GOP Primaries/Caucuses Discussions, Jokes and Predictions

[piscator]

Trump has an event in Arizona, and his supporter Sheriff Joe Arpaio is providing the security

[pErvinalia]

Neither am I, so why are you arguing with me on the point?

Because you keep asking me, despite me saying it multiple times.

And, before you say it, nobody is ideologically worshiping free speech here. Whoever you know that does that isn't here.

That'd be you, the person who said that Hitler deserves to have unimpeded free speech.

[Svartalf]

If trump is consorting with the likes of arpaio, it confirms all the ill I've been thinking of him and his ways.

[piscator]

The Wall Street Journal fired back at Donald Trump on Thursday evening, hours after the Republican candidate demanded the newspaper's editorial board apologize for pointing out that he has thus far received fewer votes compared to Hillary Clinton in the primaries.

"On Thursday the businessman demanded an apology after we—'the dummies at the @WSJ Editorial Board'—accurately noted that Hillary Clinton has received about a million more votes than he has," the board wrote in a piece headlined "A Trump Reality Check."

"The truth hurts, though Mr. Trump would rather walk down Fifth Avenue shooting the messenger," the piece continued, alluding to Trump's joke in January that he could "stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody" and not lose any voters.

In a series of tweets Thursday morning, the Republican front-runner complained about the editorial board's coverage — for not the first and likely not the last time in the 2016 election cycle.

"@WSJ is bad at math. The good news is, nobody cares what they say in their editorials anymore, especially me!" Trump boasted in one, before tweeting another condemnation of the "dummies" at publication owned by Rupert Murdoch, with whom Trump has quarreled over coverage in his media properties, including the Journal (which expressed appreciation that the Manhattan real-estate magnate is "such a loyal reader").

".@WSJ Editorial says "Clinton primary vote total is 8,646,551.Trump's is 7,533,692]"-a knock. But she had only 3 opponents-I had 16. Apologize," Trump tweeted Thursday morning.

Later in the evening, the paper responded, "Actually his rise has been cleared by the large and fractured GOP field. Of the 20.35 million GOP primary votes cast so far, he has received 7.54 million, or a mere 37%. Despite the media desire to call him unstoppable, Mr. Trump is the weakest Republican front-runner since Gerald Ford in 1976."


"The opinions he should care about are the 39% of GOP voters who said in Tuesday’s exit polls that they would consider supporting a third-party candidate if Mr. Trump and Mrs. Clinton are the nominees, or the 44% of non-Trump GOP voters who said they won’t cast a ballot for him in November," the editorial board concluded. "As Mr. Trump likes to tweet, better be careful!"




Read more: http://www.politico.com/blogs/2016-gop- ... z43LVKPEMH
Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook

[Forty Two]

Neither am I, so why are you arguing with me on the point?

Because you keep asking me, despite me saying it multiple times.

I haven't kept asking you, but it doesn't matter.

And, before you say it, nobody is ideologically worshiping free speech here. Whoever you know that does that isn't here.

That'd be you, the person who said that Hitler deserves to have unimpeded free speech.

In what way should Hitler's freedom of speech have been impeded?

[pErvinalia]

Jesus give me strength.

[piscator]

[Forty Two]

The Wall Street Journal fired back at Donald Trump on Thursday evening, hours after the Republican candidate demanded the newspaper's editorial board apologize for pointing out that he has thus far received fewer votes compared to Hillary Clinton in the primaries.

"On Thursday the businessman demanded an apology after we—'the dummies at the @WSJ Editorial Board'—accurately noted that Hillary Clinton has received about a million more votes than he has," the board wrote in a piece headlined "A Trump Reality Check."

"The truth hurts, though Mr. Trump would rather walk down Fifth Avenue shooting the messenger," the piece continued, alluding to Trump's joke in January that he could "stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody" and not lose any voters.

In a series of tweets Thursday morning, the Republican front-runner complained about the editorial board's coverage — for not the first and likely not the last time in the 2016 election cycle.

"@WSJ is bad at math. The good news is, nobody cares what they say in their editorials anymore, especially me!" Trump boasted in one, before tweeting another condemnation of the "dummies" at publication owned by Rupert Murdoch, with whom Trump has quarreled over coverage in his media properties, including the Journal (which expressed appreciation that the Manhattan real-estate magnate is "such a loyal reader").

".@WSJ Editorial says "Clinton primary vote total is 8,646,551.Trump's is 7,533,692]"-a knock. But she had only 3 opponents-I had 16. Apologize," Trump tweeted Thursday morning.

Later in the evening, the paper responded, "Actually his rise has been cleared by the large and fractured GOP field. Of the 20.35 million GOP primary votes cast so far, he has received 7.54 million, or a mere 37%. Despite the media desire to call him unstoppable, Mr. Trump is the weakest Republican front-runner since Gerald Ford in 1976."


"The opinions he should care about are the 39% of GOP voters who said in Tuesday’s exit polls that they would consider supporting a third-party candidate if Mr. Trump and Mrs. Clinton are the nominees, or the 44% of non-Trump GOP voters who said they won’t cast a ballot for him in November," the editorial board concluded. "As Mr. Trump likes to tweet, better be careful!"




Read more: http://www.politico.com/blogs/2016-gop- ... z43LVKPEMH
Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook

If that's true, and he is the weakest since Ford, then I would think the protesters would hang back and even help him win the GOP nomination. Either Bernie or Hillary would be a shoe-in for the Presidency.

[Forty Two]

[Forty Two]

Yep. The cartoon does correctly illustrate the GOP selling it's soul to the Devil when Nixon used the southern strategy. The Democrat Party owned the South for 100 years, with the Republicans often being accused of being pro-black, pro-racial miscegenation, etc. by the racist southern whites.

The Republican Party spearheaded the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and supported the Civil Rights movement in the 1950s, with school desegregation and such. Remember, it was Republican President Eisenhower who sent federal troops to Little Rock Arkansas to enforce Brown v. Board of Education, the school desegregation case, and at the time Little Rock's governor was a Democrat.

But, the Civil Rights Acts in the 1960s pissed off the white Democrats in the south so bad, that they were itching to support a different party. So, the GOP had an opportunity to collect those votes. The southern whites blamed Kennedy (northern, blue-blood, yankee), and Johnson (Great Society), for betraying them and the bulk of the then racist Democratic Party (it was the party of Robert Byrd, KKK member, and one of the longest serving Senators ever).

So, rather than stick to liberal principles and the fundamentals of human liberty, on which the party was based since the days of Abraham Lincoln, it took the short-sighted path to votes.

Reagans mistake, too, was to pander to the religious right, and gave rise to the "moral majority" nonsense. They gave the party to the religious nutjobs.

[Forty Two]

Anti-Trump protester arrested for trying to startle and hitting a police horse -- http://fox4kc.com/2016/03/19/woman-char ... p-protest/

[Forty Two]

On the issue of Trump being the "weakest" Republican candidate since Gerald Ford in 1976....

In 1976, Ford and Reagan battled it out for the GOP nomination. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1976_Repu ... Convention They split the delegate count almost right down the middle, with Ford having a slight edge.

This was a different time, and it can't really be compared as to what is going on now. Ford ascended to the Presidency in 1974 after the Nixon resignation. He served a partial term and was running for President on the heels of the US withdrawal from Vietnam. Reagan came in as the outsider candidate, and there was a great deal of debate within the party and among voters as to whether the establishment candidate, Ford, would be the better choice or whether an outsider would be preferable, to try to get the party away from the Nixon scandals. Ford was connected to the Nixon scandals, since Nixon nominated then Michigan Representative Ford to be Vice President when Agnew resigned, and then when Nixon resigned, Ford was appointed President under the terms of the 25th Amendment.

So, it was a very different scenario back then, and Ford didn't start out battling a field of 17 potential nominees, etc.

[Forty Two]

Trump announces non-interventionist foreign policy platform -- https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/pos ... gton-post/

[JimC]

...except when he feels like bombing the shit out of someone...

[Forty Two]

...except when he feels like bombing the shit out of someone...

I suppose that caveat must be applied to every candidate. How many wars did Hillary Clinton oppose since Vietnam? Has she opposed bombing anyone via drone attacks? Is she against tactical nukes?