretend you have members of a party if you're just going to pick someone irrespective of the vote?

Who do you play more fair to? The 40% that voted for him or the 60% that voted against?

That's nonsense. By that criteria, no president ever wins, because only a percentage of the population votes. If they didn't vote for him then they voted against him, right?

In 1984, Ronald Reagan got 54,455,472 votes. The population of the USA at that time was 235,820,000.

In other words, he only got 23% of the vote! Why, he didn't win, 77% of the country voted against him!

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 15, 2016 02:21 PM (39g3+)

479 465 Politico has article thatConservatives have planned meeting Thursday on how to take out trump.

Posted by: Carol at March 15, 2016 02:17 PM (sj3Ax)

Conservatives? How are the two or three of them going to take out Trump?

Posted by: RWC - Team TTBTFW at March 15, 2016 02:21 PM (mEZce)

480 I've never argued he was a democrat plant, and do not believe it.

I considered it. Hell, I don't know what to make of him. I expect that we're going to find out.

Posted by: Blue Hen at March 15, 2016 02:21 PM (326rv)

481 ****FLASH****

Hacker group reportedly threatening to release photos of Sen. Ted Cruz with prostitutes?

Posted by: Skeezix at March 15, 2016 02:22 PM (WnCSK)

482 Ugh. Sock off.

Posted by: Lizzy at March 15, 2016 02:22 PM (NOIQH)

483 ^^^^^ THIS X ELEVENTY !!!!!!!!!!!! ^^^^^^^^^^^^ !!!!!! ^^^^^^
Fuck you, Jeb Bush!
Fuck you, Mitch McConnell!
Fuck you, Paul Ryan!
Fuck you, W!
Fuck you, Karl Rove!
Fuck you, all of you beltway establishment fucks!
Fuck you, all of you lib prog anti-American treasonous scum!
Fuck you all!

TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP

Posted by: Trumpbot #298738975 at March 15, 2016 02:10 PM (D4ynZ)

Poetry! Bathroom wall poetry, but poetry none the less. Take it all or burn it down.

Posted by: DFCtomm at March 15, 2016 02:22 PM (/1gXq)

484 In 1984, Ronald Reagan got 54,455,472 votes. The population of the USA at that time was 235,820,000.

In other words, he only got 23% of the vote! Why, he didn't win, 77% of the country voted against him!

The leftist Pol Sci (but I repeat myself) professors at the Univ of Del loved to point this out. Carters numbers? Not so much.

Posted by: Blue Hen at March 15, 2016 02:23 PM (326rv)

485 >>Politico has article that Conservatives have planned meeting Thursday on how to take out trump.

Another one?

Didn't the GOP just have a big weekend meeting w/Tech CEOs off the coast of SC or something where they strategized how to take out Trump? Think it was sponsored by a conservative mag or think tank.

Posted by: Lizzy at March 15, 2016 02:24 PM (NOIQH)

486 Good for Cruz: https://twitter.com/FoxNews/status/709382192661540866

He's currently on my provisional shit list for using a wedge on the 10 inch putt re: free speech and the heckler's veto and Trump but good for him for saying that.

And sticking the shiv into Rubio but that's just gravy.

Posted by: alexthechick - Team Hardwood at March 15, 2016 02:24 PM (mf5HN)

487 ...it's over Johnny...IT"S OVER!!!

Posted by: Colonel Sam Trautman at March 15, 2016 02:24 PM (INxoa)

488 Conservatives? How are the two or three of them going to take out Trump?

Posted by: RWC - Team TTBTFW at March 15, 2016 02:21 PM

Saw a piece about this on Breitbart. Apparently one of the "bigwigs" trying to set this up is the never-popular Erick Erikson.

Wonder if Wick Rilson will be there too?

Posted by: MrScribbler at March 15, 2016 02:24 PM (8xI/8)

489 In other words, he only got 23% of the vote! Why, he didn't win, 77% of the country voted against him!

--------------

That is a stupid analogy and you know it.

Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 02:24 PM (gmeXX)

490 Let's assume Trump wins....who is his veep?

I don't think its humanly possible to predict who he'd pick. He's as likely to pick someone really great and strategic as he is something totally off the wall like a standup picture of Donald Trump.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 15, 2016 02:25 PM (39g3+)

491 We're going over Niagara Falls baby Trump means you have a barrel and Hillary! means we go freestyle.

-------

But it's going to be a really classy barrel. So classy it will make your head spin.

Posted by: Kevin DuBrow at March 15, 2016 02:25 PM (bMcUX)

492 488, Posted by: MrScribbler at March 15, 2016 02:24 PM (8xI/

If only they had worked this hard to defeat Obama.

Posted by: IC at March 15, 2016 02:25 PM (a0IVu)

493 "Hacker group reportedly threatening to release photos of Sen. Ted Cruz with prostitutes?"

-

"When it's time to shoot, shoot. Don't talk."

-Tuco

Posted by: Meremortal at March 15, 2016 02:26 PM (3myMJ)

494 Remember, the parties can nominate however they choose. They could stand around kicking each other in the nuts all day and call the last one standing the nominee if they so chose, and it would actually be marginally less brutal than the actual system in use. It wouldn't have the air of legitimacy the primary system (sometimes) has, but it would be perfectly legal.

Posted by: Brother Cavil, Restorationist at March 15, 2016 02:26 PM (9krrF)

495 I don't think its humanly possible to predict who he'd pick. He's as likely to pick someone really great and strategic as he is something totally off the wall like a standup picture of Donald Trump.

------------

He should pick the Castro brother that Hillary does not pick.

Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 02:26 PM (gmeXX)

496 492 Nah,that would have been racist.

Posted by: steevy at March 15, 2016 02:26 PM (B48dK)

497 The Whig party barely functioned at its height. The only reason it ever achieved the presidency was two fold:

1) It nominated blank slate military men (Harrison and Taylor) who could get away with saying very little.

and

2) The Democratic Party was actually in the process of fracturing itself. There were already three major factions (North, South, and West) and as the century proceeded, the party began to crack more and more.

The Republican Party wasn't born purely of Whigs, but also disaffected Northern Democrats who rejected slavery.
Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 02:16 PM (rJSDb)

Fair enough.

Which of these things does not accurately describe the Republican party for the past 30 years or so?

Also, as you note the fracturing of the Democrat party. I believe we've seen the same over the past 40- 50 years, culminating in 2008 where they went full socialist and completely ceased any appeals to the center or right.

To the Democrat's credit, they figured out around 2006 mid terms that appealing to the middle was a giant waste of time and money. It was far easier for them to gin up unyielding support and boost turn out from the radical left than try to swing votes from the low turnout, low enthusiasm, LIVs.

Posted by: Damiano at March 15, 2016 02:26 PM (XItbt)

498 Reagan gave us O'Connor, Bush 41 gave us Souter, Bush 43 gave us Roberts, voting R to get a good SC nom is an iffy proposition at best, Trump simply more so.

Posted by: All Teh Meh at March 15, 2016 02:27 PM (yos+4)

499 >>s he is something totally off the wall like a standup picture of Donald Trump.

....or Oprah!

Posted by: Lizzy at March 15, 2016 02:27 PM (NOIQH)

500 In other words, he only got 23% of the vote! Why, he didn't win, 77% of the country voted against him!

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 15, 2016 02:21 PM (39g3+)

This is why people who think "I didn't vote" is a vote against anything are wrong.

It's actually "All of the above".

People should know better than to use 1st choice preference as a proxy for last choice preference.

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at March 15, 2016 02:27 PM (uURQL)

501 Posted by: Skeezix at March 15, 2016 02:22 PM (WnCSK)

When will they release pictures of Donald Trump cheating on his wives?

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at March 15, 2016 02:27 PM (w4NZ8)

502 Pssst! Trump IS the donor to the donor class. Most often on the Dem side.
Stop lying or find a better source than mine. See the sock link.

Posted by: andycanuck at March 15, 2016 02:27 PM (ioqGj)

503 That is a stupid analogy and you know it.

And so do the leftards who use it (the ones who actually can math well enough to see where it falls apart, anyway). That's not the point of it.

Posted by: Brother Cavil, Restorationist at March 15, 2016 02:27 PM (9krrF)

504 494 But that would favor candidates without balls.Jeb would win.

Posted by: steevy at March 15, 2016 02:28 PM (B48dK)

505 Super cereal nood.

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at March 15, 2016 02:28 PM (uURQL)

506 Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 15, 2016 02:25 PM (39g3+)

Personally I can't even begin to imagine whom it would be...the only person I come up with is Sessions. Figure he has to have someone who knows the system.

Posted by: billygoat at March 15, 2016 02:28 PM (INxoa)

507 "When will they release pictures of Donald Trump cheating on his wives?"

You must be joking right...

Posted by: Skeezix at March 15, 2016 02:28 PM (WnCSK)

508 If only they had worked this hard to defeat Obama. Posted by: IC at March 15, 2016 02:25 PM

Are you kidding? They looooove them some Choom Boy!

If it wasn't for his treasonous asshattery, no one would ever listen to or read what they say.

Limbaugh admitted that having Bubba in the White House was good for his ratings, y'know....

Posted by: MrScribbler at March 15, 2016 02:28 PM (8xI/8)

509 "Hacker group reportedly threatening to release photos of Sen. Ted Cruz with prostitutes?"
****

Stop cheating! Don't make me release all my hooker pictures and videos! I guarantee you my collection is bigger! And that's not the only thing that's bigger.

Posted by: Donald Trump at March 15, 2016 02:28 PM (XItbt)

510 >>He should pick the Castro brother that Hillary does not pick.

*snort*

Shame their mom was a founder of La Raza - that would be kinda genius if they weren't rabid open borders dudes.

Posted by: Lizzy at March 15, 2016 02:28 PM (NOIQH)

511
It lends legitimacy, but it doesn't entitle you to the nomination.

Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 02:21 PM (gmeXX)

Take it from him. Prove we were right about everything. Light the match and let's get the party started.

Posted by: DFCtomm at March 15, 2016 02:28 PM (/1gXq)

512 That is a stupid analogy and you know it.

And so do the leftards who use it (the ones who actually can math well enough to see where it falls apart, anyway). That's not the point of it.

-----------

I guess I just assumed that those of us on this board were better than the leftards.

Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 02:28 PM (gmeXX)

513 SH that ended up not being directed at you at all, pardon me for going off.

Trump has suggested Diane Sykes and Bill Pryor. I'm not gonna pretend I know who those people are. I'm not a lawyer.

Here's what some aholes had to say about those names being floated.
bit.ly/1SEE2Qi

Posted by: Ghost of kari - certified inane at March 15, 2016 02:29 PM (xuouz)

514 I think whoever gets the most, regardless of the
"majority vs plurality" definition, is the winner. Because otherwise it
just ends up with the GOP flooding the primary with enough people to
make sure nobody gets a clear majority, then picking their guy.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 15, 2016 02:06 PM (39g3+)

CT and everyone else... a plurality of delegates to win has never, ever been the rule. If Trump is even one delegate shy of a majority, then the convention goes to a second vote and the person who wins will be the person that can get a majority. That is not wrong or dirty tricks OR an abrogation of liberty. It is the rules that ALL the candidates knew going in.

The ONLY way it becomes a dirty trick is if the GOPe tries to install a candidate that was not even running (I think they would fail and fail badly if they tried as, whether they are willing to acknowledge it or not, they have lost control of the party).

You don's fairly get to cry foul because your guy didn't win when the rules, as they were known at the beginning of the process, were followed.

This is true even if Trump is one delegate away from a majority... If he cannot persuade one more delegate while at the same time keeping the delegates that had to vote for him on the first ballot, that is his tough luck.

Posted by: redbanzai at March 15, 2016 02:29 PM (y7/KB)

515 447 Concur.

Posted by: Weasel at March 15, 2016 02:29 PM (6xtq3)

516 It lends legitimacy, but it doesn't entitle you to the nomination.

Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 02:21 PM (gmeXX)
_______

Look, Im not a Trump fan, but handling him like this is simply stupid. If Trump is the nominee, there will most likely be a 3rd party or independent challenge that will split the right for this cycle. Even without this being polled his numbers against Clinton are horrible, if you calculate that in, Trump is doa.

If you fuck over millions of voters through a convention coup, it would probably split the right for years to come and lose you every election in the forseeable future.

By ferociously trying to completely avoid the damage a Trump nomination would do, you will probably do much greater damage. This cycle is a mess. Somethings gotta give. Better to limit the damage as far as you can.

Posted by: The Nayden Broad at March 15, 2016 02:29 PM (P8unj)

517 "When will they release pictures of Donald Trump cheating on his wives?"

WHA...? Oh, you said Trump, nevermind.

Posted by: B. J. C. at March 15, 2016 02:30 PM (3myMJ)

518 I guess I just assumed that those of us on this board were better than the leftards.

I also assumed you could tell the poster wasn't presenting it as an argument, just mentioning what leftards argued.

Posted by: Brother Cavil, Restorationist at March 15, 2016 02:30 PM (9krrF)

519 That is a stupid analogy and you know it.

Of course it is, that's the point: claiming people who won by a smaller number than a total majority actually lost is just as stupid.

The convention rules state a required majority, but that doesn't mean someone didn't win with a plurality. Just ask two times President Clinton.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 15, 2016 02:30 PM (39g3+)

520 Take it from him. Prove we were right about everything. Light the match and let's get the party started.

----------------

There would be nothing to take from him. But sure, let's get it going. On second thought, I'll wait to see what the actual results are first.

Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 02:30 PM (gmeXX)

521 These parties need to start paying for their own primaries.

Posted by: ScoggDog at March 15, 2016 02:30 PM (zfvHs)

522 When the day comes where Trump signs into law comprehensive immigration reform in front of celebrating democrats and republican establishment... laughing about the pathetic attempt to filibuster by Ted Cruz and Mike Lee... It will have been Rubio, Kasich and the trumpbots who will be to blame.

But mostly Rubio and Kasich... because staying in this long was the wrong move, and it costs the American people big time.

Posted by: Reality Man at March 15, 2016 02:30 PM (Ch0fq)

523 Captain Rubio you've killed us.

Posted by: Hunt for Red November at March 15, 2016 02:30 PM (k8tEg)

524 ... a plurality of delegates to win has never, ever been the rule.

You ignore the unwritten rules at your own peril.

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at March 15, 2016 02:30 PM (uURQL)

525 >>> When will they release pictures of Donald Trump cheating on his wives?
*****

Immediately following his nomination speech and before the commercial break. We'll also have teaser scrolls and some split screens durning his speech.

Posted by: ABC, CBS, NBC, FOX, PBS at March 15, 2016 02:31 PM (XItbt)

526 I think Trump's poll numbers will continue to rise as the attacks against him increase.

There's a fence. Many people are one each side. I think our side includes both Trump and Cruz voters. The GOPe has the bulk of their body on the other side with a leg slung over the top rail so as to claim legitimacy.

The attacks on Trump are attacks against the folks on our side of the fence. Sure, some Cruz voters may welcome those attacks against Trump, if only to help Cruz win the thing legitimately.

But if people continue to take the attacks against Trump as attacks against the grassroot conservative movement (whatever that is today) that they consider themselves a part of, people will continue to join the fuck you right back movement. Hence, Trump will become a movement. A masthead with funny hair, but there it is.

In other words, we are almost at the point of the movie where Tango and Cash decide they have to work together to take down the bad guy.

Posted by: AlaBAMA at March 15, 2016 02:31 PM (2PHKP)

527 CT and everyone else... a plurality of delegates to win has never, ever been the rule.

Correct, that's never been the rule. That's also irrelevant to the concept of winning. The reason someone ends up with a plurality is because more than 2 serious candidates are running. Demanding a clear majority simply means nobody ever wins if you have 3 or more serious candidates in the race, so the party gets to just pick who wins, over the votes of the people.

In an election, you don't count the votes against someone. You count the votes for them.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 15, 2016 02:32 PM (39g3+)

528 Of course it is, that's the point: claiming people who won by a smaller number than a total majority actually lost is just as stupid.

The convention rules state a required majority, but that doesn't mean someone didn't win with a plurality. Just ask two times President Clinton.

-------------

I never said he lost, just that he wasn't entitled to the nomination since he would not have achieved a majority.

And Clinton didn't win a plurality, he won a majority in the election that mattered.

The rules are the rules. If they change the rules, that is something else.

Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 02:33 PM (gmeXX)

529 527
CT and everyone else... a plurality of delegates to win has never, ever been the rule.

Correct, that's never been the rule. That's also irrelevant to the
concept of winning. The reason someone ends up with a plurality is
because more than 2 serious candidates are running. Demanding a clear
majority simply means nobody ever wins if you have 3 or more serious
candidates in the race, so the party gets to just pick who wins, over
the votes of the people.

In an election, you don't count the votes against someone. You count the votes for them.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 15, 2016 02:32 PM (39g3+)

Well put.

Posted by: AlaBAMA at March 15, 2016 02:33 PM (2PHKP)

530 In other words, we are almost at the point of the
movie where Tango and Cash decide they have to work together to take
down the bad guy. Posted by: AlaBAMA at March 15, 2016 02:31 PM

So let Rafael drop out of the race and throw his support to Trump.

Oh, wait...you want it the other way around: the first-place guy should hand over to the second-place guy. Yup. Winning!

Posted by: MrScribbler at March 15, 2016 02:34 PM (8xI/8)

531 Remember, the parties can nominate however they choose. They could stand around kicking each other in the nuts all day and call the last one standing the nominee if they so chose, and it would actually be marginally less brutal than the actual system in use. It wouldn't have the air of legitimacy the primary system (sometimes) has, but it would be perfectly legal.

Posted by: Brother Cavil, Restorationist at March 15, 2016 02:26 PM (9krrF)

Yes, but if you want to make the pitch that:

- We're all roughly equal brothers-in-arms here.

and

- You did your best and supported your guy, but he lost fair and square so it's time to get with the program.

Then openly fucking over millions of voters is not a good way to go. Is it legal to engage in that kind of parsing? Sure. But people know when they're getting fucked.

Posted by: Jake (not officially a regular) at March 15, 2016 02:34 PM (8w+OS)

532 I'll just never understand how some people (mostly folks like Drudge and the people at Breitbart) became so invested in Trump. He grates on me so much that Obama is starting to appeal to me. I absolutely get how the middle class goes for Trump though, they've been left behind by both parties.

The good news is the GOPe is about to lose big. The bad news is they will co-opt Trump if he is the nominee. Also Hillary will be the next president, so the conservative movement dies for a generation at least. I won't live to see anything other than US socialism.

We were so close, if Cruz had just been born looking better.

Posted by: Dave in Fla at March 15, 2016 02:34 PM (5uwMi)

533 ... a plurality of delegates to win has never, ever been the rule.

You ignore the unwritten rules at your own peril.

------------

When has it been an unwritten rule?

Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 02:34 PM (gmeXX)

534 CT and everyone else... a plurality of delegates to win has never, ever been the rule. If Trump is even one delegate shy of a majority, then the convention goes to a second vote and the person who wins will be the person that can get a majority. That is not wrong or dirty tricks OR an abrogation of liberty. It is the rules that ALL the candidates knew going in.

And I'll also point out that Abraham Lincoln didn't actually get the nomination in 1860 until the third ballot - and that was after a lot of horse trading and shenanigans. So this kind of process goes back to the very beginnings of the Republican party.

Posted by: Maetenloch at March 15, 2016 02:34 PM (pAlYe)

535 497 Fair enough.

Which of these things does not accurately describe the Republican party for the past 30 years or so?

Also, as you note the fracturing of the Democrat party. I believe we've seen the same over the past 40- 50 years, culminating in 2008 where they went full socialist and completely ceased any appeals to the center or right.

To the Democrat's credit, they figured out around 2006 mid terms that appealing to the middle was a giant waste of time and money. It was far easier for them to gin up unyielding support and boost turn out from the radical left than try to swing votes from the low turnout, low enthusiasm, LIVs.
Posted by: Damiano at March 15, 2016 02:26 PM (XItbt)

=================

All I would like to say between the two is that historical analogies are of limited use, and the Whig party one just bugs me. It's like when people use the word "entitled" wrong. It just gets to me.

Now, in regards to how the parties have been behaving over the last few decades, I'd say that they've been pushing for a major political realignment without realizing it. Republicans have been abandoning their base very slowly while Democrats have been giving in completely to their base. So, a lot of people are finding themselves out of the major parties for a variety of reasons.

I don't want to try to predict any sort of crack up or how it might happen (I don't think it will. I think the closest we'll get is a Reform Party in reverse where Ross Perot is the Republican Nominee and Bob Dole is the third party candidate instead...if that even happens).

So...there...I guess.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 02:34 PM (rJSDb)

536 338---As a Cruz supporter, I hope he doesnt play this kind of shitty game. If Trump has the plurality, let Trump run. Cruz is young enough to run again. Unlike the golden boy, Cruz has actually proven that he can run a good, competent campaign.
Posted by: The Nayden Broad at March 15, 2016 01:58 PM (P8unj)
------------
As a Cruz supporter, I don't give a damn if he runs again. There are things I like about him, sure, but I have no investment in him or his career.

I want to keep the Bitch of Benghazi out of the White House. 2016. PERIOD. And, as someone above said, if that means voting for dog vomit, I'll vote for dog vomit.

Unfortunately, the particular piece of dog vomit the GOP is about to nominate doesn't have a prayer of beating the Bitch. Not a prayer.

At least dog vomit Rubio might give her a run for the money --- but that's been flushed down the drain.

I would like to see Cruz/Fiorina myself. I think they'd have a decent chance. Not a slam dunk, but a chance.(Please Trump-people, don't tell me he's funny-looking when your scowling orange guy has a weasel on his head.)

But what I'd like and what I'll get aren't likely to coincide.
It is what it is.

Posted by: Margarita DeVille at March 15, 2016 02:34 PM (T/5A0)

537 These parties need to start paying for their own primaries.

Posted by: ScoggDog at March 15, 2016 02:30 PM (zfvHs)

Pay for stuff? The whole point of getting elected is so that you never pay for stuff anymore and no longer have to be bogged down with that whole obligation to 'show up for work' thing.

Heck, Ryan only agreed to be Speaker when they promised that he could have more time off with his family in addition to the new fancy office and pay raise.

Posted by: Damiano at March 15, 2016 02:35 PM (XItbt)

538
So let Rafael drop out of the race and throw his support to Trump.

Oh, wait...you want it the other way around: the first-place guy should hand over to the second-place guy. Yup. Winning!

Posted by: MrScribbler at March 15, 2016 02:34 PM (8xI/

Slow your roll, homey. I didn't say that. I just said at some point, its going to become us vs them and Trump's numbers will increase.

Posted by: AlaBAMA at March 15, 2016 02:35 PM (2PHKP)

539 I knew it would take multiple cycles to unsettle the careerists.

They've lost twice in row, and now they want to go for three.

Sure, have at it.

Posted by: B. J. C. at March 15, 2016 02:35 PM (3myMJ)

540 "If Trump is even one delegate shy of a majority, then the convention goes to a second vote and the person who wins will be the person that can get a majority. That is not wrong or dirty tricks OR an abrogation of liberty. It is the rules that ALL the candidates knew going in."

True. But see what the result is when the will of the majority of the people is cast as completely irrelevant with just 1 delegate shy. If the GOPe thinks they will have a hard time with down ballot elections now, wait until they pull that.

My feeling is that if both Cruz and Trump are the leaders in the race, then the convention should nominate 1 of these 2. If, again, they disregard the voters and decide to run JEB! or Romeny or whoever, then party is dead. People will not come out and vote if their votes are irrelevant and the GOPe will most likely lose the house within a few years as well.

Posted by: Skeezix at March 15, 2016 02:36 PM (WnCSK)

541 For the record, and like Lileks, I am stating up front so that there are no charges of sour grapes: I will never vote for Trump just as I will never vote for Hillary. I consider both of them to be thoroughly corrupt human beings who would both be an absolute disaster for the country. I also do not want the thing that Trump will do to this country done while he calls himself a conservative. As I said weeks ago, if this country is going to vote another progressive in, it might as well go full retard and vote for Hillary.

I think Cruz will win so I won't have to vote third party but it needs to be said for all the conservatives who feel the same way.

Posted by: redbanzai at March 15, 2016 02:36 PM (y7/KB)

542 I might not want to live here if Trump or Hillary win but I think the debates and fights between the two of them could literally captivate the entire country and maybe have the highest turnout in decades for a general election.

Posted by: mymomsatrumpster at March 15, 2016 02:37 PM (1O61Q)

543 When has it been an unwritten rule?
Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 02:34 PM (gmeXX)

The unwritten rule is not that a plurality wins. The unwritten rule is that our whole system is built on trust.

You can follow the written rules in a way that destroys trust.

And when there is no trust ... who knows what happens next?

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at March 15, 2016 02:37 PM (uURQL)

544 " This is also the time of casting for people registered but didn't vote."

Sending post cards to every person shown on the voter rolls to have cast a ballot two weeks after the election to their voting addresses would clear that up voting fraud in a heartbeat.

"What? I didn't vote two weeks ago. Why does it say I voted? Who voted in my name? Why did you let someone vote in my name?"

Of course, they aren't serious about cleaning up the fraud since it would cost next to nothing for cities and townships to send these postcards.

Posted by: Misfortune & Pestilence at March 15, 2016 02:37 PM (T1CrP)

545 195 My biggest issue with Trump is that the merch on his store isn't as gaudy as I was hoping. I wanted it to look like someone threw up red, white, and blue and then blew up the puddle with a firecracker. I wanted like early 1990s Team USA Olympic uniforms.

--

Can I interest you in my Trump Smash tee?
On the sidebar of my blog, link in nic

Proceeds go to the voterkids milk & cereal fund

Posted by: @votermom at March 15, 2016 02:37 PM (NwON9)

546 Hacker group reportedly threatening to release photos of Sen. Ted Cruz with prostitutes?

Posted by: Skeezix at March 15, 2016 02:22 PM (WnCSK)

"When it's time to shoot, shoot. Don't talk."

-Tuco

Posted by: Meremortal at March 15, 2016 02:26 PM (3myMJ)

I'm with Tuco. Threats are stupid. Put up or shut up.

Posted by: troyriser at March 15, 2016 02:38 PM (UWlp+)

547 Posted by: Ghost of kari - certified inane at March 15, 2016 02:11 PM (xuouz)

He has changed positions multiple times AFTER he entered the race. How is it possible that you can still think that Trump means what he says?

Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at March 15, 2016 02:38 PM (PkIg+)

548 Doesn't Trump employ a whole bunch of strippers?

Posted by: Brian in New Orleans at March 15, 2016 02:39 PM (UBzPO)

549 We really need to separate out the two elements of the nominating process.

Mechanical legitimacy means the nominee fulfilled the requirements the party set in its rules. By that standard, Trump could fall one delegate short on the first ballot, then see someone else walk away with the nod on the second, because the rules say it's a free for all after the first ballot.

Popular legitimacy (for lack of a better term) means the people with a stake in the process feels the result is proper and fair. This is a much more subjective legitimacy, which makes it harder to pin down, and much harder to combat the perception of illegitimacy if it arises.

Politically speaking, you are probably hurt less compromising the first than the second. This is not to say it's a good thing, just noting that amongst groups where you have the second, folks are far more forgiving of the first. (See "Obama, B." for a case study.)

Whoever walks out of this process is probably going to be crippled by this fact. There's almost no avoiding it now short a miracle.

Posted by: Brother Cavil, Restorationist at March 15, 2016 02:39 PM (9krrF)

550 This is true even if Trump is one delegate away from a majority... If he cannot persuade one more delegate while at the same time keeping the delegates that had to vote for him on the first ballot, that is his tough luck.

You also don't give it to the guy who dropped out. Boooosh.
As was mentioned as a possibility upthread.

Posted by: rickb223 at March 15, 2016 02:39 PM (44Kmm)

551 547 He has changed positions multiple times AFTER he entered the race. How is it possible that you can still think that Trump means what he says?
Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at March 15, 2016 02:38 PM (PkIg+)

===============

Of course Trump means what he says. Just ask him, he'll tell you he does.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 02:39 PM (rJSDb)

552 When the day comes where Trump signs into law
comprehensive immigration reform in front of celebrating democrats and
republican establishment... laughing about the pathetic attempt to
filibuster by Ted Cruz and Mike Lee... It will have been Rubio, Kasich
and the trumpbots who will be to blame.

But mostly Rubio and Kasich... because staying in this long was the wrong move, and it costs the American people big time.
Posted by: Reality Man at March 15, 2016 02:30 PM (Ch0fq)

________

Sadly, that is all too probable.

Posted by: mustbequantum at March 15, 2016 02:39 PM (MIKMs)

553 So let Rafael drop out of the race and throw his support to Trump.

If he bombs out here, and cannot get enough wins to show a likelihood of winning, he probably will.

On the other hand, he is a lawyer, so it wouldn't surprise me if he did stay in it until the end, and work in the system to try to trick a win. The problem is, the GOP establishment will never pick him, never let him win, and if he somehow won, would work to defeat him.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 15, 2016 02:39 PM (39g3+)

554 "269 I say we go back to discussing boobehs.

Mmmmm Alexandra Daddario. Mmmmm

http://bit.ly/1pJvaNk
Posted by: alexthechick - Team Hardwood"

2 of the reasons that made San Andreas such a fun movie to watch. Not only was The Rock in prime ass kicking form, but his estranged wife (Carla Gugino) and daughter (Daddario) both had awesome racks. What's not to like.

Posted by: Benji Carver at March 15, 2016 02:40 PM (OD2ni)

555 Posted by: redbanzai at March 15, 2016 02:36 PM (y7/KB)

I completely agree.

Trump and Hillary have been on the same side and supporting one another since the 90s. Nothing changed about that until Trump's announcement speech.

I honestly don't understand how anyone honestly believes that Trump's anti- Hillary screed is anything more than posturing. They will be best friends again in January 2017. Guaranteed.

Posted by: Damiano at March 15, 2016 02:41 PM (XItbt)

556 A Hillary win just means Civil War II starts a little sooner. No problem - we got this.

Posted by: Weasel at March 15, 2016 02:41 PM (6xtq3)

557 530 So let Rafael drop out of the race and throw his support to Trump.

Oh, wait...you want it the other way around: the first-place guy should hand over to the second-place guy. Yup. Winning!
Posted by: MrScribbler at March 15, 2016 02:34 PM (8xI/

==============

If he thinks that Trump will be bad for the party and the country, then he should do whatever he can to prevent that.

I believe that Rubio thinks the same of Trump, but he won't consider the one thing that would help prevent Trump's rise most: dropping out.

Cruz dropping out does not hinder Trump, but strengthens him.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 02:41 PM (rJSDb)

558 ...work in the system to try to trick a
win. The problem is, the GOP establishment will never pick him, never
let him win, and if he somehow won, would work to defeat him.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 15, 2016 02:39 PM (39g3+)

Same could be said for Trump.

Posted by: AlaBAMA at March 15, 2016 02:42 PM (2PHKP)

559 ... a plurality of delegates to win has never, ever been the rule.

You ignore the unwritten rules at your own peril.

------------

When has it been an unwritten rule?

Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 02:34 PM (gmeXX)

It's more Guidelines than Rules.

Posted by: Elizabeth Swan, Pirate Court King at March 15, 2016 02:42 PM (JO9+V)

560 We really need to separate out the two elements of the nominating process.

Mechanical legitimacy means the nominee fulfilled the requirements the party set in its rules. By that standard, Trump could fall one delegate short on the first ballot, then see someone else walk away with the nod on the second, because the rules say it's a free for all after the first ballot.

Popular legitimacy (for lack of a better term) means the people with a stake in the process feels the result is proper and fair. This is a much more subjective legitimacy, which makes it harder to pin down, and much harder to combat the perception of illegitimacy if it arises.

Politically speaking, you are probably hurt less compromising the first than the second. This is not to say it's a good thing, just noting that amongst groups where you have the second, folks are far more forgiving of the first. (See "Obama, B." for a case study.)

Whoever walks out of this process is probably going to be crippled by this fact. There's almost no avoiding it now short a miracle.

-----------

Well put. There is a difference between Trump at 35% and Trump at 49%. If north of 40 - 45%, it will be difficult to deny him the nomination. That being said, there will be some horse trading going around. Shouldn't this be where Trump excels at - he has said he is the world's best negotiator.

It also depends on who comes out if Trump is not the nominee. I suspect Rubio would be completely intolerable, but Cruz may not. Especially if Trump were to endorse him.

I'm willing to wait to see how this plays out. Trump is not entitled to the nomination. Depending on where he sits is how strong his negotiating position will be.

Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 02:42 PM (gmeXX)

561 >>I will never vote for Trump just as I will never vote for Hillary.

Assuming they're both the nominees, then like Lileks, you don't count.

Posted by: General Zod at March 15, 2016 02:43 PM (Bdeb0)

562
The unwritten rule is not that a plurality wins. The unwritten rule is that our whole system is built on trust.

Exactamundo. The GOP will self destruct in an astonishing speed and degree if they pull this. Cease to be a serious party and join the Libertarians and Greens in significance.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 15, 2016 02:43 PM (39g3+)

563 The question is not whether the R Party can nominate whoever it pleases.

Will telling people to vote R afterwards work?

Posted by: Meremortal at March 15, 2016 02:43 PM (3myMJ)

564 556 A Hillary win just means Civil War II starts a little sooner. No problem - we got this.

Apt post number for CW II.

Posted by: rickb223 at March 15, 2016 02:43 PM (44Kmm)

565 "I think Cruz will win so I won't have to vote third party but it needs to be said for all the conservatives who feel the same way."

I'll happily vote for Cruz. I think he'll lose to Hillary, but it will not be the election day wipeout that will give Congress back to the Dems. With Trump, you get Hillary as President and Pelosi/Schumer in charge of Congress. But that's OK I guess because Trump voters are angry or something.

Posted by: Benji Carver at March 15, 2016 02:44 PM (OD2ni)

566 Unfortunately, the particular piece of dog vomit the
GOP is about to nominate doesn't have a prayer of beating the Bitch.
Not a prayer.

Posted by: Margarita DeVille at March 15, 2016 02:34 PM (T/5A0)

I don't know about that. They've already tussled once, and both Clintons came out the worse for it. The polls right now say that she wins, but if this were a prize fight then Trump has already given her and her trainer a black eye at the weight in.

Posted by: DFCtomm at March 15, 2016 02:45 PM (/1gXq)

567 564 Would've also worked well at 45 and 308.

Posted by: Weasel at March 15, 2016 02:46 PM (6xtq3)

568 Same could be said for Trump.

Probably, although he might be able to sit down with these guys and convince them he can work with them and would be one of the boys, if only given a chance.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 15, 2016 02:46 PM (39g3+)

569 The convention rules state a required majority, but
that doesn't mean someone didn't win with a plurality. Just ask two
times President Clinton.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 15, 2016 02:30 PM (39g3+)

CT... Clinton won both conventions by a majority and had to win the Electoral College by a majority also or he would not have been President. President is not decided by popular vote nationwide so it is irrelevant that he only got a plurality of that.

Posted by: redbanzai at March 15, 2016 02:46 PM (y7/KB)

570 I don't know about that. They've already tussled once, and both Clintons came out the worse for it. The polls right now say that she wins, but if this were a prize fight then Trump has already given her and her trainer a black eye at the weight in.

Posted by: DFCtomm at March 15, 2016 02:45 PM (/1gXq)

The nice thing about Trump is that he obviously has no interest in losing with dignity.

It's a bummer that he also has little interest in winning with dignity, but after Romney and McCain I'm happy to err on the other side of things this time.

Posted by: Jake (not officially a regular) at March 15, 2016 02:47 PM (8w+OS)

571 The unwritten rule is not that a plurality wins. The unwritten rule is that our whole system is built on trust.

Exactamundo. The GOP will self destruct in an astonishing speed and degree if they pull this. Cease to be a serious party and join the Libertarians and Greens in significance.

-----------

If they pull what? If the delegates choose someone else?

It all depends on how many delegates Trump comes in with, who is nominated (if not Trump), and Trump's reactions. None of which we know right now.

Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 02:47 PM (gmeXX)

572 "Unfortunately, the particular piece of dog vomit the
GOP is about to nominate doesn't have a prayer of beating the Bitch."

THIS, this is how we will unify!

Posted by: Meremortal at March 15, 2016 02:47 PM (3myMJ)

573 Rubio still thinks he's adored and the GOPe will broker for him.

Katshit's play is he's easier on the establishment eyes than Cruz or Trump IF Rubio drops.

Cruz is stuck between a rock and a Trump.

Trump is Trump.

So, unless the money runs out (or even if it does??), we're stuck with four candidates until the nomination, right?

Posted by: AlaBAMA at March 15, 2016 02:48 PM (2PHKP)

574 Part of the Romney's HateTrump coming out party, seemed to be about grouping those not voting Trump all against Trump. But many Cruz voters were really outsider voters. And many Rubio/Kasich voters are really moderate voters.

It was strategic to try to consolidate them, but it doesn't magically make HateCruz voters or HateRubio voters change their motivations. But that is part of the narrative now ... that any not voting Trump were actually voting anti-Trump, which was and is a fallacy. That is probably why Trump is going up in polls more than Cruz. And why Cruz moving toward the establishment money only moves him away from his outsider base.

They were running out of ballots at spots around my downstate IL location ... whatever that big turnout means.

Posted by: Illiniwek at March 15, 2016 02:48 PM (eUbDe)

575 If Trump is the nominee, prepare for President Hilary Rodham Clinton.

With at least one and possibly as many as 3 SCOTUS picks during her administration.

Trump is an Extinction Level Event for the remains of limited-government ideology. People who support him are cutting their own throats.

Posted by: DriveBy at March 15, 2016 02:49 PM (C9Vc8)

576 Probably, although he might be able to sit down with
these guys and convince them he can work with them and would be one of
the boys, if only given a chance.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 15, 2016 02:46 PM (39g3+)

Which makes him the antithesis of why people are voting for him in the first place?

Posted by: AlaBAMA at March 15, 2016 02:49 PM (2PHKP)

577 You might expect Cruz's campaign manager to run a good ground game in Mo considering that's where he's from.

Posted by: JP in KC at March 15, 2016 02:50 PM (WpCa5)

578 Posted by: DriveBy at March 15, 2016

Trump will beat Hillary and it won't be close.

Posted by: Meremortal at March 15, 2016 02:50 PM (3myMJ)

579 Cruz can beat Hillary too, but that's not a lock like Trump.

Posted by: Meremortal at March 15, 2016 02:51 PM (3myMJ)

580 Romney's endorsement of Kasich was--hands down--the most baffling political move I've seen in a long time. Did Mitt think his endorsement would magically make Kasich viable? Is the Establishment's hatred of Cruz so great they would rather crash and burn with Kamikaze Kasich?

Desperate and delusional are no way to go through life, boys.

Posted by: troyriser at March 15, 2016 02:51 PM (UWlp+)

581 575 If Trump is the nominee, prepare for President Hilary Rodham Clinton.

With at least one and possibly as many as 3 SCOTUS picks during her administration.

Trump is an Extinction Level Event for the remains of limited-government ideology. People who support him are cutting their own throats.

So, vote for who you say to vote for AND get fucked just like I have for the last 30+ years?

No thanks. BTDT.

Posted by: rickb223 at March 15, 2016 02:52 PM (44Kmm)

582 Which makes him the antithesis of why people are voting for him in the first place?
Posted by: AlaBAMA at March 15, 2016 02:49 PM (2PHKP)

==============

He fights!

He makes great deals!

He loves H1B....*tussle behind the scenes of Trump's Twitter account*

"We apologize for any inconvenience. The Donald Trump that voiced praise for H1B visas has been sacked. A new Donald Trump has been created and thrown together at great expense."

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 02:52 PM (rJSDb)

583 Trump is an Extinction Level Event for the remains
of limited-government ideology. People who support him are cutting their
own throats.

Posted by: DriveBy at March 15, 2016 02:49 PM (C9Vc

The GOP actively undermined the Constitutional requirements to pass a treaty for Obama's Iran "deal". I have a problem imaging it being any worse under Trump.

Posted by: DFCtomm at March 15, 2016 02:52 PM (/1gXq)

584 "We apologize for any inconvenience. The Donald
Trump that voiced praise for H1B visas has been sacked. A new Donald
Trump has been created and thrown together at great expense."

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 02:52 PM (rJSDb)

Who is the alternative who doesn't support the H1-B visa program? You say that like it's a damning sin, but if it is then it damns the whole GOP.

Posted by: DFCtomm at March 15, 2016 02:56 PM (/1gXq)

585 Which makes him the antithesis of why people are voting for him in the first place?

Oh sure. He's the guy the GOPe could get along with the easiest, they see eye to eye on most issues, no matter how he campaigns. Cruz is the guy they hate more, but Trump is so gross and crass and he doesn't even have a Harvard tie.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 15, 2016 02:56 PM (39g3+)

586 "The GOP actively undermined the Constitutional requirements to pass a treaty for Obama's Iran "deal". I have a problem imaging it being any worse under Trump."

^^^This. Among other things.

Posted by: Misfortune & Pestilence at March 15, 2016 02:56 PM (T1CrP)

587 If they pull what? If the delegates choose someone else?

Why do you ask questions to which you already know the answers?

I don't like Donald Trump, I think he'll be the biggest RINO that ever RINO'd the land and his strongest supporters how will curse his name if elected. But he's winning states over and over for a reason. If that reason is ignored or bypassed by the GOP in the convention, there will be hell to pay - for the very reason Trump is winning.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 15, 2016 02:59 PM (39g3+)

588 Who is the alternative who doesn't support the H1-B visa program? You say that like it's a damning sin, but if it is then it damns the whole GOP.
Posted by: DFCtomm at March 15, 2016 02:56 PM (/1gXq)

==============

The issue isn't that he supports it, it's that he doesn't know his own positions and will drop them at will.

This is the point in time when he needs to be hardest on these issues, and he's dropping them while in the middle of the campaign for the Republican nomination. What's he going to do if he wins the nomination and gets confronted with the view in a debate with Hillary? He already said that he's changing his view on the issue on live television during a debate. What will he change about his immigration views on live television in a debate with Hillary?

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 02:59 PM (rJSDb)

589 Posted by: DriveBy at March 15, 2016

Trump will beat Hillary and it won't be close.

Posted by: Meremortal at March 15, 2016 02:50 PM (3myMJ)

Trump's unfavorability is higher that Hilldog's... a feat I did not even think humanly possible. Trump will not win if elected.

Posted by: redbanzai at March 15, 2016 03:00 PM (y7/KB)

590 He has changed positions multiple times AFTER he entered the race. How is it possible that you can still think that Trump means what he says?
Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at March 15, 2016 02:38 PM (PkIg+)

Because he's still paying the cost of running for president, and represents the interests of people like me, regardless of what he says.

Trump is not just a person who may or may not be trustworthy, he's a symbol of FU GOPe.

No one cares what the flag thinks - it just needs to exist and be lifted high.

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at March 15, 2016 03:00 PM (uURQL)

591 The Republicans are going to win the White House and it's going to be awesome.

And, quite frankly, my dear, I don't give a shit which Repub wins it.

I only care that they will win it.

Which they will. Because the effing stock market and the effing economy will both tank between now and then.

Book it.

Posted by: Dogstar at March 15, 2016 03:00 PM (7Cy0Q)

592 Oh sure. He's the guy the GOPe could get along with
the easiest, they see eye to eye on most issues, no matter how he
campaigns. Cruz is the guy they hate more, but Trump is so gross and
crass and he doesn't even have a Harvard tie.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 15, 2016 02:56 PM (39g3+)

But, and I'm not trolling here, are you saying he's duping people, because that's his campaign platform. Taking it to the very people you say he's going to work with.

Which was my point all along. Trump is SMOD, because he's going to piss off so many people on both sides that it just all burns down. He's getting elected on fighting for the little guy, while promises are made he can do great deals with the people the little guy hates. The intelligentsia hate him. He's going to screw someone over and there goes his support.
I think he's making campaign promises with his mouth that his skills can't cover in cheques.

Posted by: AlaBAMA at March 15, 2016 03:01 PM (2PHKP)

593 The GOP actively undermined the Constitutional requirements to pass a treaty for Obama's Iran "deal". I have a problem imaging it being any worse under Trump.
Posted by: DFCtomm at March 15, 2016 02:52 PM (/1gXq)

Then I think you should expand the limits of your imagination.

A SCOTUS that has no problem with background checks and huge taxes for the purchase of ammunition? Bet on it.

An expanded "Obamacare" that transmogrifies into Single Payer? Yep.

Further draconian cuts into defense to fund more giveaways? Uhhuh.

You don't like how things have gone? Join the club. But dont forget there's ALWAYS further to fall. And there is no end to Blue-model idiocy that folks would push on you.

Posted by: DriveBy at March 15, 2016 03:01 PM (C9Vc8)

594 Rubio Tuesday
By The Strolling Bones

He would never say where he came from
Yesterday don't matter if it's gone
While the sun is bright
Or in the darkest night
No one knows, he comes and goes

Goodbye Rubio Tuesday
Who could gang of eight with you?
When you change with every new day
Still I'm gonna dis you

Don't question why they need to be so free
He'll tell you amnesty's the only way to be
He just can't be chained
To a life where nothings gained
And nothings lost, at such a cost

Goodbye Rubio Tuesday
Who could gang of eight with you?
When you change with every new day
Still I'm gonna dis you

"There's no time to lose", I heard him say
Catch your dreams before they slip away
Lying all the time
Lose your dreams and you will lose your mind
Ain't life unkind?

Goodbye Rubio Tuesday
Who could gang of eight with you?
When you change with every new day
Still I'm gonna dis you

Goodbye Rubio Tuesday
Who could gang of eight with you?
When you change with every new day
Still I'm gonna dis you
Songwriters: KEITH RICHARDS, MICK JAGGER
Doctored by: leumas

Posted by: leumas at March 15, 2016 03:01 PM (yzshC)

595 Who is the alternative who doesn't support the H1-B visa program? You say that like it's a damning sin, but if it is then it damns the whole GOP.
Posted by: DFCtomm at March 15, 2016 02:56 PM (/1gXq)

================

But on top of it: Whether Trump wins or loses, the GOPe will use him as the excuse to do whatever they want on immigration.

If he loses, it becomes: We lost because of his immigration views.

If he wins and changes his views (which he will do), it becomes: We won with your guy and he's doing his magic on immigration. You obviously want more amnesty, since that's what he's delivering.

Bookmark this and come back at me if Trump ever signs some border security bill with no amnesty provisions, but I'm much more willing to bet that he does what I predict than holds the line on immigration.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 03:02 PM (rJSDb)

596 587 If they pull what? If the delegates choose someone else?
---------------------
Why do you ask questions to which you already know the answers?

Selective Stupidity.

The voters of a state that voted 40+% Trump and see it given to the 15~25% guy by shenanigans are totes going to be fine with that.

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at March 15, 2016 03:02 PM (uURQL)

597 But, and I'm not trolling here, are you saying he's duping people, because that's his campaign platform. Taking it to the very people you say he's going to work with.

Which was my point all along. Trump is SMOD, because he's going to piss off so many people on both sides that it just all burns down. He's getting elected on fighting for the little guy, while promises are made he can do great deals with the people the little guy hates. The intelligentsia hate him. He's going to screw someone over and there goes his support.
I think he's making campaign promises with his mouth that his skills can't cover in cheques.
Posted by: AlaBAMA at March 15, 2016 03:01 PM (2PHKP)

=================

I've argued that a few times.

He's using the Art of the Deal on his supporters in order to get into office. He's not using the Art of the Deal on Congress to get a wall.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 03:03 PM (rJSDb)

598 Come on in the waters warm.

Posted by: Trump Camp at March 15, 2016 03:04 PM (YoCor)

599
The issue isn't that he supports it, it's that he doesn't know his own positions and will drop them at will.

This is the point in time when he needs to be hardest on these
issues, and he's dropping them while in the middle of the campaign for
the Republican nomination. What's he going to do if he wins the
nomination and gets confronted with the view in a debate with Hillary?
He already said that he's changing his view on the issue on live
television during a debate. What will he change about his immigration
views on live television in a debate with Hillary?

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 02:59 PM (rJSDb)

Are you talking about Romney? Mr. severely conservative? You point and jump up and down at these differences that have absolutely no distinction. Trump may waffle on his positions, but Romney did and before him is Mr. "Build the dang fence" certainly did, but somehow Trumps waffling is just a bridge too far for you.

Posted by: DFCtomm at March 15, 2016 03:04 PM (/1gXq)

600 dems taking repub ballots in ohio. dem woman asked by newsman taking republican ballot to vote against trump? she says no to vote for trump he will bring our jobs back! good news for trump bad news for hillary!

Posted by: trumpkin at March 15, 2016 03:04 PM (M0diF)

601 He's using the Art of the Deal on his supporters in order to get into office. He's not using the Art of the Deal on Congress to get a wall.
Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 03:03 PM (rJSDb)

We'll find out. I don't lose anything compared to the GOPe.

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at March 15, 2016 03:05 PM (uURQL)

602 But, and I'm not trolling here, are you saying he's duping people, because that's his campaign platform. Taking it to the very people you say he's going to work with.

I think he's making campaign promises with his mouth that his skills can't cover in cheques.

I think Trump is saying whatever he needs to in order to get elected. Every so often he takes his base for granted and starts to slouch toward the middle, which I believe is his natural state, and he has to backtrack again.

I don't doubt he has the skills, I just don't think he has the inclination.

Rubio Tuesday
By The Strolling Bones

Number one with a nerf bullet!

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 15, 2016 03:05 PM (39g3+)

603 600 dems taking repub ballots in ohio. dem woman asked by newsman taking republican ballot to vote against trump? she says no to vote for trump he will bring our jobs back! good news for trump bad news for hillary!

Sure She would say that.... Probably wants to make sure Trump wins so Hillary will have someone to beat....

Posted by: donna at March 15, 2016 03:06 PM (/dSsq)

604 599
Are you talking about Romney? Mr. severely conservative? You point and jump up and down at these differences that have absolutely no distinction. Trump may waffle on his positions, but Romney did and before him is Mr. "Build the dang fence" certainly did, but somehow Trumps waffling is just a bridge too far for you.
Posted by: DFCtomm at March 15, 2016 03:04 PM (/1gXq)

================

I'm lost. Could you please go and find where I said that Romney was a Constitutional Conservative through and through and would never back out of anything?

It's a strawman, and you're smart enough to know that.

Please come back at me with your reasons why you think Trump will hold the line.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 03:06 PM (rJSDb)

605 The winner-take-all states today are Florida, Ohio, and the Marianas Islands (I know, it's not a state...don't be pedantic, haters).
Missouri *could* be winner-take-all, but someone would have to win over 50%, and that's unlikely.

Therefore, nobody will run away with any of the proportional state delegates. "Winners" will get a little more (say, if they win by 3%), "losers" will get a little less.

Only a monumental wave will make Trump inevitable after today, and that's a very unlikely scenario.

Prediction: Trump gets 180-200 delegates (add 66 if Kasich screwed up OH), Cruz gets 60-100. Everyone else is irrelevant.

Posted by: Matt_SE at March 15, 2016 03:07 PM (9Fcph)

606 But on top of it: Whether Trump wins or loses, the GOPe will use him as the excuse to do whatever they want on immigration.

If he loses, it becomes: We lost because of his immigration views.

If he wins and changes his views (which he will do), it becomes: We
won with your guy and he's doing his magic on immigration. You obviously
want more amnesty, since that's what he's delivering.

Bookmark this and come back at me if Trump ever signs some border
security bill with no amnesty provisions, but I'm much more willing to
bet that he does what I predict than holds the line on immigration.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 03:02 PM (rJSDb)

You're argument is that if we attempt to stop the establishment from going open borders then they'll go open borders to spite us, but they were going to anyway. Why don't you just go with Trump is a big doo doo head.

Posted by: DFCtomm at March 15, 2016 03:07 PM (/1gXq)

607 601 We'll find out. I don't lose anything compared to the GOPe.
Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at March 15, 2016 03:05 PM (uURQL)

==================

Except conservatives will be marginalized even more than after Goldwater. Trump will be used for a generation as an excuse about why the party can't go to the "crazies" if he loses and will be proof that the base really wants amnesty if he wins.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 03:08 PM (rJSDb)

608 Here's my question ... what if Trump somehow pulls this shit off ?

I'm talking beyond the nomination. What if the crazy bastard builds some kind of coalition - say with Union Democrats and the Working Poor - and he upsets that drunk bitch in November.

The price for that's going to be some concessions on foreign trade. Going to mean some tariffs. Some higher prices, maybe some higher employment as some jobs (who knows how many) come back eventually.

How many of you are willing to pay that ?

Because I don't think some of you are.

Posted by: ScoggDog at March 15, 2016 03:09 PM (RKJF2)

609 If they pull what? If the delegates choose someone else?
---------------------
Why do you ask questions to which you already know the answers?

Selective Stupidity.

The voters of a state that voted 40+% Trump and see it given to the 15~25% guy by shenanigans are totes going to be fine with that.

------------

I never said they should go along with it. But neither should those voters who voted against Trump. The rules are the rules. There are going to be repercussions either way. Maybe we should give it to Trump just so his voters cannot say it was stolen from them. That's an argument for Trump.

Texas overwhelmingly voted for Cruz. Not sure why Texans should be disenfranchised in this matter. The most reliably conservative state in the union. The most populous conservative and republican state. The one that actually shares a border with Mexico. The one that has generated much of this country's economic wealth over the past 20 years.

Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 03:09 PM (gmeXX)

610 606
You're argument is that if we attempt to stop the establishment from going open borders then they'll go open borders to spite us, but they were going to anyway. Why don't you just go with Trump is a big doo doo head.
Posted by: DFCtomm at March 15, 2016 03:07 PM (/1gXq)

==============

No, my argument is that if you want a remote chance of border security of happening at all, you need to go with Cruz.

He's far from perfect and did support H1B's, but he's also co-sponsored legislation to limit the practice. He's actually tried to do something about it and has made all of the same promises (save for Mexico paying for the way) as Trump.

I'd rather have the guy who will be conservative in everything with a weakness on immigration than a guy who will be liberal in everything, including immigration.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 03:10 PM (rJSDb)

611 May I have ten thousand marbles please?

Posted by: Flounder at March 15, 2016 03:10 PM (JO9+V)

612 Except conservatives will be marginalized even more than after Goldwater.

Conservatives are self-defeating. Marginalizing them is the right call.

Trump will be used for a generation as an excuse about why the party can't go to the "crazies" if he loses and will be proof that the base really wants amnesty if he wins.
Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 03:08 PM (rJSDb)

Come again?

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at March 15, 2016 03:10 PM (uURQL)

613 It's not the only issue but Illegal Immigration is a big issue. We've had literally millions of people flood across our Southern border in one of the great mass migrations of all time. SCOTUS told states that wanted to enforce their border that it was a prerogative of the Feds, so hands off. Now we have a White House that has been actively encouraging immigrants to come while lying about it, including to federal judges. And then there's sanctuary cities.

We had 17 people run and Trump was the only one to really seize the high ground on this issue -- and Trump knows how to build on prime real estate.

Beyond this Trump projects that he's a common sense practical guy in a time when people really, really hate politicians.

It's not hard to figure out people.

Posted by: Ignoramus at March 15, 2016 03:12 PM (r1fLd)

614 With all this uncontrolled immigration, is anyone noticing an oversupply of Central American hookers? I'm just not seeing it on the ground here, and market share seems normal for the demographic.

Posted by: Weasel at March 15, 2016 03:12 PM (6xtq3)

615 612
Come again?
Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at March 15, 2016 03:10 PM (uURQL)

================

The champion of the base will deliver amnesty because the man is easily swayed. The party brokers will use all of their rhetorical powers to move him. Just go back to that video where Trump got swayed by the DACA kids.

It will happen. He will give us amnesty, and the elite of the Republican Party will thank the base for it.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 03:12 PM (rJSDb)

616 No, my argument is that if you want a remote chance of border security of happening at all, you need to go with Cruz.

-----------

I tend to agree that the person most likely to bring about amnesty is going to be Trump because he will bring it with a sort of deal on the wall. He'll sell his supporters on the wall aspect. His supporters will say - see finally got someone who can negotiate. Part of the negotiated deal will be amnesty - and the wall will never really get built - or will but will be meaningless.

His supporters won't push back on him, so amnesty happens.

Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 03:12 PM (gmeXX)

617 If they pull what? If the delegates choose someone else?

Why do you ask questions to which you already know the answers?

I don't like Donald Trump, I think he'll be the biggest RINO that
ever RINO'd the land and his strongest supporters how will curse his
name if elected. But he's winning states over and over for a reason.
If that reason is ignored or bypassed by the GOP in the convention,
there will be hell to pay - for the very reason Trump is winning.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 15, 2016 02:59 PM (39g3+)

Trump is not a RINO at all... he is a progressive democrat. And his "winning" consists of an average of less than 40% of the vote. In no way does that give him crown prince status.

Posted by: redbanzai at March 15, 2016 03:12 PM (y7/KB)

618 Maybe I missed the sarc (?) but Cruz's "top-of-the-class turnout operation" was nowhere to be seen in Deltona, Fl. this morning. One small Rubio sign at the edge of the drive, 7 small Trump signs down the middle of the parking lot. Asked the lady taking id if Cruz was even on the ballot cause he sure wasn't on a sign outside. By the tired way she laughed, I figure I wasn't the first one to ask. Somebody dropped the ball. Er, ...sign

Posted by: middleagedhousewife at March 15, 2016 03:13 PM (sqGlx)

619 The price for that's going to be some concessions on foreign trade. Going to mean some tariffs. Some higher prices, maybe some higher employment as some jobs (who knows how many) come back eventually.

Tariffs are a constitutional federal power. The use of them won't destroy the US.

Conservatism's core principle isn't free trade. Nor is what's called "free trade" free trade.

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at March 15, 2016 03:13 PM (uURQL)

620 It will happen. He will give us amnesty, and the elite of the Republican Party will thank the base for it.

-----------

Agreed. The base (or his portion of the base) won't be on the lookout for it because they have too much trust in Trump.

Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 03:14 PM (gmeXX)

621 618 Maybe I missed the sarc (?) but Cruz's "top-of-the-class turnout operation" was nowhere to be seen in Deltona, Fl. this morning. One small Rubio sign at the edge of the drive, 7 small Trump signs down the middle of the parking lot. Asked the lady taking id if Cruz was even on the ballot cause he sure wasn't on a sign outside. By the tired way she laughed, I figure I wasn't the first one to ask. Somebody dropped the ball. Er, ...sign
Posted by: middleagedhousewife at March 15, 2016 03:13 PM (sqGlx)

=================

That must mean that Cruz's operation doesn't exist!

\sarc

Or...he could selectively use his resources at the best places for it. Maybe he's not really contesting Florida and instead has most of his people in Missouri and Illinois?

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 03:14 PM (rJSDb)

622 In no way does that give him crown prince status.

Now you're just getting straw everywhere.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 15, 2016 03:14 PM (39g3+)

623 620 It will happen. He will give us amnesty, and the elite of the Republican Party will thank the base for it.

-----------

Agreed. The base (or his portion of the base) won't be on the lookout for it because they have too much trust in Trump.
Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 03:14 PM (gmeXX)

==================

"He lies to everyone, but not to me! We have a thing."

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 03:15 PM (rJSDb)

624 It will happen. He will give us amnesty, and the elite of the Republican Party will thank the base for it.
Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 03:12 PM (rJSDb)

Not after American Civil War 2.0, no.

Trump is the last ditch peaceful option. If the ballot box doesn't work ...

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at March 15, 2016 03:15 PM (uURQL)

625 I find all the whining about how the establishment is going to rig the system to be HORSE SHIT.

Trump has a nuclear warhead: if the GOPe cheats, his supporters will boycott the election. They will be right to do so.
So instead, the establishment will THREATEN do rig the system, thereby energizing the Trump supporters, but it will never actually happen.

It's almost like the establishment is in the tank for Trump.

Posted by: Matt_SE at March 15, 2016 03:15 PM (9Fcph)

626 In no way does that give him crown prince status.
------------------
Now you're just getting straw everywhere.
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 15, 2016 03:14 PM (39g3+)

Why argue with a woman?

Cookies, please.

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at March 15, 2016 03:16 PM (uURQL)

627 In no way does that give him crown prince status.

Now you're just getting straw everywhere.

----------

With due respect, CT, you are the one saying that Trump should win the nomination with a plurality only.

Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 03:16 PM (gmeXX)

628 Conservatism's core principle isn't free trade. Nor is what's called "free trade" free trade.

You may think that, and I may think that ...

... but I'm pretty sure Low Low Prices at the Big Box Store is the Holy Grail of a whole lot of Republicans. Especially those of the Chamber of Commerce variety.

Posted by: ScoggDog at March 15, 2016 03:17 PM (RKJF2)

629 Oh, and ALL the Repubs running were on the ballot. Seems Volusia County ordered ballots early on, no way to remove the Jeb et al. Wonder how many votes he'll get anyway?

Posted by: middleagedhousewife at March 15, 2016 03:18 PM (sqGlx)

630
I'd rather have the guy who will be conservative
in everything with a weakness on immigration than a guy who will be
liberal in everything, including immigration.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 03:10 PM (rJSDb)

I disagree. Immigration is every other issue. It's education, it's employment, it's health care, it's 1st and 2nd Amendment rights, and it is the issue that will grip the world for the foreseeable future. Look at the time line he made his Mexican rapist remark and boom:SteinleEuropean rapefugee invasionHe caught the lightening when he chose this issue during this cycle. Trump didn't just get lucky it was as if the hand of God touched him.

Posted by: DFCtomm at March 15, 2016 03:18 PM (/1gXq)

631 Conservatism's core principle isn't free trade. Nor is what's called "free trade" free trade.

You may think that, and I may think that ...

------------

I don't think tariffs will undermine the Constitution, but I don't think they are good policy at all, and as with most policy of the federal government do more harm than good.

Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 03:19 PM (gmeXX)

632 I read yesterday in Politico that if Rubio drops out his 152 delegates would become 'unbound' for the first ballot at the convention. That would only help Trump win the first ballot if he could convince them to vote for him. If Rubio nominally stays in then he could hold those delegates until the 2nd ballot where they would become unbound and could maybe vote for Cruz.

Posted by: Alix at March 15, 2016 03:19 PM (MpfHK)

633 He has changed positions multiple times AFTER he entered the race. How is it possible that you can still think that Trump means what he says?
Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at March 15, 2016 02:38 PM (PkIg+)

-----------------------

Well, hell Cruz changed his position on legalization in December 2015. And changed his position on deportation 3 WEEKS AGO.

Posted by: Make America Great Again at March 15, 2016 03:20 PM (LXJ1e)

634 Trump didn't just get lucky it was as if the hand of God touched him.

Be too much for the Hand of God to give that hair a little help while he's there ?

Posted by: ScoggDog at March 15, 2016 03:20 PM (RKJF2)

635 627 With due respect, CT, you are the one saying that Trump should win the nomination with a plurality only.
Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 03:16 PM (gmeXX)

====================

I think the proper comparison is the 1824 election that gave us John Q. Adams. (I'm really surprised that I haven't seen it reference much in regards to this.)

John Q. Adams became a largely ineffective president precisely because the party as a whole viewed the situation as Adams and Clay stealing the election from Jackson when it went to the House. I don't know if it was because of the very blatant quid pro quo from Adams to Clay with the promise for Sec of State or the situation as a whole, but it did lead to a lot of gridlock.

That was the election itself, not the primary, but I think that if the person with the plurality doesn't win the nomination, we'll be looking at something similar where the party just won't function.

Now...does that mean I think we should just hand the nomination to Trump? Not really. I'd be curious to find out what will happen to the party if Trump gets the nomination with only 40% of the delegates, though.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 03:20 PM (rJSDb)

636 How is Trump going to enact tariffs without Congress voting for them?

Posted by: Dogstar at March 15, 2016 03:21 PM (7Cy0Q)

637 I don't think tariffs will undermine the Constitution, but I don't think they are good policy at all, and as with most policy of the federal government do more harm than good.
Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 03:19 PM (gmeXX)

They are the only rational policy to other countries using tariffs.

You're in a trade warzone, and you refuse to fire your gun because it might hurt someone, even as other people are shooting at you.

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at March 15, 2016 03:21 PM (uURQL)

638 I read yesterday in Politico that if Rubio drops out his 152 delegates would become 'unbound' for the first ballot at the convention. That would only help Trump win the first ballot if he could convince them to vote for him. If Rubio nominally stays in then he could hold those delegates until the 2nd ballot where they would become unbound and could maybe vote for Cruz.

------------

Why wouldn't they vote for Cruz on the first ballot or Trump on the 2nd?

Either way, the convention may be our first demonstration of Trump's vaunted negotiation skills.

Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 03:21 PM (gmeXX)

639 >>And his "winning" consists of an average of less than 40% of the vote.

When 40% is "enough," you don't need 50% in this stage of the game. Eyes on the prize, math guy.

Posted by: General Zod at March 15, 2016 03:22 PM (Bdeb0)

640 Here is what the anti-Trump argument boils down to:

Trump isn't going to do what he promised.

Well, so what? I've had thirty years experience with that. I've decided to let Trump have his chance at stabbing me in the back.

Haha.

***Not that I really think that of Trump. He's used to fulfilling his obligations unlike a politician. And spare me your - he went bankrupt...blah, blah, blah.

He has customers daily in his enterprises and he daily fulfills his obligations. Unlike a politician.

Posted by: Misfortune & Pestilence at March 15, 2016 03:22 PM (T1CrP)

641 If they pull what? If the delegates choose someone else?

---------------------

Why do you ask questions to which you already know the answers?

Selective Stupidity.

The voters of a state that voted 40+% Trump and see it given to the
15~25% guy by shenanigans are totes going to be fine with that.

------------

I never said they should go along with it. But neither should those
voters who voted against Trump. The rules are the rules. There are
going to be repercussions either way. Maybe we should give it to Trump
just so his voters cannot say it was stolen from them. That's an
argument for Trump.

Texas overwhelmingly voted for Cruz. Not sure why Texans should be
disenfranchised in this matter. The most reliably conservative state in
the union. The most populous conservative and republican state. The
one that actually shares a border with Mexico. The one that has
generated much of this country's economic wealth over the past 20 years.

Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 03:09 PM (gmeXX)

Just pointing out... Cruz has won the states that he has won with approximately 45% of the vote (and gets an average of 23% of the vote in the states he loses). Trump has won the states he has won with under 39% on average (and only gets an average of 21% of the vote in states that he loses).

Posted by: redbanzai at March 15, 2016 03:22 PM (y7/KB)

642 618 Maybe I missed the sarc (?) but Cruz's "top-of-the-class turnout operation" was nowhere to be seen in Deltona, Fl. this morning. One small Rubio sign at the edge of the drive, 7 small Trump signs down the middle of the parking lot. Asked the lady taking id if Cruz was even on the ballot cause he sure wasn't on a sign outside. By the tired way she laughed, I figure I wasn't the first one to ask. Somebody dropped the ball. Er, ...sign
Posted by: middleagedhousewife
_________________________________________________

If Cruz spent a lot of resources on winning FL when he's down by 20%, I'd have to switch my vote to someone else, as that would be the clearest proof that he'd gone insane.

Everyone knows Trump will win FL by a mile, so let's not pretend that the outcome is in doubt, hmmkay?

Posted by: Matt_SE at March 15, 2016 03:23 PM (9Fcph)

643 I disagree. Immigration is every other issue. It's education, it's employment, it's health care, it's 1st and 2nd Amendment rights, and it is the issue that will grip the world for the foreseeable future. Look at the time line he made his Mexican rapist remark and boom:SteinleEuropean rapefugee invasionHe caught the lightening when he chose this issue during this cycle. Trump didn't just get lucky it was as if the hand of God touched him.
Posted by: DFCtomm at March 15, 2016 03:18 PM (/1gXq)

================

That doesn't mean that Trump will hold the line, just that he knows how to work a crowd.

I applaud him for that, and I've said for months that I support Trumpism but am against Trump.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 03:23 PM (rJSDb)

644 I'm just not sure Rubes voters will go to Cruz...... Maybe a split between the two....

Posted by: donna at March 15, 2016 03:23 PM (/dSsq)

645 That was the election itself, not the primary, but I think that if the person with the plurality doesn't win the nomination, we'll be looking at something similar where the party just won't function.

------------

Depends on who wins the nomination and the reaction of the man passed over. Worked out in 1960 for the GOP. Not sure Trump would have the same temperment as Seward. But if really wanted to stick it to the GOPe, he could side with Cruz and (should Cruz win) be known as the guy who made Cruz President.

Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 03:24 PM (gmeXX)

646 Trump's platform focuses on immigration and trade.

What is Cruz' platform?

Posted by: Myshiba at March 15, 2016 03:24 PM (cfHE9)

647 I don't think tariffs will undermine the Constitution, but I don't think they are good policy at all, and as with most policy of the federal government do more harm than good.

No less than Ronald Reagan disagrees.

Posted by: ScoggDog at March 15, 2016 03:24 PM (RKJF2)

648 646 Trump's platform focuses on immigration and trade.

What is Cruz' platform?

The effing Constitution.

Posted by: Dogstar at March 15, 2016 03:25 PM (7Cy0Q)

649 How is Trump going to enact tariffs without Congress voting for them?

Posted by: Dogstar at March 15, 2016 03:21 PM (7Cy0Q)

How is Cruz going to do away with the IRS, but you don't hear Cruz being called a conman. The truth is nothing like that is going to happen. The only thing Trump can do is enforce immigration laws that are currently on the books, and the GOP will be finished when they work with the Democrats to stop the deportations, and if he doesn't as he has said he would........well then I suspect we'll move to a different type of negotiation.

Posted by: DFCtomm at March 15, 2016 03:26 PM (/1gXq)

650 645 Depends on who wins the nomination and the reaction of the man passed over. Worked out in 1960 for the GOP. Not sure Trump would have the same temperment as Seward. But if really wanted to stick it to the GOPe, he could side with Cruz and (should Cruz win) be known as the guy who made Cruz President.
Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 03:24 PM (gmeXX)

==============

I just don't see Trump playing well with others when he feels like he's been cheated.

Oh well, I'm out now.

Til tomorrow...or whenever I decide to comment again.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison at March 15, 2016 03:26 PM (rJSDb)

651 I don't think tariffs will undermine the Constitution, but I don't think they are good policy at all, and as with most policy of the federal government do more harm than good.

No less than Ronald Reagan disagrees.

----------

That they undermine the Constitution or that they are good?

Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 03:26 PM (gmeXX)

652 Why wouldn't they vote for Cruz on the first ballot or Trump on the 2nd?

Either way, the convention may be our first demonstration of Trump's vaunted negotiation skills.
Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 03:21 PM (gmeXX)
_____________
The thing is you don't know how they would vote on the first ballot because they'd be unbound and Trump would most likely be closest to a majority -- so to keep those 152 safe until the 2nd ballot when 90% of the other delegates become 'unbound' -- then a much better change Cruz can get nomination.

Posted by: Alix at March 15, 2016 03:26 PM (MpfHK)

653 Cut the Cake!

Posted by: Otter at March 15, 2016 03:26 PM (JO9+V)

654 If Cruz spent a lot of resources on winning FL when
he's down by 20%, I'd have to switch my vote to someone else, as that
would be the clearest proof that he'd gone insane.

Everyone knows Trump will win FL by a mile, so let's not pretend that the outcome is in doubt, hmmkay?

Posted by: Matt_SE at March 15, 2016 03:23 PM (9Fcph)

Just like everyone "knew" that Trump had Kansas and Oklahoma by a mile?

Posted by: redbanzai at March 15, 2016 03:27 PM (y7/KB)

655 How is Cruz going to do away with the IRS, but you don't hear Cruz being called a conman.

------------

Well I don't think Cruz believes he can do it on his own. He has always said he is running on two primary Congressional agenda items - repeal Obamacare and tax reform.

Posted by: SH at March 15, 2016 03:27 PM (gmeXX)

656 That doesn't mean that Trump will hold the line, just that he knows how to work a crowd.

The guy who knows how to work the crowd knows what the crowd wants.

And has has an inkling by now of how much that crowd wants him to hold that line.

That doesn't mean he will hold the line, but it does raise the question of what benefit can you offer Trump to betray the crowd?

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at March 15, 2016 03:27 PM (uURQL)

657 I don't think tariffs will undermine the
Constitution, but I don't think they are good policy at all, and as with
most policy of the federal government do more harm than good.

No less than Ronald Reagan disagrees.

Posted by: ScoggDog at March 15, 2016 03:24 PM (RKJF2)
We don't need tariffs. We need to fix two huge issues and then see how it settles. Those are China's currency peg, and Europe's VAT disparity. Fix those two monsters and see where things shake out. We will of course have to threaten tariffs to get those two problems corrected.

Posted by: DFCtomm at March 15, 2016 03:29 PM (/1gXq)

658 644 I'm just not sure Rubes voters will go to Cruz...... Maybe a split between the two....
Posted by: donna
______________________________________________

Nate Silver already wrote an article about this on RCP about 2 or 3 days ago. 75% Rubio's supporters will switch to someone else but still vote, and of those 80% will switch to Cruz.

Kasich is more evenly split between Cruz and Trump.

Posted by: Matt_SE at March 15, 2016 03:29 PM (9Fcph)

659 654 If Cruz spent a lot of resources on winning FL when
he's down by 20%, I'd have to switch my vote to someone else, as that
would be the clearest proof that he'd gone insane.

Everyone knows Trump will win FL by a mile, so let's not pretend that the outcome is in doubt, hmmkay?

Posted by: Matt_SE at March 15, 2016 03:23 PM (9Fcph)

Just like everyone "knew" that Trump had Kansas and Oklahoma by a mile?
Posted by: redbanzai
____________________________________________

20% over the nearest competitor for 2 months straight, red.
And I'm a Cruz supporter.

Florida is lost. Move on to other states.

Posted by: Matt_SE at March 15, 2016 03:31 PM (9Fcph)

660 Trump's platform focuses on immigration and trade.

What is Cruz' platform?

The effing Constitution.

Posted by: Dogstar at March 15, 2016 03:25 PM (7Cy0Q)

Yeah! Fuck that fucking guy wanting to preserve our liberties!?!

As for Trump... he will not do what he said he would do on immigration and has baldly said as much (BTW, when is he going to release that NYT interview?). Trump for all his real estate experience is economically illiterate. What he has said he will do will make us poorer and more jobless.

Posted by: redbanzai at March 15, 2016 03:33 PM (y7/KB)

661 654 Just like everyone "knew" that Trump had Kansas and Oklahoma by a mile?
Posted by: redbanzai
_______________________________________________

P.S. the reason Cruz won OK and KS by a mile was because of undecideds in the RCP polls. Large numbers of them, who almost always bread towards Cruz.

There is no such reserve of reinforcements in FL.

Posted by: Matt_SE at March 15, 2016 03:34 PM (9Fcph)

662 Dammit..."break."

Posted by: Matt_SE at March 15, 2016 03:34 PM (9Fcph)

663
Well, hell Cruz changed his position on legalization in December 2015. And changed his position on deportation 3 WEEKS AGO.

Posted by: Make America Great Again at March 15, 2016 03:20 PM (LXJ1e)

No he did not.

Posted by: redbanzai at March 15, 2016 03:35 PM (y7/KB)

664 As a Floridian. I have done the deed.It felt like voting for Ronald Reagan all over again. You're welcome Mr. Trump.

Posted by: Drider at March 15, 2016 03:36 PM (6Xbsz)

665 Well, hell Cruz changed his position on legalization in December 2015. And changed his position on deportation 3 WEEKS AGO.

Posted by: Make America Great Again at March 15, 2016 03:20 PM (LXJ1e)

No he did not.

Posted by: redbanzai at March 15, 2016 03:35 PM (y7/KB)

In more detail, Cruz has never been for legalization. He has always advocated for following the law (which mandates deportation in most cases). What he did three weeks ago was get more aggressive about the following the law portion of his position.

He increased emphasis but it is not accurate to say that he changed positions.

Posted by: redbanzai at March 15, 2016 03:39 PM (y7/KB)

666 Go, Ted, go...

God, I hope he makes it. He's run a well-organized campaign, I don't know if that will be enough.

Posted by: Mark Andrew Edwards at March 15, 2016 03:42 PM (hR1Jj)

667 "The guy who knows how to work the crowd knows what the crowd wants.

And has has an inkling by now of how much that crowd wants him to hold that line. "

--------------------

Right. See a businessman on Main Street, not Wall Street, has to be finely attuned to his customers wants and needs. He can't sell a product that people don't want or not fulfill their expectations otherwise he will lose money and be out of business. He has to worry about what his customers want daily.

Unlike a politician who gets his government paycheck whether he delivers or not. A politician only has to worry about voters (customers) every two, or four, or six years.

So two (Crubio) of the four candidates have not had job in the private sector in their entire careers. They get paid regardless of their actions and at the cost of their voters (customers). How f'd up is that.

Kasich had an crony-outside job at Lehman's which helped to bankrupt our treasury.

I'll take Trump any day of the week.

Posted by: Misfortune & Pestilence at March 15, 2016 03:42 PM (T1CrP)

668 "Yeah! Fuck that fucking guy wanting to preserve our liberties!?!"

------------------------
*Snicker*

(Cough) BLM (Cough) Corker (Cough) TPP (Cough) Ottowa (Cough)

Posted by: Misfortune & Pestilence at March 15, 2016 03:46 PM (T1CrP)

669 He increased emphasis but it is not accurate to say that he changed positions.

Posted by: redbanzai at March 15, 2016 03:39 PM (y7/KB)

You spout weasel words like that and then claim Trump is a conman. You're a joke, but Trump thanks you for your, unintentional, support.

Posted by: DFCtomm at March 15, 2016 04:01 PM (/1gXq)

670 He increased emphasis but it is not accurate to say that he changed positions.

Posted by: redbanzai at March 15, 2016 03:39 PM (y7/KB)

You
spout weasel words like that and then claim Trump is a conman. You're a
joke, but Trump thanks you for your, unintentional, support.

Posted by: DFCtomm at March 15, 2016 04:01 PM (/1gXq)

Again I say... Cruz has always advocated closing the borders and strictly enforcing the law.

Posted by: redbanzai at March 15, 2016 04:11 PM (y7/KB)

671 The Democrats have already started planning to take the Senate with Trump ads.

Must be nice when your opponents nominate a draft-dodging, war-hero-mocking, violence-encouraging, war-crime-ordering, KKK-winking, eminent-domain-abusing, amnesty-promising, wife-cheating, four-time-bankrupting, Planned-Parenthood-supporting, Democrat-donating, Trump-Network-failed-pyramid-scheme-running, women's-face-insulting, Muslim-citizen-banning, Trump-University-ripoff-running, cocaine-hoovering, tax-return-hiding, charity-cheapskating, legal-and-illegal-immigrant-hiring, short-fingered, 15-points-behind-Hillary-Clinton-running...

Ace, it happened again. What time is it in Australia?

Posted by: TallDave at March 15, 2016 04:13 PM (74ZYB)

672 Ace, it happened again. What time is it in Australia?

Posted by: TallDave at March 15, 2016 04:13 PM (74ZYB)

In Australia all the wildlife (even the cute little duck-billed platypus) want to kill you and has some sort of poison to accomplish that task.

Belize, on the other hand, is tropical without literally every animal being life-threatening. And they also speak English. Bonus: if Honduras gets shirty, the British Gurkhas will show up to put them in their place.

Posted by: redbanzai at March 15, 2016 04:19 PM (y7/KB)

673 Right. See a businessman on Main Street, not Wall Street, has to be finely attuned to his customers wants and needs.
-------
Like Trump University!
-------
He can't sell a product that people don't want or not fulfill their expectations otherwise he will lose money and be out of business.
-------
Also like Trump University!

Trump is finely attuned to his customers' and investors' wants and needs, and shamelessly uses those wants and needs to rip them off and lie to them.

Posted by: TallDave at March 15, 2016 04:23 PM (74ZYB)

674 Posted by: redbanzai at March 15, 2016 04:19 PM (y7/KB)

That actually goes a long way to explaining why we can barely handle ASCII text.

Posted by: TallDave at March 15, 2016 04:25 PM (74ZYB)

675 Cruz is going to do better than expected.

Posted by: Jane at March 15, 2016 04:54 PM (rDidp)

676 So that MO poll was only 208 people?? That has to have a margin of error of like 15%.

Actually I just looked it up...it's 7%. So technically a 7% lead in a poll with 7% MOE is basically a dead heat. It could end up Trump 29 Cruz 36.

Posted by: Picky at March 15, 2016 05:46 PM (ilSwI)

677 Oh Marco, always the pretentious kid in the room; now the petulant one as well.

Posted by: dogfish at March 15, 2016 05:55 PM (SSeCw)

678 Has the DD called Florida fro Trump yet?

Posted by: Skeezix at March 15, 2016 06:01 PM (WnCSK)

679 For those of you shitting on Trump and the thoughts of a Trump presidency, you are shitting on the likes of Sessions, Giuliani and Laffer.

Just saying.

Posted by: oddnot not liking these times at March 15, 2016 08:49 PM (g1MTt)

680 Words cannot express my contempt for this electorate.

All hail the felon crone for President.

Posted by: evergreen at March 15, 2016 11:00 PM (tDwXn)

Processing 0.08, elapsed 0.0783 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0212 seconds, 689 records returned.
Page size 399 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.