GOP Primary Megathread III: Third Time's A Charm

[Kamcha]

http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/04/politics/john-kasich-drops-out/
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/ ... _over.html

Well NSGers, after much speculation and guessing, we finally have our Republican nominee for president. Donald J. Trump. This means that he will be facing of either Clinton or Sanders in the general election this November. The world will now know the true extent of America's racial tension, and hawkish foreign policy attitude. This could lead to serious issues with our allies abroad, particularly with China and Iran. Could this be the end of American democracy?

Well NSG, what happens next?

Some people make good on their threats to go to Canada, I guess. TBH, I'm supporting no sides in this one; neither Trump or Clinton seems interesting enough. Obama was cool in the 2008 and 2012 election, and no one really seems to be making as much of an impression as him on me.

[PaNTuXIa]

I'm surprised. I didn't expect Independents to be getting so much support.

I truly believe Sanders could win Vermont and Maine, and maybe New Hampshire, if he was to run as an Independent.

[Spiffier]

I'm surprised. I didn't expect Independents to be getting so much support.

I truly believe Sanders could win Vermont and Maine, and maybe New Hampshire, if he was to run as an Independent.

He's not going to take votes from Clinton, his wife made that clear. Nonetheless it is a shame he can't get the nomination, he would have turned the Democratic Party away from globalism.

[Risottia]

Trump isn't that bad.

Actually he's great. The Democrats could have lost the elections if it hadn't been for him.

[Idzequitch]

Oh, I got driven from the Republican party long before Trump. The circlejerk of jerks seeing who could go the furthest to the right drove me away. The irrational hatred for LGBT folks drove me away. The failure to follow their own principle that government should be small drove me away. The warmongering drove me away. The fact that I was constantly called a RINO because I dared not to be a Tea Partier drove me away. The unadulterated pretentiousness drove me away. The blatant disregard for the environment drove me away.

Trump is an additional straw, but the camel's back broke a long time ago. The Kasich/Pataki types gave me a small hope that the Republican party was not a lost cause, that it could find its way back to being a decent conservative option. But then America never gave Pataki even a look, and Kasich only gained the small amount of support he did by overstaying his welcome. Nope I have a few libertarian tendencies, but I'm not a libertarian. I wish my conscience would allow me to vote for someone else. It won't. The options are bad, and I have to vote for the only one I feel would do a decent job, aka Gary Johnson.

If you are against big military spending and pro-LGBT, why would you favor them over Trump?

I prefer a President who doesn't get into Twitter wars about who has the prettiest wife.
I prefer a President who doesn't resort to calling his opponents stupid, condescending nicknames.
I prefer a President who doesn't mock disabled people for being disabled.
I prefer a President who doesn't shame women for having periods.
I prefer a President who doesn't insult people's faces (Looking at you Carly Fiorina).

I guess what I'm really saying is, I'd prefer that my President have at least the maturity of a high schooler, a criterion that Trump does not meet.

[PaNTuXIa]

I hope many republicans go for a third party candidate.

So do I. Of my many 2016 general election predictions, I have one matchup in which their is a tie, 269-269. If this were to happen, Congress republicans may choose the libertarian candidate, Gary Johnson, as POTUS, as neither Clinton nor Trump match up to classical conservative views, which most of Congress republicans identify as.

[New Jerzylvania]

This is the Donald's dilemma: http://theweek.com/speedreads/622461/wa ... nald-trump

How so? Do you think this would make anyone who isn't voting for Clinton, more likely to vote for her?

That commercial is just fucking devastating. That's just one commercial of it's type. So how can all those Repubs in that commercial un-ring that bell? Well ...they can't and they don't really want too.

Imagine hundreds of commercials like this using their own words run thousands of times a day. That is the Donald's dilemma, getting those normal GOP voters that aren't all so damn culturally grieved like Trump supporters.

[Spiffier]

If you are against big military spending and pro-LGBT, why would you favor them over Trump?

I prefer a President who doesn't get into Twitter wars about who has the prettiest wife.
I prefer a President who doesn't resort to calling his opponents stupid, condescending nicknames.
I prefer a President who doesn't mock disabled people for being disabled.
I prefer a President who doesn't shame women for having periods.
I prefer a President who doesn't insult people's faces (Looking at you Carly Fiorina).
I guess what I'm really saying is, I'd prefer that my President have at least the maturity of a high schooler, a criterion that Trump does not meet.

He's immature (which in a way is good, he can never be destroyed by digging up something offensive he said, or something personal scandal), but I'm talking about policy.

[Aggicificicerous]

Trump isn't that bad.

Actually he's great. The Democrats could have lost the elections if it hadn't been for him.

Between Donald "Let's Build a Wall" Trump and Ted "Jesus Told Me to Run" Cruz, the Democrats were in pretty good shape regardless.

[Idzequitch]

I prefer a President who doesn't get into Twitter wars about who has the prettiest wife.
I prefer a President who doesn't resort to calling his opponents stupid, condescending nicknames.
I prefer a President who doesn't mock disabled people for being disabled.
I prefer a President who doesn't shame women for having periods.
I prefer a President who doesn't insult people's faces (Looking at you Carly Fiorina).
He's immature, but I'm talking about policy.
I guess what I'm really saying is, I'd prefer that my President have at least the maturity of a high schooler, a criterion that Trump does not meet.

Pardon my language, but fuck his policy (If he even has any, that is). If he's displaying behaviors that I would be grounding my children for, I'm sure as hell not going to vote for the man. He's completely unfit for the job.

[Risottia]

Actually he's great. The Democrats could have lost the elections if it hadn't been for him.

Between Donald "Let's Build a Wall" Trump and Ted "Jesus Told Me to Run" Cruz, the Democrats were in pretty good shape regardless.

Well, better eliminate that 1% chance, too.

Seriously, against Trump even I could become the next PotUS.

[New Jerzylvania]

If you are against big military spending and pro-LGBT, why would you favor them over Trump?

I prefer a President who doesn't get into Twitter wars about who has the prettiest wife.
I prefer a President who doesn't resort to calling his opponents stupid, condescending nicknames.
I prefer a President who doesn't mock disabled people for being disabled.
I prefer a President who doesn't shame women for having periods.
I prefer a President who doesn't insult people's faces (Looking at you Carly Fiorina).

I guess what I'm really saying is, I'd prefer that my President have at least the maturity of a high schooler, a criterion that Trump does not meet.

Yes, Myself and at least 51% of this country agrees with you. Probably more.

[New Jerzylvania]

I prefer a President who doesn't get into Twitter wars about who has the prettiest wife.
I prefer a President who doesn't resort to calling his opponents stupid, condescending nicknames.
I prefer a President who doesn't mock disabled people for being disabled.
I prefer a President who doesn't shame women for having periods.
I prefer a President who doesn't insult people's faces (Looking at you Carly Fiorina).
I guess what I'm really saying is, I'd prefer that my President have at least the maturity of a high schooler, a criterion that Trump does not meet.

He's immature (which in a way is good, he can never be destroyed by digging up something offensive he said, or something personal scandal), but I'm talking about policy.

We're talking electability. It's the best "Trump" card HRC holds. And BTW, fuck his insane policies. Reagan said "tear down that wall," not build another one.

[The Romulan Republic]

Trump isn't that bad.

Actually he's great. The Democrats could have lost the elections if it hadn't been for him.

I have seen so many people saying things like this, and it deeply disturbs me.

Their seems to be a wide spread assumption that the Democrats can't possibly lose. But people have been acting like Donald couldn't possibly win ever since he started running, and he's now the Republican nominee. This attitude on the Left that he can't win is dangerous complacency and overconfidence.

The worst possible thing we could do is assume we've won and half-ass this election.

And frankly, acting like his nomination is a good thing because he can't beat the Democrats would be very wrong even if the underlying assumption were true. Even if he loses, his being the nominee will further legitimize bigotry and political violence as part of the mainstream of American politics, and make America look even more foolish and dangerous in the eyes of the rest of the world.

[Valaran]

I prefer a President who doesn't get into Twitter wars about who has the prettiest wife.
I prefer a President who doesn't resort to calling his opponents stupid, condescending nicknames.
I prefer a President who doesn't mock disabled people for being disabled.
I prefer a President who doesn't shame women for having periods.
I prefer a President who doesn't insult people's faces (Looking at you Carly Fiorina).
I guess what I'm really saying is, I'd prefer that my President have at least the maturity of a high schooler, a criterion that Trump does not meet.

He's immature (which in a way is good, he can never be destroyed by digging up something offensive he said, or something personal scandal), but I'm talking about policy.

If he is that immature why should we trust his policies?

Policies which he's been extraordinarily vague and flip-floppy on, not to mention incredibly insulting and uncomprehending (the immaturity carries over) in many cases. Oh, aside from the wall, encouraging nuclear proliferation, pissing off allies, threatening a trade war with China, and having a truly horrific tax plan. Yay?

[Spiffier]

Pardon my language, but fuck his policy (If he even has any, that is). If he's displaying behaviors that I would be grounding my children for, I'm sure as hell not going to vote for the man. He's completely unfit for the job.

I'd rather his rampant personality defects than have a President who panders to big oil, the military industrial complex, and globalists. That is far, far more serious sin.

[Idzequitch]

I prefer a President who doesn't get into Twitter wars about who has the prettiest wife.
I prefer a President who doesn't resort to calling his opponents stupid, condescending nicknames.
I prefer a President who doesn't mock disabled people for being disabled.
I prefer a President who doesn't shame women for having periods.
I prefer a President who doesn't insult people's faces (Looking at you Carly Fiorina).

I guess what I'm really saying is, I'd prefer that my President have at least the maturity of a high schooler, a criterion that Trump does not meet.

Yes, Myself and at least 51% of this country agrees with you. Probably more.

I understand the frustration with the "establishment." I don't think much of anyone likes the status quo right now. But Trump needs to get crushed in this election to show people that the solution is not to nominate a know nothing with no political experience and no qualifications for the job. We have to work with and through "the establishment" to change things. If they won't cooperate, that's when we vote them out in favor of someone, with some experience in the political world, who will.

[Spiffier]

He's immature (which in a way is good, he can never be destroyed by digging up something offensive he said, or something personal scandal), but I'm talking about policy.

We're talking electability. It's the best "Trump" card HRC holds. And BTW, fuck his insane policies. Reagan said "tear down that wall," not build another one.

Are you suggesting any other of the Republican contenders would stand the faintest chance against Clinton? Trump is a big gamble, but it is better a big gamble than a sure lose.

[Valaran]

I understand the frustration with the "establishment." I don't much of anyone likes the status quo right now. But Trump needs to get crushed in this election to show people that the solution is not to nominate a know nothing with no political experience and no qualifications for the job. We have to work with and through "the establishment" to change things. If they won't cooperate, that's when we vote them out in favor of someone, with some experience in the political world, who will.

This.

[Idzequitch]

We're talking electability. It's the best "Trump" card HRC holds. And BTW, fuck his insane policies. Reagan said "tear down that wall," not build another one.

Are you suggesting any other of the Republican contenders would stand the faintest chance against Clinton? Trump is a big gamble, but it is better a big gamble than a sure lose.

Kasich consistently polled better against Clinton than Trump did.

[New Jerzylvania]

We're talking electability. It's the best "Trump" card HRC holds. And BTW, fuck his insane policies. Reagan said "tear down that wall," not build another one.

Are you suggesting any other of the Republican contenders would stand the faintest chance against Clinton? Trump is a big gamble, but it is better a big gamble than a sure lose.

So then, Sarah Palin for Veep to top it all off. Or better yet, Michelle Bachman.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Pardon my language, but fuck his policy (If he even has any, that is). If he's displaying behaviors that I would be grounding my children for, I'm sure as hell not going to vote for the man. He's completely unfit for the job.

I'd rather his rampant personality defects than have a President who panders to big oil, the military industrial complex, and globalists. That is far, far more serious sin.

I never thought Christians' support of globalism was a sin.

If anything, we're the most pro-globalism out there.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Are you suggesting any other of the Republican contenders would stand the faintest chance against Clinton? Trump is a big gamble, but it is better a big gamble than a sure lose.

So then, Sarah Palin for Veep to top it all off. Or better yet, Michelle Bachman.

Why stop there? Just hire fucking Ann Coulter for the job of VP.

[The Romulan Republic]

I hope many republicans go for a third party candidate.

So do I. Of my many 2016 general election predictions, I have one matchup in which their is a tie, 269-269. If this were to happen, Congress republicans may choose the libertarian candidate, Gary Johnson, as POTUS, as neither Clinton nor Trump match up to classical conservative views, which most of Congress republicans identify as.

Right. The Republican Congress will pick a libertarian who will be lucky to get two percent of the vote as President.

And people think I'm deluded for saying Sanders still has a chance.

No, if the Republican Congress got to pull a President out of their collective ass, it would most likely be Paul Ryan, the Speaker of the House (who's name has been thrown around as an anti-Donald alternative recently).

[New Jerzylvania]

Are you suggesting any other of the Republican contenders would stand the faintest chance against Clinton? Trump is a big gamble, but it is better a big gamble than a sure lose.

Kasich consistently polled better against Clinton than Trump did.

By far. Beat her in every poll I saw. But he implemented Obamacare!!!!